Proceedings
Third Meeting In The Matter
Of Pollution Of Lake Erie and
Its Tributaries
Volume 2

-------

-------
                                                                      300-A
                     CONTENTS.






                                                             PAGE






Opening Statement - Murray Stein                               3




Hon. Stewart L. Udall                                          6




H. W. Boston                                                  10




Grover Cook                                                   27




Loring F. Oeming                                              71




Ralph W. Purdy                                                71




Dr. E. W. Arnold                                             203




George Eagle                                                 207




Blucher A. Poole                                             453




Walter A. Lyon                                               472




Dwight Metzler                                               521




Robert D. Hennigan                                           523




Stanley P. Spisiak                                           550




Summary                                                      557

-------
                                                        301
                     Before

          THE WATER POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

                DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

                   STATE OF OHIO

In the Matter of the       )
                           )  Order to Show Cause - Case No. 64
Village of Walbridge, Ohio )          (Continued)

                 FINDING AND ORDER

            The Board coming now to consider the evidence and

arguments presented in the hearing on this matter finds:

            That due notice of this hearing has been

            given to the respondent herein pursuant

            to Sections 6111.06 (c) and 119.07,

            Revised Code.

It is therefore

            ORDERED, that this hearing be continued until

10:00 a.m. E.S.T., June 14, 196*6, in the Conference Room of

the Ohio Department of Health, Room 155, ^50 East Town Street,

Columbus, Ohio.

            ORDERED, that the respondent herein, the Village

of Walbridge, Ohio, advertise for bids and award all contracts

for construction of proposed sewerage facilities for discharge

of sewage from Walbridge into the Toledo sewerage system in

accordance with approved detail plans.

            ORDERED, that the respondent submit June 1, 1966,

a report of progress concerning construction of the proposed

-------
                                                  302
sewerage.

It Is further

            ORDERED, that a certified copy of this order be

served forthwith by certified mail upon the respondent  herein,
                      E. W. Arnold,  M.  D., Chairman

                      J. Gordon Peltier,  Vice Chairman

                      Fred E.  Morr

                      Barton Holl

                      S. D. Bresler

Adopted April 12, 1966, at Columbus, Ohio.



                  *******




                     Before

         THE WATER POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

                DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

                    STATE OF OHIO

In the Matter of the    )
                        )  Order to  Show Cause - Case No. 69
City of West lake, Ohio  )          (Continued)

                 FINDING AND ORDER

            The Board coming now to  consider the evidence and

arguments presented in the hearing on this matter finds:

            That due notice of this  hearing has been

            given to the respondent  herein pursuant

            to Sections 6111.06 (c)  and 119.07*

            Revised Code.

-------
                                                      303




It Is therefore



            ORDERED, that this hearing be continued until



10:00 a.m. E.S.T., September 13, 1966, in the Conference



Room of the Ohio Department of Health, Room 155* ^50 East




Town Street, Columbus, Ohio.



            ORDERED, that the respondent herein, the City of




West lake, Ohio, submit by August 1 and September 1, 1966,




reports with respect to status of litigation pending in the




local courts concerning sewer assessments affecting construc-




tion of the city's proposed sewerage.



It is further



            ORDERED, that a certified copy of this order be



served forthwith by certified mail upon the respondent herein,
                      E. W. Arnold, M. D., Chairman




                      J. Gordon Peltier, Vice Chairman
                      Robert W. Teater
                      Barton Holl




Adopted June 14, 1966, at Columbus, Ohio.
                   *******
Re:  Conneaut



     Sewerage                       November 10, 1965

-------
                                                        304
Mayor and Council



City Hall



Conneaut, Ohio  44030



Gentlemen:



            As a result of Board action November 9, 1965*



enclosed is renewal permit for the discharge of sewage from



your municipality into "waters of the state" pursuant to the



provisions of the Water Pollution Control Act of Ohio.



            You will note that this permit expires September



15, 1966.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon compliance



with the following Orders:



            1.  Provide satisfactory operation and maintenance



                of the existing sewerage and wastewater treat-



                ment works including the submission of regular



                operating reports and annual summaries as



                required by the Division of Engineering, Ohio


                Department of Health.



            2.  Develop a program for the reduction of storm



                waters into the sanitary sewers and submit a



                report on the progress made.



            3.  Submit a report setting forth:



                (a)  Percent of area of city presently unsewered.



                (b)  Percent of unsewered area developed or



                     subject to development.



                (c)  Sanitary sewerage completed, placed under



                     construction, or planned for construction



                     during this permit period.

-------
                                                        305




            4.  Submit a report and general plan for compliance




                with the Conclusions and Recommendations of the



                Lake Erie Conference (copy enclosed), with



                special reference to Sections 7, 8,  9, and 10




                concerning the means to maximize the reduction



                of biochemical oxygen demand, phosphates, and




                coliform concentrations.



            Should you have any questions with respect to the




above Orders, please notify us promptly.



                      Yours very truly,



                      E. W. Arnold, M. D., Chairman



                      Water Pollution Control Board




Enc.-Permit 84.15



    -Recom. & Concl.



Certified mail



cc:  Health Commissioner



cc:  District Office







                    ***###*








                      Before



         THE WATER POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD



                DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH



                   STATE OF OHIO

-------
                                                      306


In the Matter of the    )
                        )  Order to Show Cause - Case No. 79
City of Bellevue, Ohio  )             (Continued)

                   FINDING AND ORDER

            The Board coming now to consider the evidence and

arguments presented in the hearing on this matter finds:

            That due notice of this hearing has been

            given to the respondent herein pursuant to

            Sections 6111.06 (C) and 119.07, Revised Code.

It is therefore

            ORDERED, that this hearing be continued until

10:00 a.m., January 10, 1967, in the Conference Room of the

Ohio Department of Health, Room 155, ^50 East Town Street,

Columbus, Ohio.

            ORDERED, that the respondent herein, the City of

Bellevue, Ohio, complete and secure approval by the Ohio

Department of Health of detail plans and specifications of

proposed sewerage and wastewater treatment facilities.

            ORDERED, that the respondent complete all legisla-

tion and legal steps necessary to issue and sell bonds, notes,

or other securities for construction, operation, and maintenance

of the proposed sewerage and wastewater treatment facilities.

            ORDERED, that the respondent advertise for bids

and award all contracts for construction of the proposed

sewerage and wastewater treatment facilities in accordance

with approved detail plans.

-------
                                                       307



            ORDERED, that the respondent submit June 1,




September 1, and November 15, 1966, reports indicating



accomplishments toward construction of necessary sewerage




and wastewater treatment facilities.




It is further



            ORDERED, that a certified copy of this order




be served forthwith by certified mail upon the respondent




herein.
                      E. W. Arnold, M. D., Chairman




                      J. Gordon Peltier, Vice Chairman



                      Fred E. Morr




                      Barton Ho11



                      S. D. Bresler




Adopted April 12, 1966, at Columbus, Ohio.







                  *******








Re:  Amherst



     Sewerage                     January 17, 1966



Mayor and Council



Municipal Building



Amherst, Ohio  44001




Gentlemen:



            Enclosed is renewal permit for the discharge of

-------
                                                         308



sewage from your municipality into "waters of the state"




pursuant to the provisions of the Water Pollution Control Act




of Ohio.



            You will note that this permit expires December



15, 1966.  Renewal of this permit is contingent  upon compliance



with the following conditions:




            1.  Submit a report and general plan for compliance




                with the Conclusions and Recommendations of the



                Lake Erie Conference (copy enclosed), with



                special reference to Sections 7> 8, 9> 10, and



                11 concerning the means to maximize the reduc-



                tion of biochemical oxygen demand, phosphates,



                and coliform concentrations.



            2.  Provide satisfactory operation and maintenance



                of the existing sewerage and wastewater treat-



                ment works including the submission of regular



                operating reports and annual summaries as



                required by the Division of Engineering,



                Ohio Department of Health.




            3.  Submit a status report with respect to sanitary



                sewerage placed under construction, completed,



                or planned during the period of  this permit.




            Prior to December 15* 1966, you will be expected



to comply with Regulation 452, Ohio Sanitary Code, by placing

-------
                                                      309



your wastewater treatment plant under the responsible charge



of a full-time employee of the municipality who possesses an



operator's certificate appropriate for this Class II plant,



and to continue technical supervision until the operator is



properly certified.



            Extension beyond December 15* 1966, for the



certification of your operator does not appear warranted.



            Should you have any questions with respect to the



above conditions, please notify us promptly.



                      Yours very truly,



                      E. W. Arnold, M. D., Chairman



                      Water Pollution Control Board




Enc.-Permit 772.13



    -Recom. & Concl.




Certified mail



co:  Supt. Wastewater Treat. Plant



cc:  Health Commissioner



cc:  District Office

-------
i :
I
j
j
I
i
i
i -J
IW.
>j
1
1
i V-
*;
e;
"
i K
1
I
i
j
^
I
F
i






i 1
1 a;
! £
r=
| 0
,0
VD VO vO
vo vo vo
i 1 i
LA ir\ ir\
T* T1 T
CO*] 3 H H
: '
! £
{ K!
co j -p
K r-f 0
H fij 0
£H S £
H O O
P v-i ?-:
H '-P •,-:
o !-.-; p

^"~* x^» ^-^
• • •
H 0 H 0 HO
AH &) ft V ft o
EH CO EH CO EH CO
^-— ' ^^ ^^
ri . n , n .
£ § §'• o 8 0
< « -• •
K K K
H
fe- "
Fl 1 ,1
P=-i j-p ,
s &a s coi
EH H OS
•rf* fv* r , •* ,
*3* P-i H -v-V
w W fc c3 H H M
'N"* ^ _ij^ •
*-H l-^ T"^ '
EH g 0 CO-'
w3 | i
EH Hi
co
< O -P
g EH .' H

LA H O
-P .,-! IA. VO VO
H! EH rf p ' ON 0\ O\
5 0 ft K H H H
P-i K
Hi 3
OH • Si
HI ft -P h ;;
S; w •,— ;
3 >5 w
S CO O
• Q
F=i ^
8 53 o<5

P) ft ft
W
•f + w +5
« cq « ft .
-P ft -P -P O
w «i fl d o c! o
CO -P HOHOA MO
O C) cS
EH ft 01
<; s M
EH EH EH
co
Q LA "•»
1 O 1 •« 10
» VO o
ICO IA O H CQ H
IA
«
tD -ri
P
•l-j
P s
•.H cd
0> O
O ^i
0 -P
M CO
Q
nJ
CD Ci) W • M !H T!
w W o pq
• • > •
* " ^ *
Cj
VD OJ fcfl CM
^T\ «i
ro ON o j-
^o ft' o ON rq c-
O\ C •» •» 05 •>
H PLI Lf\ r-j >> VO
CO H ? VO
|T)
CU
CO
0
C
o
tS !W
CJ CD
H -c)
o q
EH -H
cd •
O 6 ca
•p S k
?H CD
• I £
^1 • CD
•H +5 ca
5-i ca
-P S 0
CO -rl
-P • H
H S= rQ
cd cb ^
ft CO ft

vo
vo
1
»
1
t-




ft
B
1
A.
3
PC;


H

























CU
•H
s
•
Hi

ON
OJ
CO
•i
J-
H




•
IA
VO
1
IA
H
i
CV
r-!

^
S

5- v_>
H • GT
PM o a ft
EH 0) SS
^^. 0«
f\ * *. f.
r^< M M
O -HO
« W Vi


H H



CJN H
LT\ VO
ON ON
H H




ft
<=>
+
. M + P£J
^ PH • ft
PM -P
08 fl8
OO CO
c8 •> i »v
ON 0->
tn^t ca oo





a) a)
•H -H
S S
• •
Hi Hi

H LA
-* OJ
CO LfN
«% •*
on J-
00 00



m

p<
o
bO
O
h
O

o
•p
• •
38
^ -p
-P CO
>»

O  o
W IA a





CO O
•H -ri
^< h
w w
* •
Hi Hi

VD O
O CO
t- CU





                                                                                  310
                                                                                   ca


                                                                                   Q)

                                                                                   tjO
                                                                                   Cj
                                                                                   t
                                                                                   o
                                                                                   •p
                                                                                   -p

                                                                                    I
                                                                                   §<
                                                                                   ft

                                                                                   IfN
                                                                                   CVI
                                                                                   CM

 O

 V!
I
s
H
O
 O

s
                        a
w       5
?!       O

i       a
                                      w
                                      o!

                                      st
                                                     •H

                                                     >
iS


?5
ri  1

>  O

o ^J
G -P


3
                                                                   •ri
                                                           O

                                                          •g
                                                           CJ
                                                          W
                                                                                   05

                                                                                   W

-------
                                                           311
o
               \o




ca
H
EH
H
i-5
H
O
 2

JH Is
*3 4^
v3 CO



.p
O i-i
33
n w


• c
-P M
ca •-
>> w
CQ <1>
»-! ^
a" eg
CO •
-P
0) d
II

to
h
V V
0 JH
J * *^r i
W J-5 1 U2 oS ^Cj
-PC WO
O 2: M C(!
•H O ! QJ >J • 0)
j-i O ' J> -P O PQ
-P j-rl C O
CO CCJifE! 3 W
-r-j fc^ O CU 0>
f-^ O i p^ CJ -iH rH

I-H ci i O O W tO
{•
o
Q) ft]
CO P-i
I O
ir\


0)
•H
^
W
•
^

P
9
•*
05
-P
-P

f-i
cd Ai

ctf P4
1^
i to
w 3
s -s
•" 3

^ H
O O
PM O

















<






fr-
ITN
O\
H





f-^


IS £

^ j3 C
CO CO P
rt o
•HO U

^ fi 0>


fl "§)
o 0
W O

*o pH
cfl »pH
^. >

































ptj
**
O
^r





























-------
                                                       312



 Re:  Sandusky




      Sewerage                     December 15, 1965




Mr. Stuart W. Gosser




City Manager




City Building




222 Meigs Street




Sandusky, Ohio 44870




Dear Sir:




           As a result of Board action December 14, 1965*




enclosed is renewal permit for the discharge of sewage




from your municipality into "waters of the state" pursuant




to the provisions of the Water Pollution Control Act of Ohio.




           You will note that this permit expires December




15, 1966.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon com-




pliance with the following Orders:




           1.  Complete the construction of sanitary



               sewerage for the Cedar Point Area.




           2.  Provide satisfactory operation and



               maintenance of the existing sewerage and




               wastewater treatment works including the



               submission of regular operating reports




               and annual summaries as required by the




               Division of Engineering, Ohio Department




               of Health.




           3.  Submit a report and general plan for

-------
                                                        313
          compliance with the Conclusions and Recom-
          mendations of the Lake Erie Conference
          (copy enclosed), with special reference to
          Sections 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11 concerning the
          means to maximize the reduction of bio-
          chemical oxygen demand, phosphates, and coli-
          form concentrations.
           Should you have any questions with respect to
the above Orders, please notify us promptly.
                           Yours very truly,
                           E. W. Arnold, M.D., Chairman
                           Water Pollution Control Board
Enc.-Permit 287.15
    -Recom. & Concl.
Certified mail
cc :  Mayor and Commission
cc:  Havens & Emerson
cc:  Health Commissioner
cc:  District Office

                     *****

-------
Schedule Remarks

VO
VO
OJ
OJ
*s
FQ
0)
co
VD
VO
i
rj{
0\
O
1 — I
0
o
c3 B
-p
d CO
o: ! h -rl
-p -P O
d cy

O S
•ri f-i
-P -r-i
•r-i 2
S 0
Q
•P
d
-P
CO



-p

O CD
c2
-JJ
0. H
•P O
1-1
H 0



H




b0
3 a
"^ > ! !p -H
0 O , -P ca
'ft £i CD CO




O
+5
to

»-~

r. .j
O

o
p.
c^
(£.(









I

CO 42
CQ
•0
•rl
r-1
O


'"CJ
i~J OJ
CO '"Ci
o a

S ft
§ CO

P CO


rt
O
'•p -p
n3 Js
?~i 3
O r-i

r^
n • /
i O 'i
cd X
•r-1 O



•P
•rl
•P
c
w
^_j

Cabot T:
Titaniui
VO
VO
i
i — i
OJ
4
OJ
CD
CD
CQ
VD
VD
H
0
6
o
<& o
° ^
-p J
cd
CD CO
f-l r-i
-P -r!
O
o cd

CQ r-i
t °
£ -P
!•§
H 0



H





to
a
0
o
CJ
t-l
to
rC'
•H
r-i
O
to
o
ft

r^
CO

S
CD

0
•p
•rl
C3 O
0 t3
!p CD

M -r-i
O i~f
6* °

o 2
o o
£0 f-.
.—' — j
C- ^
->
•r-i f-*
Cabot T
Titaniu
VO
j
( 	 i
OJ
OJ
CD
CD
co
vo
vo
r-i
e
*ft
B
o
cd
CD
!H
-P

O

CQ
!
I



H





fl
o
o
o
t
CO
r-i
•ri
O
cd

( 	 j
-O
fl
O
O






4
N
t3-rl
fl rj
•rl Cd
H 5-i
-P -P
W -p 3
cd CD CD
>-3








! — (
Co
0

S
o>

o
•
o
fl
Hi
CO
CD
•ri
rl
•P

r^
r£j
c
Hi
o
s
x;
o
Detrex
CO K




CO
fl
o

JLj
cd
o
o

H3

W


•
>
p^

CO
•p
C
O
>

d
CO
CD

"cd
Chlorin
vo
vo
r^
OJ
OJ
in
-P
£
CD
fl)
CO
vo
\0
I
i
o
o3 0
0 ^
-§ '
CD CQ
-P d
o
0 cd
-P CH

tfs H
-P 0
ft -P
ft fl



HI

0
• -P
S cd
•rl CD
3£
^a
^! CD
CD 43
S 0





to co
rrt rrt
•H v-1
0 r-(
•^ O
•» to
9 e
S ft
0> CO
43 S
O CO








*
o
0

•rl
r-J CO

£.
Diamond
Serai -Wo













a
o
•rl
-P
b3 «J
fl rl
•rl CD
H a
-P -H
-P 0
CD O
CO -H

































vo
VO
i
OJ
OJ
s
pq
CD
CD
CO
VO
VO
H
C7\
r-!
O
0
oS 0
* *^
-p J
cd
(D CO
fc r-i
-P -rt
O
O CO
_ij r i

W H
-P O
? ri
rl -P
II



H

O
-p
cd
CD K)

a 5J

•rl *CJ
EH P
o
"of CD
rl 43
CD O
c5 °
CD O
vo
vo
SJ
OJ
i^
'a
CD
co
vo
vo
H
C7\
!
a
08 0
o ;D
•S '
CD CQ
-P £»
O
O cd
i^ ft i

CO rH
•P 0
ft G
a o
H 0



HI





to
fl
o
0

(3





CO
rcf
•r!
|— {
O
to
o
s
CD
rj
O


•
&
o
o
o
s
CD
c^
O

o w
CD -P
•H -H
43 r-i
-P -rl
03 O
S cd
OEH













-------
                                                    315




Re:  Ashtabula County




Ashtabula Township



Ind. Wastes-Sew.                February 21, 1966



Cabot TItania Corporation




P. 0. Box 160



Ashtabula, Ohio  44004




Attention Mr. Edward J. Holland, Manager




Gentlemen:



            As a result of Board action February 8, 1966,




enclosed is renewal permit for the discharge of industrial



wastes and sanitary sewage from your Titanium Dioxide Unit




into "waters of the state" pursuant to the provisions of the



Water Pollution Control Act and to the statement of policy




of the Board dated February 24, 1953.



            You will note that this permit expires September




1, 1966.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon compliance



with the following Orders:



            1.  The satisfactory maintenance and operation



                of the wastes treatment facilities provided



                in order to obtain the maximum performance



                of these devices; submitting to the Division




                of Engineering, Ohio Department of Health, at



                regular monthly intervals, reports including



                information and analytical data pertinent to

-------
                                                     316






                the operation and  to the  performance  of the




                wastes treatment and disposal facilities.



            2.   Continued participation in the Ashtabula



                Township Industrial Association in the evalua-




                tion of the effluent of this plant and of  the




                effects of the discharge  on the waters of



                Field Brook.




            3.   The completion of  the additional industrial



                wastes treatment and control facilities now




                under construction.




            4.   The submission of a report setting forth



                information to indicate compliance with the



                Recommendations and Conclusions of the Lake




                Erie Conference (copy enclosed), with particular



                reference to Sections 12, 13, and 16.



            Should you have any questions with respect to  the



above Orders, please notify us promptly.



                      Yours very truly,



                      E. W. Arnold, M. D., Chairman



                      Water Pollution Control Board



Enc.-Permit 1824.3




    -Recom. & Conol.



Certified mail



cc:  Health Commissioner



cc:  District Office

-------
                                                      317



Re:  Ashtabula County




     Ashtabula Township



     Ind. Wastes-Sew.            February 21, 1966




Cabot Tltania Corporation




P. 0. Box 160



Ashtabula, Ohio  44004



Attention Mr. Edward J. Holland, Manager




Gentlemen:



            As a result of Board action February 8, 1966,




enclosed is renewal permit for the discharge of industrial




wastes and sanitary sewage from your Titanium Tetrachloride



Unit into "waters of the state" pursuanc to the provisions of



the Water Pollution Control Act and to the statement of




policy of the Board dated February 24, 1953.



            You will note that this permit expires September



1, 1966.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon compliance



with the following Orders:



            1.  The satisfactory maintenance and operation of



                the wastes treatment facilities provided in



                order to obtain the maximum performance of



                these devices; submitting to the Division of



                Engineering, Ohio Department of Health, at



                regular monthly intervals, reports including



                information and analytical data pertinent to

-------
                                                        318



                the operation and to the performance  of the



                wastes treatment and disposal facilities.



            2.  Continued participation in the Ashtabula



                Township Industrial Association in the  evalua-



                tion of the effluent of this plant and  of  the




                effects of the discharge on the waters  of



                Field Brook.




            3.  The completion of the additional industrial



                wastes treatment and control facilities now




                under construction.



            4.  The submission of a report setting forth



                information to indicate compliance with the



                Recommendations and Conclusions of the  Lake



                Erie Conference (copy enclosed), with particular



                reference to Sections 12, 13, and 16.



            Should you have any questions with respect  to  the



above Orders, please notify us promptly.



                      Yours very truly,



                      E. W. Arnold, M. D., Chairman



                      Water Pollution Control Board




Enc.-Permit 1463.8



    -Recom. & Concl.




Certified mail



cc:  Health Commissioner



cc:  District Office

-------
                                                       319



Re:  Ashtabula County




     Ashtabula Township




     Industrial Wastes                 February 21, 1966




Detrex Chemical Industries, Inc.




Chlorinated Solvents Plant




P. 0. Box 248




Ashtabula, Ohio 44004




Attention Mr. R. Grill, Plant Manager




Gentlemen:




            As a result of Board action February 8, 1966,




enclosed is renewal permit for the discharge of industrial




wastes from your establishment into "waters of the state"




pursuant to the provisions of the Water Pollution Control Act




and to the statement of policy of the Board dated February 24,




1953.



            You will note that this permit expires September




1, 1966.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon compliance




with the following Orders:




            1.  The satisfactory maintenance and operation of




                the wastes treatment facilities provided in




                order to obtain the maximum performance of




                these devices; submitting to the Division of




                Engineering, Ohio Department of Health, at




                regular monthly intervals, reports including

-------
                                                      320



                information and  analytical  data pertinent to




                the  operation  and  to  the  performance  of  the




                wastes  treatment and  disposal  facilities.




            2.   Continued  participation in  the Ashtabula




                Township Industrial Association in  the evalua-




                tion of the effluent  of this plant  and of the




                effects of the discharge  on the waters of




                Field Brook.




            3.   The  completion of  the additional  industrial




                wastes  treatment and  control facilities  now




                under construction.




            4.   The  submission of  a report  setting  forth




                information to indicate compliance  with  the




                Recommendations  and Conclusions of  the Lake




                Erie Conference  (copy enclosed),  with particular



                reference  to Sections 12, 13,  and 16.




            Should you  have any  questions with respect to the




above Orders, please notify us promptly.




                     Yours very truly,




                     E. W. Arnold, M. D.,  Chairman




                     Water Pollution Control  Board




Enc.-Permit 1172.12




    -Recom. & Concl.




Certified mail

-------
                                                       321




cc :  Health Commissioner



cc:  District Office







                     * *•***<**








Re:  Ashtabula County




     Ashtabula Township




     Industrial Wastes                February 21, 1966



Diamond Alkali Company




Semi-Works



P. 0. Box 488



Ashtabula, Ohio  44004



Attention Mr. J. J. Browne, Manager




Gentlemen:



            As a result of Board action February 8, 1966,



enclosed is renewal permit for the discharge of industrial



wastes from your establishment into "waters of the state"



pursuant to the provisions of the Water Pollution Control Act



and to the statement of policy of the Board dated February 24,




1953.



            You will note that this permit expires September



1, 1966.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon compliance




with the following Orders:



            1.  The satisfactory maintenance and operation of

-------
                                                    322




                the wastes treatment  facilities provided in



                order to obtain the maximum performance of



                these devices;  submitting to the Division of



                Engineering,  Ohio Department of Health, at



                regular monthly intervals, reports including




                information and analytical data pertinent to



                the operation and to  the performance of the




                wastes treatment and  disposal facilities.



            2.   Continued participation in the Ashtabula




                Township Industrial Association in the evalua-



                tion of the effluent  of this plant and of the



                effects of the  discharge on the waters of



                Field Brook:.




            3.   The completion of the additional industrial



                wastes treatment and  control facilities now



                under construction.



            4.   The submission of a report setting forth in-



                formation to  indicate compliance with the



                Recommendations and Conclusions of the Lake




                Erie Conference (copy enclosed), with particular



                reference to  Sections 12, 13, and 16.




            Should you have any questions with respect to



the above Orders, please notify us promptly.




                      Yours very truly,

-------
                                                     323



                      E. W. Arnold, M. D., Chairman




                      Water Pollution Control Board




Enc.-Permit 1742.4



    -Recom. & Concl.




Certified mail



cc:  Mr. P. H. Rockwell



cc:  Health Commissioner




oc :  District Office







                   *******








Re:  Ashtabula County



     Ashtabula Township




     Ind.Wastes-Sew.                  February 21, 1966




The General Tire & Rubber Company




Chemical Division



P. 0. Box 68



Ashtabula, Ohio  44004



Attention Mr. Richard R. Mattiko



Gentlemen:



            As a result of Board action February 8, 1966,



enclosed is renewal permit for the discharge of industrial



wastes and sanitary sewage from your establishment into




"waters of the state" pursuant to the provisions of the

-------
                                                        324





Water Pollution Control Act and to the statement of policy of




the Board dated February 24, 1953.




            You will note that this permit expires September



1, 1966.  Renewal of this permit is contingent  upon compliance




with the following Orders:




            1.  The satisfactory maintenance and operation of




                the wastes treatment facilities provided in



                order to obtain the maximum performance of




                these devices; submitting to the Division of



                Engineering, Ohio Department of Health, at




                regular monthly intervals, reports including




                information and analytical data pertinent to




                the operation and to the performance of the



                wastes treatment and disposal facilities.




            2.  Continued participation in the  Ashtabula



                Township Industrial Association in the evalua-



                tion of the effluent of this plant and of the



                effects of the discharge on the waters of



                Field Brook:.




            3.  The completion of the additional industrial




                wastes treatment and control facilities now




                under construction.



            4.  The submission of a report setting forth In-



                formation to indicate compliance with the

-------
                                                       325



                Recommendations and Conclusions of the Lake



                Erie Conference (copy enclosed), with particular



                reference to Sections 12, 13, and 16.



            Should you have any questions with respect to




the above Orders, please notify us promptly.



                      Yours very truly,



                      E. W. Arnold, M. D., Chairman



                      Water Pollution Control Board




Enc.-Permit 1369.9



    -Recom. & Concl.




Certified mail



cc:  Health Commissioner



cc:  District Office.







                       *******








Re:  Ashtabula County



     Ashtabula Township



     Industrial Wastes               February 21,  1966



Olin Mathieson Chemical Corporation



Chemicals Division



P. 0.  Box 206



Ashtabula, Ohio  44004




Attention Mr.  G. P.  Palmer,  Plant  Manager

-------
                                                        326






Gentlemen:



            As a result of Board action February 8, 1966,




enclosed is renewal permit for the discharge of industrial



wastes from your establishment into "waters of the state"



pursuant to the provisions of the Water Pollution Control



Act and to the statement of policy of the Board dated February




24, 1953.



            You will note that this permit expires September



1, 1966.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon compliance



with the following Orders:




            1.  The satisfactory maintenance and operation of



                the wastes treatment facilities provided in




                order to obtain the maximum performance of



                these devices; submitting to the Division of



                Engineering, Ohio Department of Health, at



                regular monthly intervals, reports including



                information and analytical data pertinent to



                the operation and to the performance of the



                wastes treatment and disposal facilities.



            2.  Continued participation in the Ashtabula



                Township Industrial Association in the evalua-



                tion of the effluent of this plant and of the



                effects of the discharge on the waters of




                Field Brook.

-------
                                                       32?



            3.  The completion of the additional industrial




                wastes treatment and control facilities now




                under construction.



            4.  The submission of a report setting forth




                information to indicate compliance with the




                Recommendations and Conclusions of the Lake



                Erie Conference (copy enclosed), with particular




                reference to Sections 12, 13, and 16.



            Should you have any questions with respect to the




above Orders, please notify us promptly.




                      Yours very truly,



                      E. W. Arnold, M. D., Chairman



                      Water Pollution Control Board



Enc. -Permit 1860.2



    -Recom. & Concl.




Certified mail



cc:  Health Commissioner



cc:  District Office.
Re:  Ashtabula County



     Ashtabula Township




     Ind. Wastes-Sew.                 February  18,  1966

-------
                                                      328



Reactive Metals, Inc.




P. 0. Box 579



Ashtabula, Ohio  44004




Gentlemen:




            Enclosed is renewal permit for the discharge of




industrial wastes and sanitary sewage from your Extrusion




Plant into "waters of the state" pursuant to the provisions



of the Water Pollution Control Act and to the statement of




policy of the Board dated February 24, 1953.




            You will note that this permit expires January 1,




1967.  Renewal of this permit is contingent uoon compliance



with the following conditions:




            1.  The satisfactory maintenance and operation of




                facilities which have been provided for the



                treatment and disposal of the sanitary wastes




                of this plant.



            2.  The satisfactory maintenance and operation of



                facilities which have been provided for the



                treatment and disposal of the industrial




                wastes of this plant.



            3.  The submission to the Division of Engineering,



                Ohio Department of Health, at regular monthly




                intervals, of reports to include information



                and analytical data pertinent to the operation

-------
                                                      329



                of the sanitary and industrial wastes treatment




                and disposal facilities and pertinent to the



                evaluation of the effects on the receiving




                stream..



            The requirement of submission of data with respect




to the receiving stream (Condition 3) can be accomplished by




participating in a cooperative stream monitoring program




instituted and carried out by industries discharging waste




effluents into Field Brook.



            Should you have any questions with respect to the




above conditions, please notify us promptly.



                      Yours very truly,



                      E. W. Arnold, M. D., Chairman




                      Water Pollution Control Board



Enc.-Permit 1865.2




Certified mail



cc:  Health Commissioner



cc:  District Office







                  *******








Re:  Ashtabula County



     Ashtabula Township



     Industrial Wastes                 February 21, 1966

-------
                                                        330
Reactive Metals, Inc.
P. 0. Box 35
Ashtabula, Ohio  44004
Attention Mr. R. L. Swain, General Manager
Gentlemen:
            As a result of Board action February 8, 1966,
enclosed is renewal permit for the discharge of industrial
wastes from your Metals Reduction Plant into "waters of the
state" pursuant to the provisions of the Water Pollution
Control Act and to the statement of policy of the Board
dated February 24, 1953.
            You will note that this permit expires September 1,
1966.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon compliance
with the following Orders:
            1.  The satisfactory maintenance and operation of
                the wastes treatment facilities provided in
                order to obtain the maximum performance of
                these devices; submitting to the Division of
                Engineering, Ohio Department of Health, at
                regular monthly intervals, reports including
                information and analytical data pertinent to
                the operation and to the performance of the
                wastes treatment and disposal facilities.
            2.  Continued participation in the Ashtabula
                Township Industrial Association in the

-------
                                                       331



                evaluation of the effluent of this plant




                and of the effects of the  discharge on the



                waters of Field  Brook.



            3.  The completion of the additional industrial



                wastes treatment and control facilities now




                under construction.



            4.  The submission of a report setting forth



                information to indicate compliance with the




                Recommendations and Conclusions of the Lake



                Erie Conference (copy enclosed), with




                particular reference to Sections 12, 13,  and  16,



            Should you have any questions  with respect to the



above Orders, please notify us promptly.




                      Yours very truly,



                      E. W. Arnold, M. D., Chairman



                      Water Pollution Control Board



Enc.-Permit 1453.8



    -Recom. & Concl.



Certified mail



cc:  Health Commissioner



cc:  District Office

-------
                                                   332






Re:  Ashtabula County




     Ashtabula Township




     Ind.Wastes-Sew.                  February 21, 1966




Reactive Metals, Inc.




P. 0. Box 35



Ashtabula, Ohio  44004




Attention Mr. R. L. Swain, General Manager




Gentlemen:




            As a result of Board action February 8, 1966,




enclosed is renewal permit for the discharge of industrial




wastes and sanitary sewage from your Sodium and Chlorine Plant




into "waters of the state" pursuant to the provisions of the




Water Pollution Control Act and to the statement of policy of




the Board dated February 24, 1953.




            You will note that this permit expires September




1, 1966.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon compliance




with the following Orders:




            1.  The satisfactory maintenance and operation of




                the wastes treatment facilities provided in




                order to obtain the maximum performance of




                these devices; submitting to the Division of




                Engineering, Ohio Department of Health, at




                regular monthly intervals, reports including




                information and analytical data pertinent to

-------
                                                      333



                the operation and to the performance of the




                wastes treatment and disposal facilities.




            2.  Continued participation in the Ashtabula




                Township Industrial Association in the evalua-




                tion of the effluent of this plant and of




                the effects of the discharge on the waters of




                Field Brook.




            3.  The completion of the additional industrial




                wastes treatment and control facilities now




                under construction.




            4.  The submission of a report setting forth




                information to indicate compliance with the




                Recommendations and Conclusions of the Lake




                Erie Conference (copy enclosed), with particular




                reference to Sections 12, 13, and 16.




            Should you have any questions with respect to the




above Orders, please notify us promptly.




                      Yours very truly,




                      E. W. Arnold, M.  D., Chairman




                      Water Pollution Control Board




Enc.-Permit 923.12




    -Recom. & Concl.




Certified mail




cc:  Health Commissioner




cc :  District Office

-------















CO
H
EH
a
M
O
fr* °
g O

M r^
b* H
EH ^ S
^ 3 ' — '
w £H to
CM P] <5
E-i <3 pq
H H W
MOW
? H PH
r3 J-l
5-°
0)  -pa;
o a o a
0) -rl O -rl
"~3 ^ •<->!-(
5-° 5-°
(^) Q^ Q) fj ^
p^ O fyj Q






0) 0)
Q C4
•rl *rl
^1 f^
PQ PP
•» •»
H H
•rt -rl
O 0

0
o a
o o
•H
UO -p
a aj
•rl r.
-P 0
CQ Of
^ M
0) O
<§• °
H

+> O
J5 §
o ff
VQ
VO
1
H
1
^
-P
"
•2
w
0)
CQ

VO
1
|
t-

°3

CQ •
H 0
•H -rl
o r4
cd 3
CM g
-P O
c3 -P
0) •

•P 0
ai ca
^H *rl
p | rrt




< H


n
o •
•H N
•P O -rl
o a H
^ *rS CQ
0) 1-1 0)
« o &;

fl
o
!H
H

o -a
C -rl
•rl O
J-l «3!
pq j
-\ d)
H 0)
•rl -P
O CQ
O
O

ttf
a
•H

o3 2
d o
cd o3

S ^

fn


g
M

•a
•rl

1
r-l
a>
-p
ca

a
P*
M *
0 >
(_H
H
cu to
CL) O
-P ,^
CQ ^
fj
O
•H 08
H
£> H
^S 
r— i
H
CU CQ
0) a;
•P rd
CQ r^
^
o
S^
-9 H
^s cu
Pi cu
CU -P
« CQ

a
0
0) i-l
ti -P
•H 03
rt no
s"3
0 0


fi
CO
•H
a
E!

ro
•P
a>


a
Cl|
fj rH
•S3
co
•rl CO
i> r!
a 5
o
-p a
13

-------
















a
EH

*— 1
H
O

-p
•rl
P
a
w
W)
JH **
a  *
cd s
rl -rl bO
ft ^~i ^
CO d -ri
rH H
T3 +> +3
q ^ +>
3 CD > ft 0
rH k -rl
SO -P
O OJ
^
rH <1)
TJ  «H
CO ^

t|3 * li
EH O S

o
-p
-p

•a

























a
0
•rl
-p
0}
O
•rl
Clarif
*
s
3
fx^

P CO
CO T3
GJ *rl
r~J r~{
PH O
1 CO
H •
O ft

-------
                                                          336
 Re:  Lodi

      Industrial Wastes            April 14,  1966

Locke Manufacturing Co.

Ohio Street

Lodi, Ohio 44254

Attention Mr. Allen 0. Rom

Gentlemen:

           Enclosed is permit for the discharge of

industrial wastes from your establishment into "waters

of the state" pursuant to the provisions of the Water

Pollution Control Act and to the statement of policy of the

Board dated February 24,  1953.

           You will note  that this permit expires July 1,

1966.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon compliance

with the following conditions:

           1.  The submission to the Division of

               Engineering, Ohio Department of Health,

               of a copy  of an agreement with the village

               of Lodi for the acceptance of the pre-

               treated industrial wastes into the

               municipal  sanitary sewer system.

           2.  The construction and placing in operation

               of necessary industrial waste pretreatment

               facilities to comply with the above

               agreement.

-------
                                                       337






           Notice should be submitted when pretreatment




facilities have been placed in operation and the pretreated




wastes have been made tributary to the municipal sewerage




system so that consideration may be given to exemption of




your company's permit.




           Should you have any questions with respect to




the above conditions, please notify us promptly.




                           Yours very truly,




                           E. W. Arnold, M.D., Chairman




                           Water Pollution Control Board




Enc. -Permit 1964




Certified mail




cc :  Health Commissioner




cc :  District Office
                       # # #
Re:  Elyria




     Industrial Wastes




Ternstedt Division




General Motors Corporation




P. 0. Box 760




Elyria, Ohio 44036



Gentlemen:
                                   August 30, 1965

-------
                                                         338
           Enclosed is renewal permit  for the discharge
of industrial wastes from your establishment  into "waters
of the state" pursuant to the provisions of the Water
Pollution Control Act of Ohio.
           You will note that this  permit expires August
1, 1966.  Renewal of this permit  is contingent upon
compliance with the following conditions:
           1.  The satisfactory maintenance and opera-
               tion of facilities which have  been pro-
               vided thus far for the  treatment and

               disposal of industrial  wastes  incident
               to the manufacturing processes of this
               plant.
           2.  The continued submission to the Division
               of Engineering, Ohio Department of Health,
               at regular monthly intervals,  of reports
               to include information and analytical data
               pertinent to:  (l)  The operation and per-
               formance of the industrial wastes treat-
               ment facilities; (2) an evaluation of the
               total pollution load discharged; and (3)
               an evaluation of the effects of the dis-
               charged wastes on  the receiving stream.
           3.  The prompt reporting of the occurrence and

-------
                                                      339




               cause of accidental or  Intermittent  dis-




               charges of any wastes which by reason of



               their volume or characteristics,  or  both,




               may have a deleterious  effect  on  the



               stream from the standpoint of  downstream




               legitimate uses.




           4.   The placing under construction of proposed




               additional industrial wastes treatment




               facilities in accordance  with  comprehensive




               plans approved August  12, 1965* notifying



               the Division of Engineering the date major




               units are placed into operation.




           Should you have any questions with respect to




the above conditions, please notify us promptly.




                           Yours very  truly,




                           E. W. Arnold, M.D., Chairman




                           Water Pollution Control  Board




Enc.-Permit 734.14



Certified mail




cc:  Health Commissioner




cc:  District  Office

-------












CO
H
EH
a
o
< O
^ y
EH o
3
g H a
EH M

H 3 PH
PS
WWW
EH O !>
CO <£ J-H
*^2 *^J PQ
^ 9 s
5j§|
p^ M 
a -a
cu 
iH •
•P fcOrH

















"*•



CO
•a
•H
^
CH w

J°

4-^ rH
1 1
r~{ 0
E "*



jj
s

Jn
0)
I*






^>
1
O

g>
0
CO
ji
u

























0)
60
bO ^
fl rf
•H J3
H 0
-P CQ
•P -rl
cu -a
CO
•* 1
N T3
•H 0)
H f<
S3
-p ^
=J a
CU O




"3 o
0 -rl
*rH O
g 3
11



	 i
CO ^
H 5o
cd o >>
o 2 q
•pj • 0}
ill
o •
•H S 03
w^-s
I?"3
fl^fl
O d!

























 CD -P
a 43 .£ +>
Cu (U Co 4)
CO CO « CO
r-l H
CU 0)
> CO > CO
O f-t -rl !H -rl
O O rH OH
S o o
PH 08 CO 08 CO
o •
^ -o ft -d- ft
H q M q w
S CO CO CO CO
o
8
13
' co q
q cd o
H ^ CO >rl
O to CQ
vT ^ ^ Ti
>> 08 H ;>
•H T3 d R'?
id q oj o q
O Cd -H -rl Cd OJ
co q -P o H
d 3 a) -H CW
H >> > H r-j
cd H H o 1-1 co
fn f-i S ftcO bO
cu to ti 0
to xi a o • cd
to H a o -a 5
O £3 (U fl C5
^ £5 P-« M^«^
3^0

-------











CO

p^
M

[— 1
o
< 0
td
E~i O
H 3 _
g H 3
H H

EH §
W M pi
EH O ^
CQ <£ H
<; a «
hi § §
"S P Q
H Pi
PH M ^
EH M >H
co w b
g W O
^ rj
H 2
3
Pr. /J
0
CO































CO
0)
«
,§
o
CO







to
-p
ro cu
a a
o 

•»-H
o
O S
G 3
O Pi
•rl S
•P 0
0 O
•a co
0) T3
« o
M O

 CO
8 -^
O Pi CO
-p aJ
CO o
•P VO T3
o vo a
0) 1 -H
PirH •
>< 1 CO
0) ON-H
• -P
S>> fl!
^0 CO



g
rO
a
O (1)
o a



K*>
,_{
a
o
o
0) -rl
bo q
o3 3
Is bO
(L) FH
CQ O
o
a o
0 0
•H
•P rl
a) tt)
?H Pi
O a3
M
0 r-l
° 3
w js
Q*
H J>j
O <1)
^T-l
0) ^1
T3 PQ
CO (U
f—l C^

-p

















































 w
 a
 o
 o
CO
                           o
                           CO
a
o
o
bO
-P

 G
 O
O
               CO
                   *cJ
                   Q
                          cS
                           o
                           o
           CO  d
               Pi
             •  a
            to  o
            o  o

           W  H
               
            o  a)
            CO  to
            to  O
0 0
-P VO
a vo
rQ
VO °
VO i~ 1
i PI
H ET
1 O
ON o
a
CO
•H
-P
03
to
CM co
O H
•H
to o
q cj
co CM
H »
Pi -P
o c^
+> 0)
CD F-(
H -P
1
I-i
(1) H
O 1
CO J-
•
Ss
Q. ,Q *
o r-
O CO VO
r-( OS
VO -H H
VO 0
I aJ >>

1 to
r-\ ^(H rf
H o a>
0?
a)
1 -0
!-l CO -rl
Q Q JL|
0 rl O
3 d
^ w ^j
o d y
 -O
O -rl  •
M Pi
QI tfl
E *»H
H -a
                                  H
              S
              o
              o
                      o
                     o

                     «
        o


       t

       O

        0)
                                             H
                                             a
                                             •P
                                             -P
tfl
•a
•rl
H
0
08 CO

T3 n3
CD 0)
ti >
a H
Q) O
Pi to
CO CQ
M
•a
•rl
H H
0) O
> 08 CO
OS
to tS t?
O CU (1)
•a >
08 G H
0) O
t3 Pi CO
q tfl to


0
rj
CO
•rl
fl
a
•^
-p



bO
fl
•rl

o
&
-p
03







o

0)
                                             o
                                             o
                   -P



                   CO
                                 r?
                                 o

                                 •o
                                 fl
                                 o
                                                            H
rl rj
(1) oj
> JH
O -P
0 S
3
08 T3
• a
W H
•P 0
§1
p, CQ
CU 0)
CO T3

H CO
•H ^OJ
0 W

bO
a
-P
03
0)
u
d
o


a
o
•rl
"S
rl
O
&
O
o
o
o
r—4
w
CO
43



•
CO
H
•rl
0
la3





























-------

































H
EH
a
H

pr^ i — I o
@ S 0
>2 M O
EH
<£ ^1 I
PH M
S 2 S
EH <; M
^n
p£] M ex
EH CJ «
IS H §
9 Q (2
S OF IHDUSTRI
LAKE ERIE .
CUY.AHOGA :
P

CQ



Treatment
Provided



0
CQ

t"^
 CO
ft rl -H





H




d
Clarificatio




CO
•o
tH
P-l

o
H ft
CU CO
O CQ





.
Ferro Chemical
Div.of Ferro Corp












































> 08
CO rH
O CO
U -P
fn 3
(5 H
'S tio












































<;



a
•rl
cTrH
Clarificatio
plant contro
Lagoon
ca
•c
•H
08 H
to co

• « frt
O CU
^J ^
p.1
« 0
a w
CU CO
B^


,
r> ft
•rl M
Q o
General Chemical
Allied Chemical C
National Works

vo
vo
i
VO
r-l
1
oo
^
-p
*~*
•o
f-l

cu
cS







vo
vo
1
H
1
CT\
1
• rl
43 CU
cd e3 f
0) fH 0)
fH O W CO
P H ^
W -rl >»
 o 43
CD • cd 4^ w
H ft cu « !>»
ft CQ fc ,C! W
• -rl 4> O
43 t) CU CO 0)
flj fH iH. tfl
(H 08 ftT3 Cd





< H




CO
a H
0 -rl
! \
0 -p
Q) 0
,cj o
O O



0
•s
1-1

r~j *r*
cd fa
o
*rj rH
& 03
CU 4^'
o s
.
o ft
fl H
•M O
•\ C3

a cu
Goodrich-Gulf Che
Goodyear Aerospac














cr\
VO

r-l

S

t*"~ *
VO rH
1 ft
H a

rH CJ



08
o
43
cd
+> CO
0 0
CM cd
•o •
0) ft
x! to
0 -rl
CQ -O





H



H
2
4>
§
O
1
rH




CO
-p

CQ

1
S



.
o
O
Harshaw Chemical
U"\
vo

vo
r-l
1

f-l

"
T>
PH
cu

cr\
vo
i
H
i


V0 •
VO ft
1 O
H
H Q
CMH



&3 08
•
o: 4> •
q cd co
rf CU rH
H fn -rl
ft+> 0

• fn O
•O +> rl
cy cn -p
& a a
000
woo





<; M



.rj
o
CO
•H
CD
i i
& «
rH S

0
O
r-l rl
CU W M
> T3
cd *H ^3
fH H T-l
O O O
CQ <
08 1
• H
>d ft CD
CQ CQ 02
0
CJ
H "«>
O H)
> -p
as ca
Hilltop Sand & Gr
Jones & Laughlin
Corporation
LT\
VO
1
ur\
,_^ '
1

(_,
-P

'S
PH
CU
0)
CQ






























«aj




fl
, Clarificatio
a
M
J~>
pt^
-P CO
CO »O
C^ T^
p^ 'o
1 C/J
H •
CU ft
cu co
-p 3
CQ CQ


H
CU
CU
+»
CQ
Jones & Laughlin
Corporation
342

-------






















en

R
EH
g

P£ 2 .
{H O -P

§ M O
EH

rjj r3
P^ fn a
CH < H
M pq .3
EH O w
en gj

CO
cd

O

Qj
p^







£
•H
•P
S
vo
VO
1
rH
1
rH
-P

13
PQ
CQ
ON
H
1
H
^° p*.
H 0
1
CXI fl
HW
O *M
tH ,C O
-P •
O -H S •

rH 8 a
p, cu .cu o
3 c8 cu
-P iH • -rl
0 ft 0 W
PI s a
  -rl 05
                                                                   H
                                                        to
                                                        •rl
                                                        S?
                                                                              LTV
                                                                             VO

                                                                              on
                                                                              H

                                                                             CO
                                                                                         S
                                                                                          CU
                                                                                          cu
                                                                                         CQ
                                                                                                 343
                                                                                            vo

                                                                                            rH
                                                                                         O
                                                                                         CO
                                                                                               i
                                                                                        H
.3
 O
 CQ
•rl
T3

T3
 CU

?l

 a
                                                                             a
                                                                             2
                                                                                                    o3 p o
                                                                                                    cu  co i
                                                                                                    M  d o
     CU  CO (U W

     rH rHrH CU


     S  O O CO
     O  OJ'rl 03
H
•H
O
o
O
O
CO
1
to
CQ
CU
CO


d
o
to


u
EH
d
J.
•p
Pi
CQ
O
a
H
O
O

p

r~j
pil
to
to
•rl

(3
6
08
i
CQ
1
rl
O


T3
§
CO
I5j
°8
a

•
0
a

•V
&•
Pi
s
0
o

s & Platers^ Metal Finish
rl
OJ T3
N CU
•rl p

'o S
•§ Bl
rl 0
CU O
-P C
W M
l!
0
H
> o
O O
ft 
-------





















to
pd
Hi
EH
3
o

. *T pQ u J
3 £} P^j
H
EH H O
CO PH Q
J^D p4 M
Q *3<
§O
o
8
3
EH
CO



































CO
"S
g
cu
K



cu
*^
•a
0)

o
CO





CO
-P
d cu
a s
O CU
•rl r-*
•P -rl
13 O1
<3j pCj


CO
•p

-P
CO






-P
C3 'Cf
0) 0)
1?
£1



-p
co
oj
£3:

O

O
p^
r*>
&

















s^
4J
•rl
•P

w
LTV
VO
oo
rH
CO
r-l
•P

13
pq
0)
CO
o\
VO
"H"
vo •
VO ft
1 0
H
i a
00 H
H H
BB
•
O fn <•
rH -P -P CO

~"~ cu a vH
a a o o
• O -rl U Cti
CO 08 •

cu H w §
> X a H
a o 3 o
O -H H CU
O ft ft M




H



.
0
w
•H
•a
0)

r~i
|


d
o


•o
•rl
O
1
H
(U
cu
P
CO
s
fl
0
o
1
a -p
P< 0
rl -rl
0 rl
O -P
CO
rH '|H

f 
             LfN
            VO

            vo
             H

             H
             H
             S
             pq

             cu
             cu
             CO
                 bo
                 a
             H O
             cu a
             N cu
             •H ^
              a 
                                CO
                                3
                                 O
                                CO  CQ
                                    •O
                                H  -H
                                rH  H
                                H  O
                                S  CO


                                 CU  ft
                                 CU  CO
                                -P  S
                                CO  CO
                                •p
                                 o
                                                -p
                                                 a  a
                                                 o  o
                                                 fi  rj
                                                -p  -P
                                                 ai  a!
                                                 0)  O
                                                 rl  -H
                                                -P  H
tJ CU
JH a
C3 »ri

-------































8
M
EH
H
M
O
§5 ° •
pH O -P
1*8
Hi H 0
EH

K &H s
EH *3 rH
CQ
w w <*
EH O W
& H W
J £tq j — J
<^ £J p^
S w <;
EH H O

R > O
ft M -rl
CO >• -rl
H 8 S
•rl 0) H
OH o
,
rj
G
y
S
>> W
M -P T3
O W *H
0 d H
4n PQ CQ
0) 1
« H •
cu ft
H cu co
•H -P 3
O CO CQ
a
o
• -P
O aj
O M w
O CU
H ft O
•rl H Oj
o ^> o ci
M o H
Li Q H (£<
03 -rl CU
'O "in cu H
d cu -P co
S « C73 rl
p -p
CO CV o fl
CQ CU
(U • O
VO
VO
1
-~J*
, — 1
1
H
J_,
-p
t_]

'S
pq
CU
cu
CQ





VD
VD
1
H
1
1 — I
"
CU
1 bO
CQ > a$
l-i cu f
CU CO CU
> CQ
cu CH
CQ 0 >,
o 40
O O O
e co o
rl -H O g
-P -O -P CU
CQ -p
O O b3 >>
O 
cd a;
p- J ^/2





w
cu
o
d

H
6

-p
8
o
VO
VD
1
^j-
H
1
H
j_,
-P


•s
p-5
^
CU
co
H
ft
a
0
o
VO W t^-
i H VD
H -rl 1
1 0 H
O d i
H to CO

j^
O CH
<*H ^3 O
-P »
a rj a •
CO ? O "H
H 0 fl
ft cu o o
o M o

-P -H o -H
rt rH H ^
O ft 0 W
ft a a

-------















CO
a
EH
H
v-3
H
O
»
-p
•rl
-P
S
>>
1
•p •
w a
o
%4 Tt
d) +>
rC Oj
+3 S
is -H
3 -P
IH w
a
w >
•O G

•H
a
•ri
S
, i
3
+*
£


•

o
O OJ
0
§ CO
H 0)
 rl
pq
«
w§
• o
CO -rl
M
II



























<£
™^t




«


•
o
CO
•a
•H
o
<;
uT
_J
3
£
a]
o
ti
(1)
I
<
ft.
T^
o
PI
rl
0
o

•rl
fl
0
o
rl
S

-------
                                                         34?
Re:   Akron
     Industrial Wastes             April 14, 1966
Diamond Crystal Salt Co.
P. 0. Box 151
Akron, Ohio 44309
Attention Mr. Lyle F. Pohly, Plant Manager
Gentlemen:
           Enclosed is permit for the discharge of
industrial wastes from your establishment into "waters
of the state" pursuant to the provisions of the Water
Pollution Control Act and to the statement of policy of
the  Board dated February 24, 1953.
           You will note that this permit expires November
1, 1966.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon
compliance with the following conditions:
           1.  The submission prior to May 15, 1966,
               of a report outlining proposals for
               compliance with the attached Recommenda-
               tions and Conclusions of the Lake Erie
               Conference.
           2.  The initiation of corrective measures
               necessary for the reduction and the
               control of the critical characteristics
               of the industrial wastes of this plant.
           Should you have any questions with respect to

-------
the above conditions, please notify us promptly.




                           Yours very truly,




                           E. W. Arnold, M.D., Chairman




                           Water Pollution Control Board




Enc.-Permit 1962




    -Recom. & Concl.




Certified mail




cc:  Health Commissioner




cc:  District Office








                      # * # * #
Re:  Walton Kills
     Industrial Wastes
Perro Chemical
November 26, 1965
Div. of Ferro Corporation




P. 0. Box 3^9




Bedford, Ohio 44014




Attention Mr. E. J. Riley, Plant Manager




Gentlemen:




           Enclosed is renewal permit for the discharge




of industrial wastes from your establishment into "waters




of the state" pursuant to the provisions of the Water




Pollution Control Act and to the statement of policy of the




Board dated  February  24,  1953.

-------
                                                         3^9




           You will note that this permit expires October




1, 1966.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon




compliance with the following conditions:




           1.  The satisfactory maintenance and




               operation of existing facilities for the




               the treatment and disposal of industrial




               wastes; submitting to the Division of




               Engineering, Ohio Department of Health,




               at regular monthly intervals, reports to




               define the quality of effluent discharged




               to Tinkers Creek.




           2.  The prompt reporting of the occurrence and




               cause of accidental or intermittent dis-




               charges of any wastes which by reason of




               their volume or characteristics, or both,




               may have a deleterious effect on the stream




               from the standpoint of downstream legitimate




               uses.




           3.  The submission to and approval by the Ohio




               Department of Health of comprehensive plans




               for the removal of barium compounds and




               suspended solids from the effluent.




           Should you have any questions with respect to the




above conditions, please notify us promptly.




                           Yours very truly,

-------
                                                       350
                     E. W. Arnold, M. D., Chairman
                     Water Pollution Control Board
Enc.-Permit 668.10
Certified mail
cc:   Health Commissioner
cc:   District Office

                     * # # * #


Re:   Akron
     Industrial Wastes             March 16, 1966
Goodyear Aerospace Corporation
1210 Massillon Road
Akron,  Ohio 4^315
Gentlemen:
           Enclosed is permit for the discharge of
industrial wastes from your establishments into "waters
of the state" pursuant to the provisions of the Water
Pollution Control Act of Ohio.
           You will note that this permit expires September
1, 1966.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon
compliance with the following conditions:
           1.  Either:
               (a)  The submission to the Division of
                    Engineering, Ohio Department of Health,

-------
                                                       351
                    of a copy of an agreement between your

                    company and the City of Akron for the
                    acceptance of the industrial wastes of
                    your plants into the municipal sanitary

                    sewerage system; or

              (b)   The submission to and approval by the
                    Ohio Department of Health of detail

                    plans of proposed facilities for the

                    treatment and disposal of the industrial
                    wastes of your plants for discharge to

                    waters of the state.
           2.  The submission to the Division of Engineering

               prior to May 15, 1966, of a report indicating
               proposals for complying with the attached
               Recommendations and Conclusions of the Lake
               Erie Conference, giving particular emphasis
               to Sections 12, 13, 16, 17 and 18.

           Should you have any questions with respect to the
above conditions, please notify us promptly.
                           Yours very truly,
                           E. W. Arnold, M.D., Chairman
                           Water Pollution Control Board

Enc.-Permit 1957

    -Recom. & Concl.
Certified mail

-------
                                                     352




cc:  Health Commissioner




cc:  District Office








                     **#*•*









Re:  Cleveland




     Industrial Wastes




     (Acid Iron)                   November 16,  1965




Jones and Laughlin Steel Corporation




33^1 Jennings Road




Cleveland, Ohio




Gentlemen:




           Enclosed is renewal permit for the discharge




of industrial wastes from your plant into "waters of the




state" pursuant to the provisions of the Water Pollution




Control Act and to the statement of policy of the Board



dated February 2*4, 1953.




           You will note that this permit expires September



1, 1966.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon




compliance with the following conditions:




           1.  The satisfactory maintenance and operation




               of facilities provided for the controlled




               discharge of waste pickle liquor.




           2.  The submission to the Division of Engineering,



               Ohio Department of Health, of a  proposal for

-------
                                          353




    the treatment or disposal of waste  pickling




    acid and a schedule for the completion of




    such program, in conformance with commit-



    ments to the Water Pollution Control Board,




    June 8, 1965.




3.  The submission to the Division of Engineering,




    at regular quarterly intervals,  of reports




    to include information regarding flow volumes




    and pertinent analytical data on the



    industrial waste discharges.




4.  The prompt reporting to the Division of




    Engineering of the occurrence and cause of  any




    accidental or intermittent discharges of




    wastes which may have a deleterious effect  on




    the receiving stream.




5.  The submission to the Division of Engineering




    of information pertaining to any plant



    expansion or process changes which may affect




    the character of the industrial waste dis-




    charges, together with a proposal for pro-




    viding controls for such discharges so that



    there will be no deleterious effect on the




    receiving stream.




6.  The submission of a report and general plan



    for compliance with the Conclusions and

-------
                                                   35^





               Recommendations of the Lake Erie Conference




               (copy enclosed}, with special reference to




               Sections 12, 13, and 16.




           Should you have any questions with respect to




the above conditions, please notify us promptly.




                           Yours very truly,




                           E. W. Arnold, M. D., Chairman




                           Water Pollution Control Board




Enc.-Permit 1205.11




    -Recom. & Concl.




Certified mail




cc:  Dr. W. H. Jukkola




cc :  Health Commissioner




cc:  District Office








                     # * * *  #
Re:  Cleveland




     Industrial Wastes




     (Blast Furnace)               December 15, 1965




Jones and Laughlin Steel Corporation




33^1 Jennings Road




Cleveland, Ohio




Gentlemen:




           As a result of Board action December 14, 1965*

-------
                                                   355




enclosed is renewal permit for the discharge of industrial




wastes from your plant into "waters of the state" pursuant




to the provisions of the Water Pollution Control Act and




to the statement of policy of the Board dated February




24, 1953.



           You will note that this permit expires September




1, 1966.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon




compliance with the following Orders:




           1.  The satisfactory maintenance and operation




               of facilities provided for the clarification




               of blast furnace flue gas wash waters.




           2.  The submission to the Division of Engineering,




               Ohio Department of Health, at regular




               quarterly intervals, of reports to include



               information regarding flow volumes anc^ per-




               tinent analytical data on the industrial




               waste discharges.



           3.  The prompt reporting to the Division of




               Engineering of the occurrence and cause of




               any accidental or intermittent discharges of




               wastes which may have a deleterious effect




               on the receiving stream.




           4.  The submission to the Division of Engineering



               of information pertaining to any plant




               expansion or process changes which may affect

-------
                                                      356



               the character of the industrial and waste




               discharges,  together with a proposal for




               providing controls for such discharges so




               that there will be no deleterious effect on




               the receiving stream.




           5.  The submission of a report and plan for




               compliance with the Conclusions and Recom-




               mendations of the Lake Erie Conference (copy




               enclosed ), with special reference to




               Sections 12, 13, and 16.




           Should you have any questions with respect to the




above Orders, please notify us promptly.




                           Yours very truly,




                           E. W. Arnold, M.D,, Chairman



                           Water Pollution Control Board




Enc.-Permit 1075.12




    -Recom. & Concl. - Certified mail




cc:  Dr. W- H. Jukkola




cc:  Health Commissioner




cc:  District Office








                     *****




 Re:   Cleveland




      Industrial  Wastes



      (Mill Scale)                  January 14,  1966

-------
                                                   357






Jones & Laughlin Steel Corporation




33^1 Jennings Road



Cleveland, Ohio




Gentlemen:




           Enclosed is renewal permit for the discharge




of industrial wastes from your plant into "waters of the




state" pursuant to the provisions of the Water Pollution




Control Act and to the statement of policy of the Board




dated February 24, 1953.




           You will note that this permit expires November




lj 1966.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon




compliance with the following conditions :




           1.  The satisfactory maintenance and operation




               of facilities provided for the removal of




               mill scale and oil from the industrial



               waste discharges.




           2.  The submission to the Division of Engineering,




               Ohio Department of Health, at regular monthly



               intervals, of reports to include information




               regarding flow volumes and pertinent




               analytical data on the industrial waste




               discharges.




           3.  The prompt reporting to the Division of



               Engineering of the occurrence and cause of

-------
                                                      358




               accidental or intermittent  discharges  of




               wastes which may have  a  deleterious  effect




               on the receiving stream.




           4.   The submission to the  Division of Engineering



               of information pertaining to  any plant




               expansion or process changes  which may affect




               the character of the industrial waste  dis-




               charges,  together with a proposal for  pro-




               viding controls for  such discharges  so that




               there will be no deleterious  effect  on the




               receiving stream.




           5.   The submission of a  report  and plan  for



               compliance with the  Conclusions and  Recom-




               mendations of the Lake Erie Conference



               (copy enclosed), with  special reference to




               Section 16-b and -f.




           Should you have any questions with respect to




the above conditions, please notify us  promptly.




                           Yours very truly,




                           E. W. Arnold, M.D., Chairman



                           Water Pollution Control  Board




Enc.-Permit 1149.12




    -Recom. & Concl.




Certified mail




cc:  Dr. W. H. Jukkola

-------
                                                  359




cc:   Health Commissioner




cc:   District Office



                     *****




Re:   Akron                               March 28, 1966




     Ind. Wastes-Sew.




Ohio Edison Company




47 North Main Street




Akron,  Ohio 4^308




Gentlemen:




         Enclosed is renewal permit for the discharge of




industrial wastes and sanitary sewage from your Gorge Plant




into "waters of the state" pursuant to the provisions of




the  Water Pollution Control Act and to the statement of




policy of the Board dated February 24, 1953.




         You will note that this permit expires March 1,




1967.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon compliance




with the following conditions.




       1.  The satisfactory maintenance and operation of




           facilities which have been provided for treatment




           and disposal of the sanitary sewage of this plant.




       2.  The satisfactory maintenance and operation of




           facilities which have been provided at this plant




           for modification of industrial wastes; submitting




           to the Division of Engineering, Ohio Department of




           Health,  at regular quarterly intervals, reports  to

-------
                                                    360




               include information and  analytical data




               pertinent to the definition and  to the




               evaluation of the industrial wastes dis-




               charged to the Cuyahoga  River.




           3.   The initiation of a study to define the




               magnitude and extent of  the heat load




               discharged from this plant on the water




               temperature of the receiving stream.




           4.   The submission prior to  April 15, 1966, of




               a report setting forth a proposal for




               compliance with the Conclusions  and Recom-




               mendations of the Lake Erie Conference, as




               requested in a letter dated December  29,




           Should you have any questions with respect to the




above conditions, please notify us promptly.




                           Yours very truly,




                           E. W. Arnold, M.D.,  Chairman




                           Water Pollution Control Board




Enc.- Permit 1295.9




Certified mail




cc:   Health Commissioner




cc:   District Office








                     *****

-------
                                                   361






Re:  Cleveland




     Industrial Wastes




     (Acid Iron)                   August 13, 1965




Republic Steel Corporation




Bolt and Nut Division




Cleveland, Ohio




Gentlemen:




           Enclosed is renewal permit for the discharge




of industrial wastes from your plant into "waters of the




state" pursuant to the provisions of the Water Pollution




Control Act and to the statement of policy of the Board




dated February 24, 1953.




           You will note that this permit expires August 1,




1966.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon compliance




with the following conditions:




           1.  The satisfactory maintenance and operation




               of facilities and procedures which have



               been instituted for controlled discharge of




               acid pickle liquors.




           2.  The submission to the Division of Engineering,




               Ohio Department of Health, of a proposal for




               the treatment or disposal of the waste




               pickling acid from this plant and a schedule




               for the completion of the proposed program.

-------
                                                   361-A






           3.   The  submission  to  the  Division  of  Engineering




               of a proposal or detail  plans of facilities




               for  the  treatment  or disposal of zinc  and




               cyanide  wastewater from  this plant and  a




               schedule for the completion of  the proposed




               program.




           4.   The  submission  to  the  Division  of  Engineering,




               upon request, of reports  incorporating  flow




               measurements  and  analytical data  pertinent



               to the definition  of the  characteristics of




               the  wastes  and  to  the  evaluation of  the




               pollution loads as represented  by  critical




               constituents of the wastes.




           5.   The  prompt,  reporting of  the occurrence  and




               cause of accidental or intermittent  dis-



               charges  of  any  wastes  which by  reason  of




               their volume or characteristics, or  both,




               may  have a  deleterious effect on the stream




               from the standpoint of downstream  legitimate




               uses.




           Should you have any questions with  respect  to




the above conditions, please notify us  promptly.




                          Yours  very truly,




                          E.  w.  Arnold, M.D., Chairman



                          Water  Pollution Control  Board

-------
                                                     362




Enc.-Permit 1207.10




Certified mail




cc:  Mr. L. P. Birkel




cc :  Health Commissioner




cc:  District Office








                     *****









Re:  Cleveland




     Industrial Wastes




     (Acid Iron)                   August 13, 1965




Republic Steel Corporation




Cleveland District




Cleveland, Ohio




Gentlemen:




           Enclosed is renewal permit for the discharge of




industrial wastes from your plant into "waters of the




state" pursuant to the provisions of the Water Pollution




Control Act and to the statement of policy of the Board




dated February 24, 1953.




           You will note that this permit expires August




1, 1966.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon compliance




with the following conditions:




           1.  The satisfactory maintenance and operation




               of the facilities which have been provided for

-------
                                                     363






               the controlled discharge  of all the  waste




               pickle liquors of this  plant.




           2.   The completion of the conversion of  No.  1




               pickling line to the use  of hydrochloric acid.




           3.   The planning and initiation of construction




               of hydrochloric acid reclamation facilities.




           4.   The continued monitoring  of the Cuyahoga




               River to determine the  effect  of industrial




               waste discharges on the stream water quality;




               submitting to the Division of  Engineering,




               Ohio Department of Health, upon request,




               reports on information  obtained by monitoring



               and defining the characteristics of  the




               wastes as discharged.




           5.   The prompt reporting of the occurrence and




               cause of accidental or  intermittent  discharges



               of any wastes which by  reason  of their volume




               or characteristics, or  both, may have a



               deleterious effect on the stream from the




               standpoint of downstream  legitimate  uses.




           The report presented to the Water  Pollution




Control Board on June 8, 1965, is accepted as your  schedule




for the elimination of acid pickling wastewater discharges.




           Should you have any questions with respect to




the above conditions, please notify  us promptly.

-------
                                                   364
                           Yours very truly,
                           E. W. Arnold, M.D., Chairman
                           Water Pollution Control Board
Enc.-Permit 1208.10
Certified mail
cc:  Mr. L. F. Birkel
cc:  Health Commissioner
cc:  District Office

                      * * * # #


Re:  Cleveland
     Industrial Wastes
     (Blast Furnace)                       May 19, 1966
Republic Steel Corporation
Cleveland District
3100 East 45th Street
Cleveland, Ohi~
Gentlemen:
           _.-,-closed is renewal permit for the discharge
of industrial wastes from your plant into "waters of the
state" pursuant to the provisions of the Water pollution
Control Act and to the statement of policy of the Board
dated February 24, 1953.
           You will note that this permit expires April 1,

-------
                                                    365






1967.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon compliance




with the following conditions:




           1.  The satisfactory maintenance and  operation




               of facilities provided  for the  clarification




               of blast furnace flue gas  wash  waters.




           2.  The submission to and approval  by the Ohio




               Department of Health of detail  plans  for




               the relocation of the Westside  slurry pumps,




               increasing the filtering capacity and im-



               proving the efficiency of  the existing




               thickeners.




           3.  The submission to the Division  of Engineering,




               Ohio Department of Health, at regular quarterly




               intervals, of reports to include  information




               regarding flow volumes  and pertinent  analytical



               data on the industrial  waste discharges.




           4.  The prompt reporting to the Division  of



               Engineering of the occurrence and cause of




               any accidental or intermittent  discharges of




               wastes which may have a deleterious  effect on




               the receiving stream.




           5.  The submission to the Division  of Engineering




               of information pertaining  to any  plant  ex-



               pansion or process changes which  may affect

-------
                                                   366
               the character of the industrial waste dis-

               charges, together with a proposal for pro-

               viding controls for such discharges so that

               there will be no deleterious effect on the

               receiving stream.

           Should you have any questions with respect to

the above conditions, please notify us promptly.

                           Yours very truly,

                           E. W. Arnold, M.D., Chairman

                           Water Pollution Control Board

Enc.-Permit 1078.13

Certified mail

cc:  Mr. L. F. Birkel

cc:  Health Commissioner

cc:  District Office


                     * # # * #


Re:  Cleveland

     Industrial Wastes

     (Phenol)                      November 16,  1965

Republic Steel Corporation

3100 East 45th Street

Cleveland, Ohio 44127

Gentlemen:

-------
                                                   367




           Enclosed is renewal permit for the discharge




of Industrial wastes from your By-Product Coke Plants  Nos.




1 and 2 into the "waters of the state" pursuant  to  the




provisions of the Water Pollution Control Act and  to  the




statement of policy of the Board dated February  24,,  1953.




           You will note that this permit expires  September




1, 1966.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon com-




pliance with the following conditions:




           1.  The satisfactory maintenance and  operation




               of the dephenolizing facilities provided.




           2.  The submission to the Division of Engineering,




               Ohio Department of Health, at regular  quarterly




               intervals, • of reports to include  information




               regarding flow volumes and pertinent analytical




               data on the industrial waste discharges.




           3.  The prompt reporting to the Division of



               Engineering of the occurrence and cause of  any




               accidental or intermittent discharges  of




               wastes which may have a deleterious effect




               on the receiving stream.




           4.  The submission to the Division of Engineering



               of information pertaining to any plant




               expansion or process changes which  may



               affect the character of the industrial waste

-------
                                                      368
               discharges,  together with a proposal for

               providing controls for such discharges so

               that there will be no deleterious effect on

               the receiving stream.

           5.  The submission of a report and general plan

               for compliance with the Conclusions and

               Recommendations of the Lake Erie Conference

               (copy enclosed), with special reference to

               Sections 12, 13, and 16.

           Should you have any questions with respect to

the above conditions, please notify us promptly.

                           Yours very truly,

                           E. W. Arnold, M.D., Chairman

                           Water Pollution Control Board

Enc.-Permit 964.12

    -Recom. & Concl.

Certified mail

cc:  Mr. L. F. Birkel

cc :  Health Commissioner

cc:  District Office



                     **•*•*#



Re:  Cleveland

     Industrial Wastes

     (Mill Scale)                   March 16, 1966

-------
                                                     369
Republic Steel Corporation


Bolt and Nut Division


Cleveland, Ohio


Gentlemen:


         Enclosed is renewal permit for the discharge


of industrial wastes from your plant into "waters  of the


state" pursuant to the provisions of the Water Pollution


Control Act and to the statement of policy of the  Board


dated February 24, 1953.


         You will note that this permit expires April 1,


1967.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon compliance


with the following conditions :


         1.  The satisfactory maintenance and operation


             of facilities provided for the removal of


             mill scale and oil from the industrial waste


             discharges.


         2.  The submission to the Division of Engineering,


             Ohio Department of Health, at regular quarterly


             intervals, of reports to include information


             regarding flow volumes and pertinent  analytical


             data on the industrial waste discharges.


         3.  The prompt reporting to the Division of


             Engineering of the occurrence and cause of


             any accidental or intermittent discharges of


             wastes which may have a deleterious effect on

-------
                                                      370


               the receiving stream.


           4.  The submission to the  Division of Engineering


               of information pertaining to any plant ex-


               pansion or process changes which may affect


               the character of the industrial waste dis-


               charges, together with a proposal for pro-


               viding controls for such discharges so that


               there will be no deleterious effect on the


               receiving stream.


           5.  The submission of a report and plan for


               compliance with the Conclusions and Recom-


               mendations of the Lake Erie Conference (copy


               enclosed), with special reference to


               Section 16.


           Should you have any questions with respect to the


above conditions, please notify us promptly.


                           Yours very truly,


                           E. W. Arnold, M.D., Chairman


                           Water Pollution Control Board


Enc.-Permit 1153.12


    -Recom. & Concl.


Certified mail


cc:   Mr. L. P. Birkel


cc:   Health Commissioner


6c:   District Office
                        *****

-------
                                                     371




Re:  Cleveland




     Industrial Wastes




     (Mill Scale)                  March 16, 1966




Republic Steel Corporation




Cleveland District




Cleveland, Ohio





Gentlemen:




           Enclosed is renewal permit for the discharge




of industrial wastes from your plant into "waters of the




state" pursuant to the provisions of the Water Pollution




Control Act and to the statement of policy of the Board




dated February 24, 1953.




           You will note  that this permit expires April




1, 1967.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon




compliance with the following conditions :




           1.  The satisfactory maintenance and opera-



               tion of facilities provided for the removal



               of mill scale and oil from the industrial




               waste discharges.




           2.  The submission to and approval by the Ohio



               Department of Health of detail plans of the




               proposed scale removal equipment for the




               44-inch mill scale pit.




           3.  The submission to and approval by the Ohio




               Department of Health of detail plans  of  the

-------
                                         372
    proposed oil skimming equipment for the
    12-inch mill scale pit.
4.  The installation of the facilities for re-
    use of soluble oil-bearing waters from the
    cold rolling operation in accordance with
    plans submitted for approval to the Ohio
    Department of Health.
5.  The submission to the Division of Engineering,
    Ohio Department of Health, at regular quar-
    terly intervals, of reports to include in-
    formation regarding flow volumes and per-
    tinent analytical data on the industrial waste
    discharges.
6.  The prompt reporting to the Division of
    Engineering of the occurrence and cause of
    any accidental or intermittent discharges of
    wastes which may have a deleterious effect on
    the receiving stream.
7.  The submission to the Division of Engineering
    of information pertaining to any plant ex-
    pansion or process changes which may affect
    the character of the industrial waste dis-
    charges, together with a proposal for pro-
    viding controls for such discharges so that
    there will be no deleterious effect on the

-------
                                                     373
               receiving stream.
           8.  The submission of a report and plan for




               compliance with the Conclusions and Recom-




               mendations of the Lake Erie Conference




               (copy enclosed), with special reference to




               Section 16.




           Should you have any questions with respect to




the above conditions, please notify us promptly.




                           Yours very truly,




                           E. W. Arnold, M.D., Chairman



                           Water Pollution Control Board




Enc.-Permit 1154.12




    -Recom. & Concl.




Certified mail




cc:  Mr. L. P. Birkel



cc:  Health Commissioner




cc:  District Office








                     *****
Re:  Cleveland




     Ind. Wastes-Sew.




     (Blast Furnace)




United States Steel Corporation




Tubular Operations
November 10, 1965

-------
Central Furnaces




2650 Broadway Avenue




Cleveland, Ohio 44113




Attention Mr. Ralph Dice, Asst. Supt.




Gentlemen:




           As a result of Board action November 9> 1965>




enclosed is renewal permit for the discharge of industrial




wastes and sanitary sewage from your Central Furnaces




into "waters of the state" pursuant to the provisions of




the Water Pollution Control Act and to the statement of




policy of the Board dated February 24, 1953.




           You will note that this permit expires July 1,




1966.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon compliance




with the following Orders:




           1.  The construction of the sewers and




               appurtenances necessary for the collection




               of the sanitary sewage of this  plant and




               the discharge of the sewage into the




               Cleveland municipal system.




           2.  The satisfactory maintenance and operation



               of facilities provided for the clarifica-




               tion of blast furnace flue gas wash waters.




           3.  The submission to the Division of Engineering,




               Ohio Department of Health, at regular



               quarterly intervals, of reports to include

-------
                                                    375





               information regarding flow volumes  and




               pertinent analytical data on the industrial



               waste discharges,




           L\.   The prompt reporting to  the Division of




               Engineering of the occurrence and cause of




               any accidental or  intermittent discharges




               of wastes which may have a deleterious effect




               on the receiving stream.




           5.   The submission to  the Division of Engineering




               of information pertaining to any plant ex-




               pansion or process changes which may affect




               the character of the Industrial waste dis-




               charges,  together  with a proposal for pro-




               viding controls for such discharges  so that




               there will be no deleterious effect  on the



               receiving stream.



           6.   The submission of  a report and general plan




               for compliance with the  Conclusions  and




               Recommendations of the Lake Erie Conference




               (copy enclosed), with special reference to



               Sections  12,  13, and 16,




           Should you have any questions with respect to




the above Orders, please notify us promptly.



                           Yours  very truly,

-------
                                                     376
                       E. W. Arnold, M.D., Chairman
                       Water Pollution Control Board
  Enc.-Permit 1083.12
      -Recom. & Concl.
  Certified mail
  cc:   Mr. Herbert Dunsmore
  cc:   Mr. Frank C. Manak
2 cc:   City of Cleveland
  cc:   Health Commissioner
  cc:   District Office

                         *****


  Re:   Cleveland
       Sewerage                      January 14, 1966
  United States Steel Corporation
  Tubular Operations
  Central Furnaces
  2650 Broadway
  Cleveland,  Ohio 44113
  Attention Mr. Ralph Dice,  Asst. Supt.
  Gentlemen:
             Enclosed is renewal permit  for the discharge of
  sanitary sewage from your Central Furnaces into "waters of
  the  state"  pursuant to the provisions  of the Water Pollution

-------
                                                       377
   Control Act of Ohio.
              You will note that this permit expires November
   1, 1966.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon
   compliance with the following condition:
              The construction of the sewers and appurtenances
              necessary for the collection of the sanitary
              sewage of this plant and the discharge of the
              sewage into the Cleveland municipal system.
              Should you have any questions with respect to the
   above condition, please notify us promptly.
                              Yours very truly,
                              E. W. Arnold, M. D.,  Chairman
                              Water Pollution Control Board
   Enc.-Permit 687.13
   Certified mail
   cc:   Mr. Herbert Dunsmore
   cc:   Mr. F. C  Manak
2  cc:   City of Cleveland
   cc:   Health Commissioner
   cc:   District Office

                        * * # * #


   Re:   Cuyahoga Heights
        Industrial Wastes
        (Acid Iron)                     January 14, 1966

-------
                                                  378




United States Steel Corporation




Cuyahoga Works




4300 East 49th Street




Cuyahoga Heights, Ohio




P.O. - Cleveland, Ohio




Gentlemen:




           Enclosed is renewal permit for the discharge




of industrial wastes from your establishment into "waters




of the state"  pursuant to the provisions of the Water




Pollution Control Act and to the statement of policy of the




Board dated February 24, 1953.




           You will note that this permit expires October




1, 1966.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon




compliance with the following conditions:




           1.  The completion of the study which has been




               initiated for the determination of satis-




               factory treatment or disposal of the strong



               pickle liquors of this plant.



           2.  The submission to the Division of Engineering,




               Ohio Department of Health, of a proposal for




               the treatment or disposal of waste pickling



               acid and a schedule for the completion of




               such program, in conformance with commitments




               to the Water Pollution Control Board, June 8,




               1965.

-------
                                       379






3.  The satisfactory maintenance and  operation



    of facilities provided for the controlled




    discharge of waste pickle liquor.




4.  The submission to the Division of Engineering,




    at regular quarterly intervals, of reports




    to include information regarding  flow  volumes




    and pertinent analytical data on  the




    industrial waste discharges.




5.  The prompt reporting to the Division of




    Engineering of the occurrence and  cause of



    any accidental or intermittent discharges




    of wastes which may have a deleterious effect




    on the receiving stream.




6.  The submission to the Division of Engineering



    of information pertaining to any  plant ex-




    pansion or process changes which  may affect




    the character of the industrial waste  dis-




    charges, together with a proposal for  pro-




    viding controls for such discharges so that




    there will be no deleterious effect on the



    receiving stream.




7.  The submission of a report and plan for



    compliance with the Conclusions and Recom-




    mendations of the Lake Erie Conference




    (copy enclosed), with special reference

-------
                                                      380




                 to Section l6a.




             Should you have any questions with respect to




  the above conditions, please notify us promptly.




                             Yours very truly,



                             E. W. Arnold,, M.D., Chairman




                             Water Pollution Control Board




  Enc.-Permit 1201.11




      -Recom. & Concl.




  Certified mail




  cc:  Mr. Herbert Dunsmore




  cc:  Mr. Prank C. Manak




2 cc:  City of Cleveland




  cc:  Health Commissioner




  cc:  District Office








                      #•*#*#









  Re:  Cuyahoga Heights




       Industrial Wastes




       (Mill Scale)                  January 14, 1966




  United States Steel Corporation




  Cuyahoga Works




  4300 East 49th Street




  Cuyahoga Heights, Ohio




  P.O. - Cleveland, Ohio

-------
                                                  381






Gentlemen:




           Enclosed Is renewal permit for the discharge




of industrial wastes from your plant into "waters  of the




state" pursuant to the provisions of the  Water Pollution




Control Act and to the statement of policy of the  Board




dated February 24, 1953.




           You will note  that this permit expires  October




1, 1966.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon




compliance with the following conditions :




           1.  The satisfactory maintenance and operation



               of facilities provided for the removal of




               mill scale and oil from the industrial waste




               discharges.




           2.  The submission to the Division of Engineering,




               Ohio Department of Health, at regular quar-



               terly intervals, of reports to Include in-




               formation  regarding flow volumes and per-




               tinent analytical data on  the industrial




               waste discharges.




           3.  The prompt reporting to the Division of




               Engineering of the occurrence and cause of



               any accidental or intermittent discharges




               of wastes  which may have a deleterious effect




               on the receiving stream.

-------
                                                      382





             4.  The submission to the Division of Engineering



                 of information pertaining to any plant ex-




                 pansion or process changes which may affect



                 the character of the industrial waste dis-




                 charges, together with a proposal for pro-



                 viding controls for such discharges so that




                 there will be no deleterious effect on the




                 receiving stream.



             5.  The submission of a report and plan for com-



                 pliance with the Conclusions and Recommenda-




                 tions of the Lake Erie Conference (copy



                 enclosed), with special reference to Section



                 16-b and -f.




             Should you have any questions with respect to the



  above conditions, please notify us promptly.



                             Yours very truly,




                             E. w. Arnold, M.D., Chairman



                             Water Pollution Control Board



  Enc.-Permit 1161.12




      -Recom. & Concl.



  Certified mall



  cc:   Mr. Herbert Dunsmore



  cc:   Mr. Frank C. Manak



2 cc :   City of Cleveland




 cc:   Health Commissioner




 cc:   District  Office
                            * * *

-------
| — j







CO
rX
M
(rt
£-

W









CD
3
-a
cu
43
O
CO




CO
•P
H fl
d 01
a B
O CD
£ -^
03 c^

«" 0
E w
CD CO



o
O
"
CQ
CO
0
•fi1
CD
43
0
O
•rl
rj
r-j
o
$
cu
JH
-1-3
CO

O
•p
• •
43 >>
O T3
CO 2
•rl -P
^3 co

rl f-l
O CD
fl T3
jd g





















>
43 CQ
o «
CO !s
•rl CD
13 CQ
•M




o
*H 'O
A -rj
rl O
cu co
£> "
•3d
M O

0
fl

Qj •
Ho
o co
M 8
CD pq

fl
O > O
(§ ^ ft


0
bO f-
Svo
>>cr\
PA 43 H
• o
rl H >>
CU ftiH
•P B rl
i9 8 <$
« *
-P CO
O r— 1 *^" x
W  1 CD
bO bO
fl « M
OJ CD -H
CO rl -0
19

•H
H
o3 0
» CO
ft
CQ 13
3 CD
CO >
•vH
« O
0 w
CD W
ss



>>
§
H
s
f-J
^
•a
fl
n
co
j^


















t-
vo
H

VO
vo
VO •
1 ft
H 0

o a
H H
CO CQ
^d
* 1
t ( o
O P^ fl
CH CQ o
•rl -rl
CO T3 -p
fl O
H • rl
ft-P -P
o aS co
•P cu a
Si rl O
Q -P O

H



•
o
CQ
•rl


•a
CD
Controlli



•
CO
•rl

gj
•d
+i
s


j>j
rt
ft
B
o
o
-p
d
o
3
5§

(D
£i
t-
vo fl


fl CO
•rl H

O O
£> d

b*0 •
OP*
^i d vo
ft CU VO

O P LT\

M tf •
s ^ o*





VO
vo

H
1
21


rl OJ
O to ti
.
CD
•d
•p
CO
a
pi-T

•
<







































,§
'O fl -rl
CD d co
P &-H^t_
S. *-* '.cj
CD
5 CD d «3
M 42 O
O 43 -H -P
OH r~J ^ fl
M ffi d) Co
B 0 P4
IA
VD
1
cr\
H

C\J
H

j_i
•P

T3
f.
PQ

(U
c^




vo
VO
ir\
H
i
%
43
•p
•3 a^
co o S
O fl O
P-i d o
O -H CU
rl H P3
ft ft
•p d •
•d 0 H
g o
O ^.| rj
^ c2 °

H



M
fl
3
-P
a>
u
^.
bO
Screenin,
lagoons
M
oij
•rl
H
08 0
• CQ
ft

•J Q;
CO >
->H
4 °
S w
cu co
43 -H
0 f-H
4

O d
O 0
M
CD C
43 fl
sa
07
-P
4-* r*
0) 0
^j (3
•H CD
5 0































4

-------
Re:  Lake County




     Painesville Township




     Ind.Wastes-Sew.                    December 15, 1965




United States Rubber Company




Chemical Division




Plant Area No. 1




P. 0. Box 460




 Painesville, Ohio  44077




Attention Mr. J. M. Poynter, Factory Manager




Gentlemen:




            As a result of Board action December 14, 1965>




enclosed is renewal permit for the discharge of industrial




wastes and sanitary sewage from your establishment into the




"waters of the state" pursuant to the provisions of the Water




Pollution Control Act and to the statement of policy of the




Board dated February 24, 1953.




            You will note that this permit expires November




1, 1966.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon compliance




with the following Orders:




            1.  The satisfactory maintenance and operation of




                facilities which have been provided for the




                treatment and disposal of the industrial wastes




                and sanitary wastes, respectively, of this




                plant.

-------
                                                     385
            2.   The submission to the  Division  of  Engineering,
                Ohio Department of Health,  at regular monthly
                intervals,  of reports  to  include information
                regarding flow volumes and  pertinent  analytical
                data on the industrial waste discharges.
            3.   The prompt  reporting to the Division  of
                Engineering of the occurrence and  cause  of any
                accidental  or intermittent  discharges of wastes
                which may have a deleterious effect on the
                receiving stream.
            4.   The submission of a proposal for compliance
                with the Conclusions and  Recommendations of
                the Lake Erie Conference  (copy  enclosed), with
                special reference to Section  16.
            Should you have any questions with  respect to the
above Orders, please notify us promptly.
                      Yours very truly,
                      E. W. Arnold, M. D.,  Chairman
                      Water Pollution  Control Board
Enc.-Permit 736.16
    -Recom. & Concl.
Certified mail
cc:  Health Commissioner
cc:  District Office

-------









03
W
H
EH
H

H
3o
ptH H
e^ <§
^
tl t2
^i, r^
E~t ^
<.j <^ ^
EH § W
W W Pi
EH O M
 >

£H H-5 rH
• O 'H
ft 0) O
faO ^H
W 0) O

H



W
1

rf
H ft
•H a>
O CO



H
»j_|
O
•3
o
,tj
•rl
o3

O
•H
CU
o o
H O
4j ^-j
H ci)
ro o
PQ ft
CU -rl
^ «

























 pH d O -P
•P ' fl g -H ft w
m q o O aJ -H ci
CO -H U O -P O I*

w
r^H
*(H
o o

-------







8
E-i
O
< o
r i 1
r-^l •*
EH O
Cr3
H Sj
<•% R £3
§ < S
prj pu «~C
f!q K P^
EH o:
HH@
H ^ S
g| w
d|!
Hi S
p^ M  'd  *d o
H w H w H bO
O oj O >> O aj
W &: EH W W H




03
o o ° E?
q -p q -P o
ro CQ co ct5 q
hO 0} bO fj d
S2 £g0
* •
P< O
0 fl
°§
H -r! W
03 W 4> C1J
0 -H fl -H
8 -H H > o-P1
(X> ^| *f-^ f— \ tf-4 ^Q [>j £4 |-^ «\ f^_f ^;;
•fJ ^ r~( 'O Ti O P4 rf bO W O
ctj QJ O ** %3 cj to W £j d J^i
>bpOM>sH^ O -HOcuciJ'
•rH *o O fl^ oj 03 'CJ QJ ^O O W W1
•ps.-pf-i -d qw Hbo^q
O ^^ ^1 Co PJ ^. | <*1 cj •(-! O Cd CO CtJ1
«aj W O > O O 3 K^'O W H M tl

bO
i -H fc
O »in CO
O O bO
o fi o co o 2
•rH fl| bO -H PL, -H CQ
q q q q
3 ^ -H 3 -P 3 -p
ttO H w bb oj bo o>
5-rj W h 0) J-) tt>
S  co
O 0 • bO
pr, SOP
0 W
(U 08
o bo a>
•H j-i q >>
M Q) -rj 0)
•P M r^H »M
o5 rj o c3
co O oj d
OQ QQ Oj [V^
3





















< <



«\
bO
q o
t>0 W .3 rH
58 Si
•do o> w oj
H W) h 0)
O of O O S
W H W +> 9





•H O S* ^H O !?
q +3 a> q -p a)
O E-l O O E-i O

O
fl •
O
M H
e3 • •»
bp W
rj rd
CO 0
>i • ^
o ^^
^Sj FO
O (3
r^ 3
« «

-------






























03
a
EH

H
O
< 0

IT* •
EH O "^
£f^ -i-^
M § §
S o
< <£
fxj M 1
H <2 £5
M
fr^ H CO
£H c5 "3«
03 < PQ

^r- p f^j
<£ r^
I_J p^ p>
^ O *H
VH pj
OF INDUSTR
LAKE ERIE
MAUMEE
03
g
£






















W
i^j
S

o
/V*












o
•d
o

y



w
-p
d o
S a
o o
•H to
-P -rl
•H d
'd CJ1
T3 O


W
rj
•s
-p
03








Treatment
Provided


o
-p
w
^Cd
O
o









?i
JO
•H
•P
































,












< < <;



^
w w C!
F-i 1 S- W O
O O R5 to G S
-p pi to o O -P
H 'd pi PI o n5
•rl O W O bO O
"tH M OJ to
Pn-d O H -P Cl
bO fl -P O
•3 ^H S P? o3 §)
HO O -9 O co
o w fT -P 'i .
H to O to -P  t)
to O -rl O O £! O
EH *IH -P ^H 03 O Co


f? >>
r*! O M ,i4
H g  -P 0
•H £< P4
0* ° H &
O >> PM O
to
Pi 'o O o3 *
HS o o
P d we
O3 O (S W H
rf H  «\ c/3 p^
q o co s
o S & o
o o o u o












































^


p-f
EH

,

4-^ rH
W Til
o d
W O
F
bO 0




o
rH N
03 -r)
O H
H -P
as
*\
•
>

Q
« 0
O
§°!3
O
fi o
O rf
a O
o
W '
*H p4*
*>
cd •
ft&












































< <


t — 1
•* Co
J^ CO 05
O M O
•HO p.

cj rH »H
^i *H 'd
03 <+H
o T) d
0 S S
o w
w -d
o o o
O u w


t?
o o
O Cj
bO co
d o
O -rl O
•H to -HO
go a -P
co ro cd co
II II
•
O
O

to
O •
N O
•H 0
•rl bO
-P f-
o c
fa £
d
o o
o
d H
as a)
•rl bO
«H O
O 'rl
ft ft



-P

O to

-P -P
to ft
Pt-rl
to 0
O ^•^ TJ
-P 

























<;









•H
Lagoon
neutralizat




a
o
H
H I
o -d
0 -rl
bO
«
•H
r-j d
vj Cu
0 >
•H O
PH fl .
0 0

d>

0 "0)

0 0* -H
ir\
VO
i
CO
CM
|
O
H
£•1
-P
H)

f^j
J-(
«

O
o
03
CO
H
•rl
fn O
0 cd
VO -p -P^
i w cd H
H fl O
" 0 M >»
1>-U -P .0
Vi
o
!H w
O W O
SH H +>
•H w
W O cd
a^ cd >

-------























W
EH
S
H
O
< 0
PH H
W •
g°3
P§
EH O
§3 {% I
ri<4g
W W CO
EH O <;
CO ^C f-H
< g

^ ^ p
« w w
fH M W
CO « M
E> W g
gS
p
=
-p

•4~
S

VO
Co
i
in
H
i
CJ
to
43
5

T3
«
HH
co
co
CO



















< < <«;

•co
c\>
CO
o
•» ft
G W
0 -H
08 -r) -d
• +>
4> 05 >>
05 to «3
CO 03 fn
h ft ft
EH H) C W &
• ca o O
g o -d o
tt) H bO c! bO
6-H ca d ro
OHM M
c!
o
S -rl
rl 4>
0) O
C3 1^
•d CQ 9 rd
CO CD 03 O
•rl 43 O to
CH W O O (X|
•rl 05 -rl O -rj
rj* SIS §^
^ H bD g bO cd
S «rl M O B H
HO O &H O M
•
O
0 O
a
H 4>
p'
4> •» OS
• H bO A
0 m 0 «
O *H
CO (3 43
to C! 9 C!
O -H 3 O
4> bO O 3
S W rl rl
co PH
•d o3 4s
t. a oj co
o-g o .c
PM H5 (^ H
LT\
VO
1
CO
CJ
O
H
to
-p
s

-d
«
HH
co
0)
CO



















 4>
-d o -rl o3
co o ^
fH 4> 03
CO ft
CD E3 4> CO
an w
<5 ci 43
h 'h H
fl c 3 TJ
0 -rl ft 0
«s
bO
•9
•S5 r?
•H to CO
CJ 03 C
•H PH -H
fi, CH
to 0)
H CO «
cd ft
•P S H
Op -H
S W 0

53
c8 O
-rl
CO 4>
rl «J
•H to >>
tH O J-l
ft CD
H H a
S 0 -rl
CD • O <*H
>> O 0)
•tf 0 H «
5M O O
co >d
ja 
4^ H b»
• ft r4
"tH • ft
o 43 a
f-i 0 •H
• P
0 I to
•H i O
H tr\  o
CO
15
is
•H rl W
+> H
 X •
CO 0) ft
a CO
0 •rj
O 4> -O


H




•
M
H
o5
JH
P bO
M
'd +>
•rl 43
O 0)
<< ca


bO
.g
«43
O a3
•H H
§*
bOH
JH cd
0 +>
r?^
•
o
5

•\
to
0) •
•rl >
to -r<
43 P
W
p1 co
1 5
5^
CO
to M
CO o
>> o
Is


































<;





g
•rl
43
Clarifica


CO
o
a
£5
S
H +>
0) W
0) cJ
45 H
CQ «
•
&
O
O

H
CO
0)
+>
CO

0)
1
to
co
4>
a

to
0)
•p
03
bO <1> w
PI 5-< W
•rl UD-p
ll> W
ja to 03
o £
M CM
!M ^H
co 'd O
H co
ft CO CO
• rl W
. L _(
43 > P
il) 0) CO
P rl rl

VD
VD
1
H

O\
03
IS
11
>  .
3 §
fi-8




o
H1
o
:C3
0)
s

1) ro
P^
£
fa -P
CD 3
H H
H AH
•rl 1
!> •
C O
1 H
»«ii «*
1 **
V) W
d <3
.9 to
0 H
i-j O

cj
JH O
O -H -P
<*H 43 rl
0 Cd
•d 3 -P
O fn W
a> 43
M w O
rt -P
w o
a o Ti
CQ •**(!)
H H -P
fi **» f i
ft r* o
• to CJ
•P ft P<
CO ft X
p cd co

M3
Co
i
H

ON
08
•8
S
43 W
4>
cJ H
<1) -rl
H <*-<
S5
0)
13
(S M




•» O
0 -rj
•rl H
P} O
3 C!
bO (U
5S

M
0)
^
•H
PM
co
d
•H '
S §
3 fl
i t
M ca
S 52
^i a)
0 H
rj O
389

-------























1
EH
H
|J5
H
O
 |~.j
HH Di
P3 W
^a
H
!§!
EH
CO


























«
f.
a
e
a





CD
r~
4

C.
CO


to

d cu
si E
o 5J
•rl rl
•P -H
S C
•d cu
<«

2
•p

-p
CO






-p
Treatmen
Provided


CD
•P
CO
a
C(--|
o

I










^
-p
•H
-P



































^*



O W
O rH
•rl -rl
CO O
r-j OS
S -p
Lagoons ,
treatmen



CO
H
£ S
d "CD
cu co H
H -d ^>
•P -H 3
-P H H
CD O O
CO CO CO
CO
CO
a
H
0
*d *d
£i fl •
o o w
**s
w JH fX|
rt o
CD CH CD
& w q
O co S
1 O ft
>>« 2^
CD §
£> * H
^3 • CD
3,8£


































^J








&
Land spr
disposal
W)
•9
CO
CO
o
g
o
•rl O
Si -P
ll

1^1
^Q
O
•H
^
08
3
•rl
CU
a

j§>
Q
a
>
•rl
« bp
0 r. -5
•P 0 -P
• CH co
0 vH
•H CO X
H Si CD
ft d
ft H O to
d ft-P CD
•H
$ p, w -p
CU O -P >H
C H ^ H
• 0) h -rl
• ft O CJ d) 9 05 «« ^ vB H i ON 4> rf X^s a) d rl S O to cd •P cy -P •rl O M +> H B o3 ctJ H « Ctf -rl S O «8 ^* ^ Land spr disposal r? CU o o •rl O fj -P 3 d hO •S O • O 3fl 3 A r ^> c5 CJ w 1 5 o K CJ O ?5 r^H ^ co »H O ll II * o o CU bD So' .5 "^^ i ^H d o •» o o to cu -P d O 0 f-i •H O fd ^5 P| p4 VO vo C\J -:t rl -P •d W o CU CO i H l C- 0) 08 rl 08 CO -P . CU rl -P •H O 05 'd ft o ? o ^ •P rl -P W . • -P W H -d w ft H CO S -9 y O ^ CD o to cs H rj •rl CO d ^> Aeration bO CO CO o o rl ^"^ Pl . O •d w o* o bO •S H -p ^g « d Y •rl p. & CO H •rl O 05 • ft •3 ay Land spr disposal bO CO CO cu o o O tj •rl A< hO fl •rl d Land spray disposal CO CO CD o o O k •rl &( 3 |o •3 o «H O O -rl W 390 'S "* Q J«4 3 CD &s O -H -P CH d S§ &^ CO CO £ w B 0 -H 0) 0 & ^8 CM O • ,0 P P 0
-------
































CO
pj
r~i
^
a
H
fei H
EH b -d
g <
s s '
EH *-N j^i
P^
www

ls«
^ < w
PS W
rrt
i
O3



























CO
"f.
CC
e
cu
PC










0)
1
-d
0)
^
o
CO






w
^>

S s
o o>
•H r4
+> 'H
si
tJ CU
w
+>

43
CO




Treatment
Provided

cu
+3
W
ro


o
o

1








r*a
4^
•H

rj
(3










































^J




N
3
Acid neutr
settling
bO
.9
^r^
W
•H
o a
•H -H
9*
bOH
rt «
0 -P

O
,5
CO
cu
•H
4»
CO
* p1
^ rd
« &

0 O
O O
CO CO
& jj
fifi
















c-
vo
i
l/N
H
VO i
vo vO
tr\ P^
rH O
t
C\J fl
H H

*
§ *
co co
ctj
£H E£
O • co
fc J fQ .O
C S
W «rl CO
H • •
ft 4^ 4^
• c5 03
4> CU CU
cu ri r<
O-P 4>


H



CO
H •
O ,C
4> ca
In-plant c
monitored
to
•5
J^
CO
•H
O £
i-i -ri
£?3
0 -P


.
o
o
o
o
H
cu
s
05
JS

^
t
CO
VO
VO
1
CO
H
1
fO
ri

M

•c)
f-i
pq
cu
cu
CO






^
VQ
t
H
1
H
0)
0
w 3 •
H -d 4>
O Q) -H

4-5 CO
§O d
43 O
0 0
• w
4> 0) r-J
rt "rl CD
H 3 -H
|S 08 0


< < H






§" 0?
M H ri H
ft oj ft ca
ca w co to r3
0 00
•d ft -d ft o
C co C co bO

E? b
M M
O 
CH (3
2 9
w 03
O O W
O O O
bD S tiO S UO
«» «« 6

O 0 •
,3^3
"eel
C ^^"^ £3 CJ
•n £> 'd-^ 4d
H *H 9 M o3
O O 


'd
j^i
fp
cu

CO






vo
VQ
J
H
1
CO
CU CO

w 2 a
H -d a>
o o g
^1 rl  CU i-j CU
S r) ™ •**
TO "O O CO
H 2 -rl TO
1 W -rl
& 08 0 0


H





§
Chemical,
lagoon &
incinerati
w
"cd*
cj
.ft
a
cu
ca ^!
o o
•H
CJ04J
5CU
to

O
o
1
rH
g
4>
A4

O

rQ
O
CO
VO
VO VC)
vo i

t—H
• I
H t«">
0 ^

O >J3

CO tJ

L w
ft cu
^ cu
H CO






t-
vO
1
H
1
H
CO
0)
P *n
W O
CO

rf O
*rf
> O
•P *d
O OJ H

rl r4 CU
O 0 ,C!
0 V-t ft


H o;




» d
8S §
+> -H M
o5 -f^ Co
J-i cS H
Oj 43
CU rH M p!
M <»H H -H
•rf
'w
ca
>> cu
M O
cu o

*rl PJ

-------


















CO
EH

\—l
H
O
< O
FN H
EH O T^
p** j ^
§ S o
H O

11 g
H W CQ
§3 
+>
w
OS
s
'
















HH
o
0)
s









J>;
4-*
•H
1











rj
•d
rl
0>
^

•P H
to d
•rl CO
rl « 0
O 0) ft
Vl U
O -rl W
CO -p Tj (1)
C -rl
« W 08 -p
H -P • v-1
ft r» -P H
• H Cfl «rl
•P ft <1) O
0} rf tj M
«-H -P 
J^ M « W
O JH O -p 0
w O w co O
•rl -H -H CO
'd -P 'd •
w as w -p ca
•P CO
O CO O !H
TD TS rl <1>
0) 
03 0) '!> ft Q co
O 13 rl 4) W v-j H
•rj *H -P uO rH
H £J "03 *d -P w
S s o £ c 5 6
S ^  -H
o o w CQ i^ ca -P

M
R
•o
4^ r~f
O 03 r-|
•H H H

Mo) c3  O iH
3c IS t\5
O • H
0) -rl CD bO bO
rC _^ CJ ^W J3





























<<


(U
M
•d
^
CO
•d
0)
Activat







o
§
I


08

rl
0>

-g
•H


•
^J
«
                      392
CO

-------
                                                      393
Re:  Edgerton

     Industrial Wastes                 October 28,  1965

Edgerton Metal Products, Inc.

East Bement Street

Edgerton, Ohio  43517

Gentlemen:

            Enclosed is renewal permit for the discharge of

industrial wastes from your establishment into "waters of the

state" pursuant to the provisions of the Water Pollution

Control Act of Ohio.

            You will note that this permit expires  July 1,

1966.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon compliance

with the following conditions:

            1.  The satisfactory maintenance and operation of

                facilities provided for the treatment and

                disposal of cyanide-bearing wastes  incident

                to the plating operations of this plant.

            2.  The submission to the Division of Engineering,

                Ohio Department of Health, of a plan for (a)

                the treatment or (b) the collection, hauling

                away and providing satisfactory disposal of

                chrome-bearing wastes incident to the plating

                operations of this plant.

            3.  The submission to the Division of Engineering,

                at regular monthly intervals, of reports to

-------
                                                          394
                include waste flows and the concentration

                of critical constituents of the discharged

                wastes.

            Should you have any questions with respect to

the above conditions, please notify us promptly.

                      Yours very truly,

                      E. W. Arnold, M. D., Chairman

                      Water Pollution Control Board

Enc.-Permit 1416.10

Certified mail

cc:  Health Commissioner

cc:  District Office



                    *******



Re:  Allen County

     Bath Township

     Industrial Wastes               February 15, 1966

Ford Motor Company

Lima Engine Plant

Lima, Ohio

Gentlemen:

            Enclosed is renewal permit for the discharge of

industrial wastes from your plant into "waters of the state"

pursuant to the provisions of the Water Pollution Control Act

-------
                                                        395
and to the statement of policy of the Board dated February
24, 1953.
            You will note that this permit expires October 1,
1966.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon compliance
with the following conditions:
            1.  The satisfactory maintenance and operation of
                facilities which have been provided for the
                treatment and disposal of industrial wastes
                incident to the manufacturing processes of
                this plant; submitting to the Division of
                Engineering, Ohio Department of Health, at
                regular monthly intervals, reports to include
                information and analytical data pertinent to
                the operation and to the performance of these
                facilities.
            2.  The prompt reporting to the Division of
                Engineering of the occurrence and cause of
                any accidental or intermittent discharges of
                wastes which may have a deleterious effect on
                the receiving stream.
            3.  The submission to the Division of Engineering
                of information with respect to plant expansions
                and/or changes in processes, contemplated within
                the interim of this permit, which will signi-
                ficantly affect the disposal of industrial

-------
                                                       396



                wastes,  together with proposal  of adjustments




                and/or Improvements to these  facilities con-




                sistent  with such plant expansions and/or




                changes  in processes.




            4.   The submission prior to April 15, 1966, of  a




                report setting forth proposal for compliance




                with the Recommendations and  Conclusions of




                the Lake Erie Conference, a copy  of which was




                mailed to you December 29, 1965.




            Should you have any questions with respect  to




the above conditions, please notify us promptly.




                      Yours very truly,




                      E. W. Arnold, M. D., Chairman




                      Water Pollution Control Board




Enc.-Permit 1399-8




Certified mail




cc:  Mr. C. J.  pellrath




cc:  Health Commissioner



cc :  District Offir-








                    *******









Re :  Saint Marys




     Industrial Wastes                October 28, 1965

-------
                                                      397




The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company



Saint Marys Plant




South Wayne Street



Saint Marys, Ohio  45885



Gentlemen:




            Enclosed is renewal permit for the discharge of




industrial wastes from your establishment into "waters of the




state" pursuant to the provisions of the Water Pollution



Control Act of Ohio.




            You will note that this permit expires October 1,



1966.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon compliance




with the following conditions:



            1.  The satisfactory maintenance and operation of




                facilities provided thus far for the treatment



                and disposal of the industrial wastes of this




                plant; submitting to the Division of Engineering,



                Ohio Department of Health, at regular monthly



                intervals, reports to include information and



                analytical data pertinent to the operation of




                these facilities.



            2.  The submission of a report and general plan for



                compliance with the Conclusions and Recommenda-



                tions of the Lake Erie Conference (copy enclosed)



                with special reference to Sections 12, 13, 16,




                17, and 18.

-------
                                                      398
            Should you have any questions with respect to the

above conditions, please notify us promptly.
                      Yours very truly,
                      E. W. Arnold, M. D., Chairman

                      Water Pollution Control Board

Enc.-Permit 795. ^
    -Recom. & Concl.

Certified mail
cc:  Mr. F. A. Price

cc :  Health Commissioner
oc:  District Office


                   ******* *


Re:  Auglaize County

     Duchouquet Twp.

     Industrial Wastes                 April 26, 1966
Pepsi-Cola Bottling Company
R. R. 6
Wapakoneta, Ohio  45895
Gentlemen:

            Enclosed is renewal permit for the- discharge  of
industrial wastes from your establishment into "waters of the

state" pursuant to the provisions of the Water Pollution
Control Act of Ohio.

-------
                                                       399



            You will note that this permit expires July 1,




1966.  Renewal- of this permit is contingent upon compliance




with the following conditions:



            1. The completion of studies now under way as to



               the effectiveness of the aeration unit with




               controlled flow and the effectiveness of the



               experimental lagoon for the treatment of




               alkaline wastewaters.



            2. The submission to the Division of Engineering,



               Ohio Department of Health, of a report on these



               studies and a proposal and time schedule for



               corrective measures which will provide satis-



                factory treatment.




            3. The submission to the Division of Engineering,



               at regular monthly intervals, of reports to



               include information regarding flow volumes and



               pertinent analytical data on the industrial



               waste discharges.



            4. The prompt reporting to the Division of




               Engineering of the occurrence and cause of



               any accidental or intermittent discharges of



               wastes which may have a deleterious effect on



               the receiving stream.




            5.  The submission to the Division of Engineering

-------
                                                      400
               of information pertaining to any plant ex-
               pansion or process changes which may affect
               the character of the industrial waste dis-
               charges, together with a proposal for pro-
               viding controls for such discharges so that
               there will be no deleterious effect on the
               receiving stream.
           Should you have any questions with respect to the
above conditions, please notify us promptly.
                           Yours very truly,
                           E. w. Arnold, M.D., Chairman
                           Water Pollution Control Board
Enc.-Permit 1950.1
Certified mail
cc:  Health Commissioner
cc:  District Office

                      # # * * #


Re:  Allen County
     Shawnee Township
     Ind. Wastes-Sew.              March 18, 1966
Sohio Chemical Company
P.O. Box 628
Lima, Ohio 45801

-------
                                                      401
Attention Mr. J. L. Locker, General Superintendent
Gentlemen:

           Enclosed is renewal permit  for the discharge
of industrial wastes and sanitary sewage from your
establishment into "waters of the state" pursuant to the
provisions of the Water Pollution Control Act and to the
statement of policy of the Board dated February 24,  1953.
           You will note that this permit expires January
1, 1967.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon
compliance with the following conditions:
           1.  The satisfactory maintenance and operation
               of facilities which have been installed for

               the treatment of the sanitary sewage  of
               this plant; submitting  to the Division of
               Engineering, Ohio Department of Health, at
               regular monthly intervals, reports to in-
               clude information and analytical data per-
               tinent to the operation and to the per-
               formance of these facilities.
           2.  The satisfactory maintenance and operation
               of facilities which have been provided for the
               collection, treatment,  and controlled dis-
               posal of the industrial wastes and process
               waters incident to the  manufacturing processes

               of this plant so as to  maintain the current

-------
                                                     402





               water quality objectives  in  the Auglaize




               River, and to avoid the occurrence  of




               nuisance conditions in the Ottawa River.




           3.   The continued prosecution of engineering




               studies directed toward accomplishment of



               a reduction of the critical  constituents




               in the wastes effluent, together with  the




               installation of improvements to treatment




               facilities or procedures  developed  by  these




               studies.




           4.   The submission to the Division of Engineering,




               at regular monthly intervals, of reports to




               include information and analytical  data




               pertinent to the definition of the  volumes




               and characteristics of the industrial  wastes



               effluents and for the evaluation of the




               effects of the discharges on the receiving



               streams (Ottawa and Auglaize Rivers).




           5.   The prompt reporting to the Division of




               Engineering of the occurrence and cause of



               any accidental or intermittent discharges of




               wastes which may have a deleterious effect




               on the receiving stream.




           Should you have any questions with respect to




the above conditions, please notify us promptly.

-------
                                                     403
                           Yours very truly,
                           E. W. Arnold, M.D., Chairman
                           Water Pollution Control Board
Enc.-Permit 1349.9
Certified mail
cc :   Health Commissioner
cc :   District Office


                     * * # * *


Re:   Allen County
Shawnee Township
Industrial Wastes                  October 28, 1965
Sohio Petroleum Company
P.O. Box 628
Lima, Ohio
Attention Mr. J. L. Locker
Gentlemen:
           Enclosed is renewal permit for the discharge of
industrial wastes from your establishment into "waters of
the  state" pursuant to the provisions of the Water Pollution
Control Act and to the statement of policy of the Board
dated February 24, 1953.
           You will note that this permit expires August 1,
1966.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon compliance

-------
                                                  404





with the following conditions:




           1.  The satisfactory maintenance and operation




               of existing facilities for elimination of




               certain strong increments of industrial




               wastes by evaporation and incineration.




           2.  The installation of additional in-plant




               controls for the reduction of nitrogen-




               bearing 'compounds to a level that unsatis-




               factory conditions, attributable to the




               effluent, will not result at downstream




               locations.




           3.  The continuation of studies to determine



               means to further reduce all critical




               constituents to a level acceptable for dis-




               charge to the Ottawa River.




           4.  The submission to the Ohio Department of




               Health of a report on the findings of this




               study with recommendations for corrective




               measures.




           5.  The submission to the Division of Engineering,




               Ohio Department of Health, at regular monthly




               intervals,  of reports to include information




               and analytical data pertinent to the defini-




               tion of the characteristics of the industrial




               waste effluents and to  the  evaluation  of the

-------
                                                   405




               polluting properties  of these  wastes as




               as  represented  by critical  constituents.




           6.   The prompt reporting  of the occurrence and




               cause of accidental or  Intermittent  dis-




               charges  of any  wastes which by reason of




               their volume or characteristics,  or  both,




               may have a deleterious  effect  on  the stream



               from the standpoint of  downstream legitimate




               uses.




           Should  you have any questions with respect to




the above conditions, please notify  us promptly.




                           Yours very  truly,




                           E.  W. Arnold, M.D., Chairman




                           Water Pollution Control  Board




Enc.-Permit 1559.5



Certified mail




cc :  Health Commissioner




cc:  District Office








                     *****




Re:  Allen County




     Shawnee Township




     Ind. Wastes-Sew.              March 18,  1966




The Standard Oil Company




Lima Refinery

-------
                                                     406





1150 South Metcalf Street




Lima, Ohio 45804




Attention Mr. K. A. McDaniel, Manager




Gentlemen:




           Enclosed is renewal permit for the discharge




of industrial wastes and sanitary sewage from your estab-




lishment into the "waters of the state" pursuant to the




provisions of the Water Pollution Control Act and to the




statement of policy of the Board dated February 24, 1953.




           You will note that this permit expires January




1, 1967.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon




compliance with the following conditions:




           1.  The satisfactory maintenance and operation




               of facilities which have been provided for




               the treatment and disposal of the sanitary




               sewage of this plant; submitting to the




               Division of Engineering,, Ohio Department of




               Health, at regular monthly intervals, reports



               setting forth information and analytical data




               pertinent to the operation and to the per-




               formance of these facilities.




           2.  The satisfactory maintenance and operation




               of the oil separator and air flotation




               facilities which have been provided for the




               treatment of the industrial wastes incident

-------
                                                     407
               to  oil-refining  processes;  submitting

               to  the  Division  of  Engineering,  at  regular
               monthly intervals,  reports  to  include  in-
               formation and  analytical  data  pertinent  to
               the operation  and to  the  performance of
               these  facilities.
           3.   The prompt reporting  to the Division of
               Engineering of the  occurrence  and cause  of
               any accidental or intermittent discharges
               of  wastes which  may have  a  deleterious
               effect  on the  receiving stream.
           4.   The prompt institution of measures  to  control
               the periodic high concentration of  phenol in

               the plant discharge.
           Should  you have any  questions with respect to
the above conditions,  please  notify  us promptly.
                           Yours very truly,
                           E. W. Arnold, M.D., Chairman
                           Water  Pollution Control Board

Enc.-Permit 887.13
Certified mail
cc :  Health Commissioner
cc:  District  Office


                     *****

-------
                                                    408



Re:  Antwerp




     Ind. Wastes-Sew.              December 17, 1965



The Weatherhead Company




Antwerp, Ohio ^5813




Gentlemen:




           Enclosed is renewal permit for the discharge




of industrial wastes and sanitary sewage from your estab-




lishment into the "waters of the state" pursuant to the




provisions of the Water Pollution Control Act of Ohio.




           You will note that this permit expires July 1,




1966.   Renewal of this permit is contingent upon compliance




with the following conditions:




           1.  The satisfactory maintenance and operation




               of facilities provided for the treatment




               and disposal of the sanitary sewage and




               industrial wastes of this plant.




           2.  The submission to the Division of Engineering,




               Ohio Department of Health, at regular monthly




               intervals, of reports to include information




               and anlytical data pertinent to the operation




               and performance of the sanitary sewage and




               industrial wastes treatment facilities.




           3.  The submission of a report and plan for




               compliance with the Conclusions and Recom-



               mendations of the Lake Erie Conference

-------
                                                     409





               (copy enclosed), with special reference




               to Sections 12,  13,  16,  17 and 18.




           Should you have any questions with respect to




the above conditions, please notify us  promptly.




                           Yours very truly,




                           E. W. Arnold, M.D., Chairman




                           Water Pollution Control Board




Enc.-Permit 682.11




    -Recom. & Concl.




Certified mail




cc:  Mr. F. E. Stearns, Asst. Secy.




cc:  Health Commissioner




cc:  District Office








                     *****

-------








co
w
H
H
Hi
H
|o5

JH c3 §
LrJ J3 ***""^
W M i^j
,>4 r~"1 f^
•rf  O PM
« W fi
^ I — 1 PH
w g,
£~) W <«
6 M §
§ §
S
CO
1
IH
CO


























J.
r.
QJ
(
n

rc
c
co



«
•4"
o3 a
a a
0 CL)
•rl t-t
-P -r
•H 3
^3 D
qj (
 o
H fM


ty
•p
V.
&
^H
o
a

^













j>j
-p
•H
-P
£



VQ
VO
H
1
21
03 O
o3
0) P!
a o
a> lp
>• o
•rl ?S
-P tJ
O O
(U M
F-< 09
0 0 3
O <*-! O

H


1
-P

fc w
•P P!





fl
O S^l
•H O
•P -H
oj w
J-i 
-------

















co
w
H
a
jj^
H
< o
pL( HH
1^
|||
EH 
«3 g PS

H1 M O
 o !>>
OH -H M
•rl O C -P
S M c3 H
cu w to ?i
.5 -rl ij O
O |t) O fL(
o
r!
o'
o ^

0r-(
c3
a s
>> o
M ^
d) ft
f-Q
J-i
^! 0)
W 4J
pj ca
S o
(4 PM












c—
VO
H
I
H
CO
*?«'
fH H CD
O Oi cu
• -rl -P ca

bO bO-P -r)
c a w -p
CU -rl -rl -H
C X H
cu a cu -H
rH 03 0
•rl H O 03

oj •< •< H




jT
o
•rl
H-J
>> >. 03 -d
03 0} N CU CU
ft ca ft H a H fn
ca a ca ctf -H O 03
.0 fc H f-i ,G
>do >d -P -P 4* o
Jo3 CO CU CU O *rj
nl t-5 tn ca O "tj



r*> >> ^>
M H «H
CU CU 0)
O O U O
I SH
O O O H
-P P -P H
CO 05 03 O rO
ag a 4> 'H
O O -P O
«
O
O 08 0 fl
S O
bO OH TH •
f5 -H £j W O «3
•rH 45 « O -rl W
fn £3 * *fH r* ^U
3 CO O W -rl bO ^1
03 H 0 -H p» C -rl
0 -P t> -ri JS
<3j 03 -rl CU c
bO CU Q r-i w cd
H -P EH H d 0
p 03 CU -H O CU •
£> cu o bO p> SO
rt ^t-rlca i-iH CUO
O O ^H PH CU CU CO
Ca -rl ^2 N
f> CUOC QJn cUbO
•rl ff d ti CU -H fP fcl
.
S
o

•P D*~*
OVO
CvO
Q
5 >,
o Jo


VO
VO
H
1
VO
r-j O
•3 • 0
•d > -r
cu cu -el
^1 ca
O • f-l
ca JH O
-P c^-(
08 W »
C -P
HJ O 0
!H O a|
tl 1

l-i


§
W
HJ
aj
1
CU
Grease s





3
'£ ,
CH 03
S o
cu -H
P S
>, 8
S6





^
c
1
o
o

08

.±>
VH
i

















•p
ca
>»
ca
•
S
JjQ

§

\>
0








































-------









CO
w
M
EH
H
H
0
< 0


1= °
EH M is;
< < H
EH <^ W
W W K
EH Q H
CO 
C~J *^> 1 	 1
13: M H

0) O

EH PH
g
EH
EH
CO





CJ
-p
w
cJ
r ,
























Tt
O
P<
H
















^
-P
•rl
•JJ
S






















 JH
i> O


a
a
w
•H
S3

3
<1)
S

a
o
•rl
-P
aj
f-i
O -P
M 3
0 H
O fl PH
O
W -H ^<5
j-i w q
O -rl 3
•P > EH
3*.*
rH a 3
03 O H
!-4 cfl (U


s3d
412

-------























CO
pr3
EH
H
O
 £j

CH H §
CO PS <;
!^ W co

CO
EH
co

























w
!H
cS
S
CU







0)
H
*o
 -rj
•rj P
•o a
•< «

m
•P
03
-p
CO







reatinent
rovided
EH f4

a)
ta
CvJ
Is

fi i
O

CD
^












^
+3
+>

3




































^*








ettling
CQ

H
> 03 f-l
oJ H P co
FH ^ C3
ft 'd cu o
-P bO
fl fn -H H
cd CD O
HH <^ «< o3

>> 0 ^
ri w
g 3 cs
H bO H
CO M O
O O JH
i £5
O SH ^^^
-P O

§ 1 3
tH « 0
1
-H
*f-4
* O
o p^
fl H

o *v <5
O co
a cu
N -H H
S ,a -P
•H O +>
O « -rl
M 1 1-3
P
>-i £ S"
S fH
. CU 0)






VO
vo
1
H C-
l VO
t~-CTs
H
08 cu
4*^4
t . rQ j^
O CU 10
&'S §
M M O
CO
H
••> JH -H
w o • o
o 08 



<< <; M


CO
fl ca
0 r<
o o
bO -P
n) tS oS
H •
SH h CM
>> O
CO CJ •
a § « c o
CD CU O >H
5 ^ -rf ^ "S
M 
-------
































en
8
E-i
H
Hi
H
O

EH
@w
Js H
£} ^
H H
w 5
gin
£H
i-3 P^


£5 P^
Q ^
r*l
fa
0
CO
ej
E-
co





























w
-v;
Cll

K










O

0)
_r~]
O
CQ





W
ITS
VO
1
LPi
H

C\J
H

Jj
Hi
^
W
<•>
O
en







vo • vo
^H
H I




•
ft
co w
P CH JH
i— ) Cl ft c3 CO
CO 
 & M
« -H +>

<; H

H
O
fl rl
0 -P
•r) C!
P O
d-d o >,
N <1) d> in
•rl H bO -P  O -P
J^ f3 O


^ *rt
* *~i
TJ Co •
C .M ^
hn r*n *H •
<4 P O
HI o c\j
o5 0) co =3-
0 G -rl -d
'd >rl L ^ "*°
So CQ t-j o3
r{ ) — 1 Hj ,__]
Ox! I H At
0 rl 05
X 0) S o
eu «>P H O -d
^ • c j3 -H 0
•P O 3 4) p H
0) 3 H 0 03 0
R H Al O E2} 6-1

















«
H
ft
a
o
o

•P CA
M H

O J3
O -H


•
X!
o s
to  r-**
?H -P W
0 -rl
«H O 0)
bO
CO |5 05
H CJ rl
•H fl 0)
o 5
0} O CD
PC, -P W

< < H

a
0
P -rl
S • -P
»,
•rl -rl rj
fl C 0
•rl -rl O
0)
r-l H 5)
o5 ccj co
P -P £
cu a> o
as w
CM
W
•p -P ^fe
R r~i *
03 A< O 43
^> *~l r5^ O £H
M Pi CH O 3
Q Cu JH O i — |
Pi ' ^> 04 t\3 »H PH
O ,Q O ^ -P P<
0 fl 0 S 0 §
(U CD O CD
?H W *H K H M
O W O W
-P *3^ 4-J ^> 4)
o o m rH ^
S C S co co >
•n 3 rl 0)
*d cd ti rd d) r~i
O O O flj CD O
fa Hi (xf CQ C5 PQ















VO
VO
I
H

CO

O
p
O
•rl
A



«
g p<
O -rj
-P T3
W
rf
C[_^ Q
O JH
>^
'i o -p

W JB I?

H







&
rl
B1

•d
Hi





13

d) P H
§go
0 S 5








>»
cu 3
M i1
dq S
o
cu
J5 bo
33
Q> S
gc§
414

-------













CO
H
H
H
H
1-3
H
Q
~J
W M
EH
CO O rtf
<3 EH p
§ fc
>H O
H3 f^o

a -d
s«
•§•0
O 0
h h
EH P4



0
•p
W
05
^

«H
O
0

*>
ft












>!
4?
•H
•P
C
W



























< < •< < <:



d
H fl 0
O O -rl
h -H +>
-p -p ^
fl o -d
0 ^ -H
o >d bo X
O G O
-P 0 h -H
w cj +J HO
pj 3 c) o -p Td
0 H H 1 -P -rl
o ft ft o o a
bO 1 § fn ta co
M H 8 6c8 &

bO bO
fl a
•H -r-i
^! rG
^? 53 !2
• H 'H -rl
ho c! q q
Cw ^! O -H -rt
SO PH PC,
h O
w d bo H H
M O 03 CO 05
03 M £ -P 4>
H 0) O 0) O
0 « co S 5?
• •
co «H *n *
W J3 3 ft
o3 H-3 ni> 'd M
H fl 
•df^ oo oo^-^ rfo -d
h rf-ri cd-Hh >>S h
0 0 ftp ftp o WO rt
piH'd cooj coni4-> ri fdp!
10 +> pfl cu» GO
WH ogW cScOO M> cJ-H
GO • O 3 -H 4J W
OEH GAi G^l PP CO'H
£ OO OO,G )-< l|>
<54-> hO hOO rfw H-H
ico Oh Ohh ftbO HP
>,o5 3 p3o tscd oco
£0 CSH o5H« oo Oh
Hi 0 J23 PH K P**-' S« M PP



























«: «< «: <:



o •
bO 4>
h oJ
03 03 CO d ft w ft ft w -H
GO 0)G w OGbO
OH WO WOO
OH O -d OH
MO H§) 3 HMO
Co h *H Co TO »cl w »rl
Hl-o OH t-5 O H ^3


>>
>> h
h 0
O G
3 co
C(5 O
o
o
•p 43
^J co n5 to
o3 H g H
h rl O -rl
M 0 EH 0

•
o
G
O H
O O
H H ft
td t* ^ ^ c*
« Oh 3 G" h
O O O co O
o id G _ ft G
d) h -H G S -H
O ct3 4n rf O  O fl)
fa 3 « T , w
co >» H
h 4J O H -H O
o co >d o o -d
> O A! cu
H OH O G HI
'H ,G O -P P O
CO EH EH CO CO EH
43



t--
vb
i
H

CM

h h W
O • O- G
 h H»-^
-POO
W «H -P O -H
• O 0$ -P 'o
rQ • fe • O
•H -P ft -H
W d ,G 0 f-i
03 O W W 0>
0 h C3 •rj ft
PCI -P > •d*-'




<<











W
8
o

,3





•d
o
•d
G w
o -d
ft-d
w H
2 O
CO CO


•
0
0

§§
W -rl
•rj -P
•d cti
W -P
CO
O
•d o
o h
H 0
O .G
EH CO
o >>
X! S?
EH W

-------




























CO
M
M
EH
U
M
O
<
fe
E*~i
H ca
^i| «1
EH K
< W
M
w w
EH [M
3
pr"] |_^
EH •
co O nd
< EH -P
^ M §
i t pi
EH PQ
CO H
e
g
CO





























w
f-i
a

w








0
H

rd
(1)
,G
O
CO





M
•P
'3 o
G £3
O CU
•rl h
-P -rl
•H 3

>
Pj D jfj Q) CO
^2 G o -p •
•3 G w w Is
CO O nd £ M



H





•d
G
oJ ^o
.0) Q)
bOrH bO
G H M
•H O OS
H JH ,G
•P -P c5
•PGM
 ft
O O
^0

0) 0)
H H
cj co
0 O
co co

o o


*o ^
EH (H
rH 'd
M *H Ct)
O 0 >
<(H d O
CO • ft
3 CO Oj
H -H
ft-3. i
^3 08 w
0) • -P
in -P ?>
P< cj !H VO
n o Q fi
g O 'rl O ,Q W O
O JS C -H O (U O
fc -d TO -P ^ bO bO
6> OJ OJ -rj (0
^, o  CD o -p
S a co co
-p
H
PH
• • M W
& & 0 73
O O 4> C -H
o o fl a> o fn
3 -d -H o
^1 f-( H -rt W -P
Q) d) p4 ^3 -H rt
ft ft I"* r* r^i
fl B Ai cd -H
cD d> O O Q bO
EH EH 0 G

CD CD .Q O *d TI>
g 3 |>, ^ G H
EH EH co t> M [s










































^£




^
rj
o
Cyanide
settlin
G3
5
CO
a
pci

•d
^^
0)
a

o
•H
~ctj
g
Qj f3
^HJ O
O »H
O W
rH ^
O *H
O ^
Pi
H 
-------
December 15, 1965
                                                      417
Re:   Erie County
     Perkins Township
     Industrial Wastes
Bechtel-Mclaughlin, Inc.
P. 0. Box 948
Sandusky, Ohio 448?0
Gentlemen:
           As a result of Board Action December 14, 1965.>
enclosed Is renewal permit for the discharge of Industrial
wastes from your establishment Into "waters of the state"
pursuant to the provisions of the Water Pollution Control
Act  of Ohio.
           You will note that this permit expires July 1,
1966.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon compliance
with the following Orders:
           1.  The satisfactory maintenance and operation
               of the facilities provided thus far for
               treatment and disposal of cyanide-bearing
               increments of the industrial wastes of this
               plant.
           2.  The elimination of all discharges of strong
               acids, chromium-bearing wastes, and other
               metal-bearing waste increments to waters of
               the state prior to the expiration date of
               this permit.

-------
                                                    418





           3.  The submission to the Division of Engineering,




               at regular monthly intervals,  of reports to




               include information regarding flow volumes




               and pertinent analytical data on the




               industrial waste discharges.




           4.  The prompt reporting to the Division of




               Engineering of the occurrence and cause of




               any accidental or intermittent discharges




               of wastes which may have a deleterious effect




               on the receiving stream.




           5.  The submission to the Division of Engineering




               of information pertaining to any plant




               expansion or process changes which may




               affect the character of the industrial




               waste discharges, together with a proposal




               for providing controls for such discharges




               so that there will be no deleterious effect



               on the receiving stream.




           6.  The submission of a proposal for compliance




               with the Conclusions and Recommendations of




               the Lake Erie Conference (copy enclosed),




               with special reference to Sections 12, 13,




               16, 17, and 18.




           Should you have any questions with respect to the



above Orders, please notify us promptly.

-------
                                                     419



                     Yours very truly,




                     E. W. Arnold, M.D., Chairman




                     Water Pollution Control Board




Enc.-Permit 944.15



    -Recom. & Concl.




Certified mail




cc:   Health Commissioner




cc:   District Office








                     # # * # #









Re:   Lucas County




     Washington Township




     Industrial Wastes             March 28, 1966




Doehler-Jarvis Division




National Lead Company




1945 Broad Avenue



Toledo, Ohio 43601




Gentlemen:




           Enclosed is renewal permit for the discharge




of industrial wastes from your Toledo Plant No. 2 into




the  "waters of the state" pursuant to the provisions of




the  Water Pollution Control Act of Ohio.




           You will note that this permit expires February




1, 1967.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon

-------
                                                  420





compliance with the following conditions:




           1.  The satisfactory maintenance and operation




               of facilities provided thus far for the




               reclamation and controlled  discharge of




               industrial wastes incident  to the manu-




               facturing processes of this plant;  submitting




               to the Division of Engineering, Ohio Depart-




               ment of Health, at regular  monthly intervals,




               reports to include information and  analytical




               data pertinent to the definition of the




               industrial wastes as discharged to  the




               receiving stream.




           2.  The prompt reporting to the Division of




               Engineering of the occurrence and cause of




               any accidental- or intermittent discharges




               of wastes which may have a  deleterious effect




               on the receiving stream.




           3-  The submission to the Division of Engineering




               of information with respect to proposed




               plant expansion or changes  in processes




               together with a proposal with respect tc




               adjustments or improvements of wastes treat-




               ment facilities consistent  with such




               expansions or changes in processes.




           4.  The submission  prior  to April  15 >  1966, of

-------
                                                    421
               a proposal for complying with the Recom-

               mendations and Conclusions of the Lake

               Erie Conference,  as  requested in a letter

               dated December 29,  1965 > giving particular

               emphasis to Sections 12, 13,  16, 17 ,  and 18.

           5.   The submission to and approval by the Ohio

               Department of Health of detail plans  of

               proposed facilities  for the satisfactory

               treatment of the  industrial wastes of this

               plant in accordance  with Section 15 referred

               to above.

           Should you have any questions with respect to the

above conditions, please notify us  promptly.

                           Yours very truly,

                           E. W. Arnold, M.D., Chairman

                           Water Pollution Control Board

Enc. -Permit 978. 11

Certified mail

cc:  Div. of Air & Water Poll. Control

cc :  Mr. H. H. Jacobson

cc :  Health Commissioner

cc :  District Office
                     * * *

-------












W
>1
^
S
S











«






CD
rH
^
•3
o
Jd



CO


g
H
O
<
fi|
^

Is W
EH !-J
< ."
W ^,
CcJ
EH M

H 3
EH h^
3o
§ EH
J fn
< o
H W
W ffi
EH H
co p
(i,
S
CO
t3
£H
CO



















]
o
CO




01
H^
d o>
fl S
O CD
•H JH
-p «H
•H p!
*u O^
rd CD
< «


w
•3
jj
la
-P
CO






atment
vided
CD O
^ ^
EH FL,



EH!
:
i
i







i

>•„
•H
-p
S
•r) -rl -rl
rH r-i H rH
d O O O
O CO CO CO
•r\ ...
a ft ft ft
CD WWW
O CO CO CO
•
O
fl
H 0
« -H
S h r": •
P -P fl d
•rl O d -P
W CD Pi -P CO
 oJ ,Q fL, d
3 CD fl «S rH
fl H -rj -P fl -p
•H O d ^! O W
a p w >• as
3 
w d fl -P w +1
•rl W d -rl fl
'<-\ X O H >> X CO
O (1) ft ft H CD H
 -{-3 rH W J> -P
• M d -H ^ •
^-5 ft il) O f-l ft |S
CD a is ca o S CD
ft -H -P «H  0
•H
P> W
VI
W O
rl «
d> 1
^> 'd
S S
o 3
ea
VO
vO
i
CO

v£>
fn
£
f—i
rCJ
f-*
pq
CD
H
CO-P-H^O 000





H < H



W

j2
rH CO
o3 H cS 08 -P
H 0 § H bO
d -H S w d fl
O b3 CD fl O -H
•rf O P5 O -H H
S H O S -P
CD O H bj) fl> -p
.fl -H •£) cf .fl CD
G W O H) 0 W

bO
5
^5
w c3
•d -H
•rl fl
rH H -H
03 O pt,
0 CO
*d * d
B P< CO
55 to -P
g C^ £





>i

P< 3
^ &
o g +>
O O fl
o d
H H
O fl Pi
t} 0
•rl W fM
fn -rl CD O
1 S| fl
O CD •»
CD -rl bD S:
g cSS g





































<;



08
a
0 fl
•H 0
•P -H
d -p
traliz
rifica
p! d
CD H
& 0




•
o
w
3

H w
CD -d
CD -H
-P 0
CQ «<





•
ft
rl
O
0 fl
O
W 'iH
-d w
•rH Tl
"2 -rt
d O
O
CO
fl H
O oJ
•H -P
g&
 422
W
0
CO

-------








vo •
vo p
co 
^2 K
to
p
oJ
P
CO






EH H
rn Q
^
Q
£H
rH

fjl^
O
£p
CO














.p
o o>
S tf

"d '>
 si
CO M  J: P ^
i o -p
O O 0) k 05
o • o Q) A;
ft P M
D CO 0) nj O
^ -H -H & Se
Co 'O J-( d)
a w P -P
fn W p!
O O O «S <1>
EH 
•ni C3 d5 CO
t^ flj J»4 O
•rl H O O
5_j p| Qi O.
c3 ^ J3 w
H ^ OJ -H




ri

y
w w
0) Q)
p p
cd • oj «
qj O p O
CO O CO O
!u 0 'So
40 W P ,Q
•rl ft -H ft
3 & 3 &
£j \3 ^J PQ
423

-------
                   424
June 8, 1966
Re:   Lake County




     Painesville Township




     Ind. Wastes-Sew.




IRC Fibers Division




Midland Ross Corporation




P. 0. Box 580




Painesville, Ohio 44077




Gentlemen:




           Enclosed is renewal permit for the discharge




of industrial wastes and sanitary sewage from your




establishment into the "waters of the state" pursuant




to the provisions of the Water Pollution Control Act and




to the statement of policy of the Board dated February 24,




1953.



           You will note that this permit expires February




1, 1967.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon




compliance with the following conditions:




           1.  The submission to and approval by the



               Ohio Department of Health of detail plans




               of terminal facilities for the neutraliza-




               tion of acids and the precipitation of zinc



               and related settleable solids from the




               increments of the industrial wastes of this



               plant designated as "C2" and "H3", together




               with a schedule of construction of these

-------
                                         425
    facilities.
2. - The submission to and approval by the Ohio
    Department of Health of detail plans of
    facilities for secondary treatment of the
    sanitary sewage of this plant together with
    a schedule of construction of these
    facilities.
3.  The satisfactory maintenance and operation
    of facilities provided for the clarification
    of the ash-bearing wastes of this plant;
    submitting to the Division of Engineering,
    Ohio Department of Health, at regular monthly
    intervals, reports to include information and
    analytical data pertinent to the performance
    of these facilities and pertinent to the
    definition of critical waste loads discharged
    to waters of the state.
4.  The satisfactory maintenance and operation
    of the facilities provided thus far for the
    treatment and disposal of sanitary sewage
    of this plant; submitting to the Division
    of Engineering, at regular monthly intervals,
    reports to include information and analytical
    data pertinent to the operation and performance
    of these facilities.

-------
                                                       426






           5.  The continued submission to the Division




               of Engineering, at regular monthly inter-




               vals, of information and analytical data




               pertinent to the definition of the critical




               industrial waste loads of the significant




               increments of industrial wastes of this plant




               discharged to waters of the state.




           Should you have any questions with respect to




the above conditions, please notify us promptly.




                           Yours very truly,




                           E. W. Arnold, M.D., Chairman




                           Water Pollution Control Board




Enc.-Permit 7^7.14




Certified mail




cc:  Health Commissioner




cc:  District Office








                       *****









Re:  Wickliffe




     Industrial Wastes             June 8, 1966




The Lubrizol Corporation




Box 3057, Euclid Station



Cleveland, Ohio



Gentlemen:

-------
                                                      427
           Enclosed is renewal permit for the discharge
of industrial wastes from your establishment into "waters
of the state" pursuant to the provisions of the Water
Pollution Control Act and to the statement of policy of the
Board dated February 24,  1953.
           You will note  that this permit expires April 1,
1967.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon compliance
with the following conditions:
           1.  The satisfactory maintenance and operation
               of industrial wastes treatment facilities
               which have been provided at this plant.
           2.  The continued submission to the Division
               of Engineering., Ohio Department of Health,
               at regular monthly intervals, of reports
               to include information and analytical data
               pertinent  to the operation and to the per-
               formance of the industrial wastes treatment
               facilities.
           3.  The continuation of the studies which have
               been initiated for the determination and
               segregation of the critical increment of
               the industrial wastes discharged; submitting
               to the Ohio Department of Health a report
               setting forth the findings and proposal for
               the satisfactory treatment and disposal,

-------
                                                       428






               reduction,  or elimination of the critical




               constituents of this waste.




           4.  In the event additional wastes treatment




               facilities  are proposed to comply with the




               provisions  of Condition 3 (above), the




               submission  to and approval by the Ohio




               Department  of Health of detail plans of the




               proposed treatment devices or facilities.




           Should you have any questions with respect to




the above conditions, please notify us promptly.




                           Yours very truly,




                           E. W. Arnold, M.D., Chairman




                           Water Pollution Control Board




Enc.-Permit 1182.12




Certified mail




cc:  Health Commissioner




cc:  District Office








                     *****









Re:  Ottawa County




     Erie Township




     Industrial Wastes             March 18, 1966




United States Rubber Company




Erie Army Depot

-------
                                                    429
P.O. Box 488

Port Clinton, Ohio 43452

Attention Mr. Frederick E.  Weber,  Factory Manager

Gentlemen:

           As a result of Board action March 8,  1966,

enclosed is permit for the  discharge  of industrial wastes

from your establishment into the "waters of the  state"

pursuant to the provisions  of the  Water Pollution Control

Act and to the statement of policy of the Board  dated

February 24, 1953.

           You will note that this permit expires December

1, 1966.  Renewal of this permit is contingent upon

compliance with the following conditions:

           1.  The provision and operation of temporary

               expedients for control of industrial wastes

               characteristics as  outlined in the letter

               and report of January  26, 1966.

           2.  The submission to the  Division of Engineering,

               Ohio Department of Health, at regular monthly

               intervals, of reports  setting forth

               industrial wastes characteristics as dis-

               charged and adequate information  to define

               the effects of the discharge on the waters

               of Lake Erie.

           3.  The submission to and  approval by the Ohio

               Department of  Health  of detail plans of

-------
                                                   430




               facilities for the satisfactory treatment




               and disposal of the industrial wastes of




               this plant.



           4.  The construction of the proposed industrial




               wastes treatment facilities in accordance




               with approved plans.




           Should you have any questions with respect to




the above conditions, please notify us promptly.




                           Yours very truly,



                           E. W. Arnold, M.D., Chairman
                           Water Pollution Control Board
Enc.-Permit 1958




Certified mail




cc :   Health Commissioner




cc:   District Office
                       * * *

-------
                                                    431
                     APPENDIX III









           RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS




             OF THE LAKE ERIE CONFERENCE
                       # * * #
           RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS








(Agreed upon by Conferees from Michigan,  Indiana,  Ohio,




Pennsylvania, New York and U. S. Public Health Service




following conference under Section 8 of the Federal Water




Pollution Control Act in the matter of pollution of the




interstate and Ohio intrastate waters of Lake Erie and




its tributaries held in Cleveland, Ohio,  August 3-6, 1965,




and in Buffalo, New York, August 10-12, 1965.)








1.  The waters of Lake Erie within the United States are




    interstate waters within the meaning of Section 8 of




    the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.  The waters of




    Lake Erie within the United States and its tributaries




    covered by sessions of this Conference are navigable

-------
                                                    432






    waters within the meaning of Section 8 of the Federal




    Water Pollution Control Act.




2.  Lake Erie and many of its tributaries are polluted.




    The main body of the Lake has deteriorated in quality




    at a rate many times greater than its normal aging




    processes, due to inputs of wastes resulting from the




    activities of man.




3.  Identified pollutants contributing to damages to water




    uses in Lake Erie are sewage and industrial wastes,




    oils, silts, sediment, floating solids, and nutrients




    (phosphates and nitrates).   Enrichment of Lake Erie,




    caused by man-made contributions of nutrient materials,




    is proceeding at an alarming rate.  Pollution in Lake




    Erie and many of its tributaries causes significant




    damage to recreation, commercial fishing, sport fishing,




    navigation, water supply, and esthetic values.




4.  Eutrophication or over-fertilization of Lake Erie is of




    major concern.  Problems are occurring along the lake




    shoreline at some water intakes and throughout  the lake




    from algal growths stimulated by nutrients.   Reduction




    of one or more of such nutrients will be beneficial  in




    controlling algal growths and eutrophication.




5.  Many sources of waste discharge reaching Lake Erie




    have inadequate waste treatment facilities.   The delays




    in controlling this  pollution are  caused by  the lack

-------
                                                     433



    of such adequate facilities and the complex municipal,




    industrial, financial and biological nature of the




    problem.




6.  Interstate pollution of Lake Erie exists.   Discharges




    into Lake Erie and its tributaries from various sources




    are endangering the health or welfare of persons in




    states other than those in which such discharges




    originate, and in large measure this pollution is




    caused by nutrients which over-fertilize the lake.




    This pollution is subject to abatement under the




    Federal Watep Pollution Control Act.




7.  Municipal wastes be given secondary treatment or treat-




    ment of such nature as to effectuate the maximum reduc-




    tion of BOD and phosphates as well as other deleterious




    substances.



8.  Secondary treatment plants be so designed and operated




    as to maximize the removal of phosphates.




9.  Disinfection of municipal waste effluents be practiced




    in a manner that will maintain coliform concentrations




    not to exceed 5>000 organisms per 100 ml at public water




    supply intakes, and not to exceed 1,000 organisms per




    100 ml where and when the receiving waters in proximity




    to the discharge point are used for recreational purposes




    involving bodily contact--   It is recognized that bathing



    water quality standards are established by statute

-------
    in New York State.




10.  All new sewerage facilities be designed to prevent




    the necessity of bypassing untreated waters.




11. Combined storm and  sanitary sewers be prohibited in




    all newly-developed urban areas, and eliminated in




    existing areas wherever feasible.  Existing combined




    sewer systems be patrolled and flow-regulating




    structures adjusted to convey the maximum practicable




    amount of combined  flows to and through treatment plants




12. Program be developed to prevent accidental spills of




    waste materials to  Lake Erie and its tributaries.  In-




    plant surveys with  the purpose of preventing accidents




    are recommended.




13. Unusual increases in waste output and accidental spills




    be reported immediately to the appropriate State agency.




14. Disposal of garbage, trash, and other deleterious refuse




    in Lake Erie or its tributaries be prohibited and




    existing dumps along river banks and shores of the




    Lake be removed.




15. The conferees meet  with representatives of Federal,




    State and local officials responsible for agricultural,




    highway and community development programs for the




    purpose of supporting satisfactory programs for the




    control of runoff which deleteriously affects water




    quality in Lake Erie.

-------
                                                    435
16.  Industrial plants improve practices  for the  segregation
     and treatment of waste to effect  the maximum reductions
     of the following:
           a.   Acids and alkalies.
           b.   Oil and tarry substances.
           c.   Phenolic compounds  and  organic chemicals
               that contribute to  taste and odor  problems.
           d.   Ammonia and  other nitrogenous compounds.
           e.   Phosphorus compounds.
           f.   Suspended material.
           g.   Toxic and highly-colored wastes.
           h.   Oxygen-demanding substances.
           i.   Excessive heat.
           j.   Foam-producing discharges.
           k.   Other wastes which  detract from recreational
               uses, esthetic enjoyment,  or other beneficial
               uses of the  waters.
17.  The Michigan, Indiana, Ohio,  Pennsylvania and New York
     Water Pollution Control Agencies  undertake action to
     insure that industrial plants  discharging wastes into
     waters of Lake Erie and its tributaries within their
     respective jurisdictions institute  programs  of sampling
     their effluents to provide necessary information about
     waste outputs.  Such sampling shall  be conducted at
     such locations and with such  frequency as to yield

-------
                                                   436





     statistically reliable values of all waste outputs




     and to show their variations.  Analyses to be so




     reoorted are to include where applicable:  pH, oil,




     tarry residues, phenolics,  ammonia,  total  nitrogen,




     cyanide, toxic materials,  total biochemical oxygen




     demand, and all other substances listed in the pre-




     ceding paragraph.




18.  Waste results be reported  in terms of both concentra-




     tions and load rates.  Such information will be main-




     tained in open files by the State agencies for all




     those having a legitimate  interest in the  information.




19.  The Department of Health,  Education, and Welfare




     establish water pollution  surveillance stations at




     appropriate locations on Lake Erie.   Surveillance




     of the tributaries will be the primary responsibility




     of the States.  The Department of Health,  Education,




     and Welfare will assist the States at such times as



     requested.




20.  The Department of Health,  Education, and Welfare will




     be responsible for developing up-to-date information




     and experience concerning  effective  phosphate removal




     and control of combined sewer systems.  This informa-




     tion will be reported to the conferees regularly.




21.  Regional planning is often the most  logical and




     economical approach toward meeting  pollution problems.

-------
                                                  437



     The water pollution control agencies of Indiana,




     Michigan, Pennsylvania, New York and Ohio,  and the




     Department of Health, Education, and Welfare will




     encourage such regional planning activities.




22.  Within six months after the issuance of this Summary,




     the State water pollution control agencies  concerned




     will present a schedule of remedial action  to the




     Conferees for their consideration and evaluation.




23.  The Federal Conferee recommends the following for




     the consideration of the State agencies :




     a.  Recommended municipal treatment - Completion of




         plans and specifications August 1966$ completion




         of financing February 19^7j construction started




         August 19^7) construction completed January 1,




         1969; chlorination of effluents May 15, 1966;




         provision of stand-by and emergency equipment




         to prevent interruptions in operation of municipal




         treatment plants August 1966; patrolling of com-




         bined sewer systems immediately.




     b.  Discontinuance of garbage and trash dumping




         into waters immediately.




     c.  Industrial waste treatment facilities to be




         completed and in operation by January 1, 1969.




24.  Federal installations waste treatment facilities to




     be completed and in operation by August of  1966.

-------
                                                     438






25.  Representatives of the United States Corps of




     Engineers meet with the Conferees,  develop and put




     into action a satisfactory program  for disposal of




     dredged material in Lake Erie and its tributaries




     which will satisfactorily protect water quality.




     Such a program is to be developed within six months




     after the issuance of this Summary  and effectuated




     as soon as possible thereafter.




26.  The conferees will establish a Technical Committee as




     soon as possible which will evaluate water quality




     problems in Lake Erie relating to nutrients and make




     recommendations to the conferees within six months after




     the issuance of the summary of the  conference.




27.  The Conference may be reconvened on the call of the




     Chairman.








     At the conclusion of the Cleveland  session of the




conference the following was included among the conclusions



and recommendations of the conference:




           "Pollution of navigable waters subject to




     abatement under the Federal Water Pollution Control




     Act is occurring in the Ohio waters of Lake Erie and




     its tributaries.  The discharges causing and




     contributing to the pollution come  from various



     municipal and Industrial sources, from garbage,

-------
                                                    439



     "debris, and land runoff.




           "Pollution of the Ohio waters of Lake Erie




     and its tributaries within the State of Ohio




     endangers health and welfare."




           A question has been raised concerning the juris-




diction of this conference over intrastate Ohio waters.




The conferees agreed to present this question to the




Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare and the Governor




of Ohio for clarification and resolution.








                       *****

-------
                     G. Eagle






           MR. STEIN:  Are there any comments or questions




from the conferees?




           A VOICE FROM THE AUDIENCE:  Mr. Stein, may I




ask a question?




           MR. STEIN:  No, just the conferees.  If Ohio




wishes their participants later, we will be glad to hear




from them.




           MR. POSTON:  I noted under the industrial data




comments on Page 6, that you said that it is expected that




full conformity with Item 17 will be attained in the next




six months to a year.




           We have had difficulty getting information




relative to industrial waste discharges as to the quantities




from individual sewers and the analysis of these particular




data.




           Would you say now that in six months' time we




would be able to get full industrial data in the Lake Erie



Basin portion or Ohio portion of the Lake Erie Basin?




           MR. EAGLE:  Well, even in less time than that,




Mr. Poston.




           I think we are pretty well satisfied as far as




the requirements for the comprehensive survey group are




concerned, at least.




           As to the data on the Maumee Basin, there are

-------
                     G. Eagle




just a couple of little details to be worked out.  I don't



anticipate any trouble here.




           We are in the process of getting it  on the




Cuyahoga now, and some of this is already coming in,  so I




would say that we could have this to you well within  the




six-month period.




           MR. POSTON:  Well,  in regard to the  Cuyahoga




River Basin,  we have not been satisfied with industrial




waste information.   It just hasn't been there.




           MR. EAGLE:  Well, I don't know whether we  have




gotten into the complete detail of this.




           You have requested us -- and we are  now in the




process of clearing this with the industries and getting




it made available to you.




           As I say, we are supposed to have this completed




well within the six-month period.  Frankly, most of this




approach has  been more in the discussion stage  rather than




in a stage of actually submitting figures and data.




           MR. STEIN:  I wonder if I may clarify this




before we go  to Mr. Quigley, because I have been getting




correspondence on this.




           Mr. Poston, I have seen letters back and forth




where you have asked for data.  Are you satisfied with the




data you are getting from Ohio?

-------
                                                    442
                     G. Eagle

           MR. POSTON:  Well, we don't have any data on

the Cuyahoga River on industrial —

           MR. STEIN:  Wastes.

           MR. POSTON:  Industrial wastes.

           MR. STEIN:  Have you asked for it?

           MR. POSTON:  Yes, sir.  We have asked both the

industries and the State for this information.

           MR. STEIN:  Well, I think the question here is,

if this is so, can Mr. Poston expect to get this data?

           MR. EAGLE:  Yes, sir.

           MR. STEIN:  When?

           MR. EAGLE:  As I claim, we are in the process of

getting it for you.

           MR. STEIN:  When?  Do you have any dates of when

he can expect this to be?

           MR. EAGLE:  Well, within the six-month period, as

I said in the report here, and I would hope that within

two or three months we will be able to give him at least

90 percent of it.

           We may have to go out and get some more informa-

tion ourselves, but I would expect that we could satisfy

this within a relatively short time.

           MR. STEIN:  Mr. Quigley?

           MR. QUIGLEY:  Mr. Stein, I would merely like to

comment,  in Secretary Udall's absence, I am almost certain

-------
                       G. Eagle




I know the man well enough to know that If he were here In




the afternoon session and heard this colloquy, that he




would have said -- at least, I am assuming he would have




said, and he can contradict me if I am wrong, but I don't




think I am -- if he is looking ror candidates for his




lists of filthy industry, it seems to me that you would




have some likely nominees.




         It seems to me that any industry that won't




come clean and reveal the facts, whether they are pleasant




or unpleasant, deserves the full focus of sharp public




attention.  This I think Secretary Udall made clear this



morning.  He intends to focus public attention on any




industry or any city that just won't face up to its




responsibility in this area.



         Now, I am new on this particular assignment.  I




don't know the details of any discussion.  I don't know what




the holdups might be.  But I think it is only fair to serve




notice on any industries in the State of Ohio or anywhere




else in the Basin involved in this Meeting, or, for that




matter, anywhere else in the country, that won't cooperate that




you give us little or no choice but to go one of two ways: l)




the way the Secretary referred to today, and that is to ask




the Congress to give us additional legislative authority for




plant inspection and the right of entry,or 2) the full force

-------
                                                    444



                       G. Eagle




of public attention.




         We will do it either way, but I don't think




anybody should have any doubt when the Meeting breaks up




that we are going to do it.




         We have to know what the facts are.  We have to




know what the pollution situation is before we can




intelligently move to spell out a proper, sound, corrective




timetable.  I think the time has come -- and, in case




anybody doesn't realize that it has, the purpose of my




remarks at this point in the record is to make it clear




-- we are going to quit fooling around.




         We want the facts, nothing but the facts -- the




hard or unpleasant ones as well as the glowing ones.  This




is the only way that we can accomplish the job.




         Having just returned from a luncheon cruise on the




Cuyahoga, I am fascinated by the fact, Mr. Eagle, that on




Page 6 of your report you indicate, "It may be of interest



to the conferees to know that the major industries,




municipalities and counties in the Cuyahoga River Basin




formed a committee about two years ago ... and the major




functions of this committee are: (l)  To determine existing




river water quality;  (which I could answer for them right




now on the basis of an hour and a half's exposure) (2) To

-------
                       G. Eagle




determine the causes of changes in water quality;   (I think




I could pretty near write that part of the report in five or




ten minutes)  (3)  To determine the treatment or control




requirements necessary to upgrade and maintain water




quality for all reasonable and legitimate uses..."




         It seems to me that any treatment would auto-




matically result in the upgrading of the quality of a




river such as the Cuyahoga.




         Then there is the fourth function.   This  one, I



confess, I am not able to answer off the top of my head.




This may be why it has taken two years for the committee to




report, but the fourth assignment is:  "To determine the




cost of such requirements."




         Now, I would be frankly interested in knowing --




and I think it ought to be spread on the record -- the make-




up of this committee; who is serving as its chairman; when



was the last time it met; and when is a report of the kind




that has been referred to here likely to be forthcoming?




         1 think it is important that if an industrial




committee, a committee made up of public officials, represent-




ing the counties and the municipalities in that river basin,




were formed two years ago, that it is almost time for at




least a preliminary report.




         Now, how would we go about finding out if the

-------
                     G. Eagle




committee is still functioning and if a report has ever




been made and if it is likely to be made.  If it is, how




might the conferees become privy to it?




           MR. EAGLE:  Well, Mr. Quigley, the committee is




made up by representatives of principal industries.  Mr.




Charles Loundsbury, who is the manager of the duPont Company




here in Cleveland, is the chairman of this committee.  Mr.




Walter Godell, who is the Director of the Water Pollution




Control Agency here in the City of Cleveland, is a member,




as well as a representative from Akron and the other major




cities in the Basin.  There are some sanitary engineers




who are members of this committee.




           They have met as recently as a month ago.  They




have several subcommittees that are at work and meet some-




times two or three times a month for a considerable time.




           They have made an intensive sampling program of




the river, and perhaps will do another one or two after




they have been able to evaluate this information.




           Frankly, this is a very complex situation.  We




have many different types of industries that are discharging




in a rather limited stretch of water here in the Cleveland




area, and they are trying to evaluate the problem and then




to come up with a program, each industry come up with a




program,  which will be reviewed by the other people, the

-------
                       G. Eagle




experts, because they are all affected,  to see if this




would be adequate to Improve the water,  which In their




opinion would suffice so far as the best Interests of the




public are concerned.




         Now, this is admittedly an industry-municipal




committee, and while this information will be helpful to




the State, it certainly is not going to  influence our best



judgment and consideration.




         This is simply a collection of  information and




the making of recommendations that  would be of assistance.




We propose within the year, of course, to hold hearings here




at Cleveland, to set up water quality criteria and standards




for Lake Erie as well as the Cuyahoga River,  which is an




influencing tributary of Lake Erie.  I think this will be



laid out on the table and the Water Pollution Control Board




will make a decision which will be  forwarded to you for your




approval with respect to the quality of  the water we expect




to have in the Cuyahoga River, and  how soon we expect to




attain this.




         MR. QUIGLEY:  What did you say  the chairman's




name was?



         MR. EAGLE: Mr. Charles Loundsbury, who is the




manager of the duPont Company in Cleveland, Ohio.




         MR. QUIGLEY:  Let me ask you one other question

-------
                                                     448
                     G. Eagle
on a slightly different phase.
           I fioticed the several letters that Dr, Arnold
has sent out to the municipalities.  I haven't had a chance
to go through the appendix of the report in detail, but
I am assuming comparable letters were sent to industrial
polluters who are not now in full compliance with the
terms of the permit,.  What can the State of Ohio do at the
present time if a city, or, for that matter, an industry
fails to meet the terms which you attach to granting a
permit?
           MR. EAGLE:  The Water Pollution Control Board
conducts a show-cause hearing why the permit should not be
denied, and if the permit is denied and we do not obtain
compliance within the specified legal limits established,
then it is referred to the courts.
           MR. QUIGLEY:  And what, may I ask as a lawyer,
with full respect intended for the bench, can the courts do?
           MR. EAGLE:  The courts can fine the responsible
officials.
           MR. QUIGLEY:  Have they done this?
           MR. EAGLE:  No, sir, they have not done this.
We have closed down some industries because of very flagrant
violations for limited times so they could make the necessary
improvements.

-------
                     G. Eagle




           This has been done by order of the Board,  and




while we have not tested this in the courts,  they did comply




with the cease-and-desist order.




           In the case of municipalities,  we  find our most




effective weapon to date to be a freeze on any additionaj.




building or any additional connections to the sewer system




which are tributary to an already inadequate, overloaded




plant, or no plant in some cases.  Of course, placing a




building freeze on this has brought results faster than




most any other action.




           MR. QUIGLEY:  How long has Ohio had the permit




system?




           MR. EAGLE:  Since 1951.




           MR. QUIGLEY:  I have no further questions.




           MR. STEIN:  Are there any other comments or




questions?




           (No response. )




           MR. STEIN:  I have one just for clarification.




           You talked about completion in 1970 and 1971 of




plants at Cleveland and Akron.  Can we sort those out?




Which one is 1970, and which one is 1971?




           MR. EAGLE:  I think we would have to go back to




the tables,  Mr. Stein.  I am not sure what we do say on the




tables.  They are on the Cuyahoga River Basin, and we have

-------
                                                     450





                     G. Eagle




a lot of things in this index, Appendix II.




           I would stress, Mr. Stein,  that as to both of




these cities we are talking about, they have secondary




treatment plants now,




           MR. STEIN:  Well, not all of the plants in




Cleveland are secondary, are they, Mr. Eagle?




           MR. EAGLE:  Yes, but this is the one I am talking




about in this connection.




           Now, I didn't give you a detailed breakdown on




Cleveland here.  I think maybe you will find it back under




the Cuyahoga River Basin.




           MR. STEIN:  The reason I am asking, and I think




this is a relatively vital question, is if we are going




to establish a time-table for the clean-up of major dis-




charges into Lake Erie, I think the question of whether




you are proposing that Cleveland be completed in 1970 or



1971 assumes some significant proportions.




           MR. EAGLE:  Yes.  Under the Cleveland breakdown




you will note that as to westerly plant, which is now a



primary plant, we are scheduled to have a report and




general plan this year in September, which will outline




what needs to be done and set up a schedule for these




improvements.   jn our discussions with the c'ity officials




in Cleveland, we anticipate that this  will take two to three

-------
                                                      451




                     G.  Eagle




years, and therefore will be well ahead  of this  1970 and




1971 date.




           MR. STEIN:  In other words, you think Cleveland




can be all completed and In operation by 1970?




           MR. EAGLE:  Well, so far  as secondary treatment




is concerned,  yes,  sir;  but all of these plants  constantly




need enlargement and improvement. This  is what  we  have




pointed out with the 1970 and 1971 dates.




           MR. STEIN:  I understand  that,  but will  they be




in compliance  with the recommendations of the conferees?




           MR. EAGLE:  Yes, sir.  So far as secondary




treatment is concerned,  yes, sir.




           MR. STEIN:  I don't have  any  further  questions.




Are there any other questions?




           (No response.)




           MR. STEIN:  If not, thank you very much  for Ohio.




           I have just one comment.  I didn't want  to spend



time this morning on commendations.  One is for  Michigan.




As I say, I don't think your record  is so bad.




           How many individual sources did you have up




there — 37?



           MR. OEMING:  36 individual waste disposers.




           MR. STEIN:  They got compliance on 35.  That  is




only one off.   From our experience with  a lot of enforcement

-------
                     G. Eagle




cases, I think that is a pretty good record of stipulations




with 35.



           We have heard from the Federal installations.




Of course,  we have that one outside the BasJn, but in the




Basin they are all going.  One is a little behind, but that




is going too.  I think that is pretty good.




           I have been dealing with Ohio for many years,




and they have with us.  I hope we are getting more friendly




all the time, but this is certainly the most optimistic




report I have heard from Ohio, and I think we are talking




the same language.




           MR. EAGLE:  Thank you.




           MR. STEIN:  I think this is very good.




           I wonder if we can go on to Indiana?

-------
                                                   453



                     B. A.  Poole









           STATEMENT OP BLUCHER A.  POOLE,  CONFEREE




           AND TECHNICAL SECRETARY,  INDIANA STREAM




           POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD









           MR. POOLE:  Commissioner  Quigley,  Chairman Stein,




Fellow Conferees and Ladies and Gentlemen:




           Shortly after the August  19^5 conference,  the




State of Indiana mailed a copy of the conclusions and




recommendations to each municipality which had a sewer




system, and to each industry that maintained  a separate




outlet into the Indiana waters of the Lake Erie Basin.




           With that letter of transmittal, we checked the




various items of the conclusions of  the conferees that




applied to the particular installation under discussion,




and requested action to comply with  the conferees' recom-




mendations .




           There follows a very brief summary of the  situa-




tion insofar as Indiana is concerned.




           1.  All municipalities with sewer systems  have




secondary sewage treatment works in  operation.




           2.  The City of Fort Wayne has submitted a




request for a Federal grant to construct a pilot plant to




reduce phosphates in the waste water treatment plant.  The

-------
                     B. A. Poole




Federal Water Pollution Control Administration has not as




yet acted on the request of the city.




           I might add here that there have been various




and sundry efforts made in the Fort Wayne sewage treatment




plant during the past several months by way of altering




operation procedures to see what could be accomplished in




the way of phosphate removal with the addition of silting,




and I believe everybody requires a modern activated sludge




plant.




           Unfortunately, there at Fort Wayne, we have not




had too much luck.  That is, the average phosphate removals




have been in the neighborhood of perhaps 12, 15 and maybe




some 20 percent, but certainly not to the point that was




indicated insofar as the problem in Lake Erie is concerned,




           I am hopeful that we can go forward at Fort




Wayne with this pilot project, which is in the middle.




           3.  The City of Garrett advised the Board it will




install effluent chlorination facilities and the City of




£uburn has included such facilities in its expansion program




to protect the Fort Wayne public water supply souce.  The




Cities of Fort Wayne and New Haven have not been requested




to install effluent chlorination facilities pending the




establishment of water quality criteria and a determination




of water uses for the Maumee River.

-------
                                                      455
                     B. A. Poole

           i might point out that we are in touch with

Ohio., and under the Water Quality Act of 1965, Ohio will be

holding its hearings, I think perhaps a little before

Indiana, with respect to water quality criteria for the

Maumee, but I can assure you that these will be worked

together and we will get into harmony.  If, as I anticipate,

it develops that there are body-contact water uses in Ohio

within the reach of Port Wayne and New Haven, I assure you

that the Indiana Board will require chlorination at these

facilities.

           4.  All industries requested to institute

effluent monitoring programs with the exception of Kitchen-

Quip, Inc., Waterloo, are now sampling or have agreed to

sample waste effluents.  These data are maintained in open

files.

           5.  Five industrial plants have improved or

constructed new treatment works since the conference in 1965

           6.  Of the 21 industrial plants in the basin,

thirteen have adequate waste control facilities and eight

need additional treatment works.

           I think, as I reported in August last year, that

the monitoring program in Indiana is very adequate for the

waters under consideration.  There are stations on the St.

Joe and St. Mary shortly after they enter the State of

-------
                                                        456
                     B.  A  Poole

Indiana, and there are two stations on the Maumee between

the City of Fort Wayne and the State line,

           70  Water quality data at highway 101 approxi-

mately two miles from the State line on the Maumee River

show the minimum dissolved oxygen was 5.3 mg/1 in 1965.

This indicates the Maumee River waters are of about as good

quality as presently known economic sewage treatment tech-

nology can provide, and  I would hasten to add, with the

exception of phosphates, which I have touched upon earlier,

and also with the exception of coliform, which I have

touched upon earlier.

           8.  The City of Port Wayne has a routine program

of patrolling three times each week all regulating chambers

at storm overflow points on the sewer system.  Less frequent

patrolling of storm overflows is carried out by the smaller

cities.

           9.  All cities are requiring separate storm and

sanitary sewers in newly-developed areas.

           I wish to point out the City of Fort Wayne has

under study the possibility of separation or some other

means of handling its storm overflow problems.

           10.  All municipalities have complied with the

suggested time-table as  all sewered communities in the basin

have secondary treatment facilities in operation.  All

-------
                     B.  A.  Poole




industrial plants will have adequate waste treatment  works




in operation on or before the suggested date of January 1,




1969, and I hope well in advance of that date of January 1,




1969.




           Now, Mr. Chairman, the rest  of the report  I can




read if you desire, but  in essence all  it does is document




very briefly the situation with respect to each sewered




municipality and with respect to each industry that maintains




an outlet into any of the Indiana waters of the Lake  Erie




Basin.




           I would suggest we dispense  with the reading,




but request that the entire report be entered in the  record.




           MR. STEIN:  It will be entered into the record




as if read, without objection.



           MR. FOOLE:  Thank you.









                   MAUMEE RIVER BASIN









Fort Wayne









           The City of Port Wayne is continuing effective




operation and maintenance of its sewage treatment facilities.




The  City is requiring sewer separation in newly-developed




urban areas and investigating feasibility in existing

-------
                B. A. Poole                             458




sewered areas.  The Board of Works has indicated that an




engineering study would be instituted to determine what




should be done to control pollution from existing combined




sewer systems.




            Recent monthly reports indicate daily BOD in




the effluent ranging from 10 to 35 mg/1 with monthly averages




less than 20 mg/1 and suspended solids ranging from 5 to 25




mg/1 with monthly averages less than 15 mg/1.




            The oity has tried various operational procedures




in an effort to obtain better phosphate removal; however, it




is removing about as much as it can with present iacilities.




Special laboratory analyses on 24-hour composite samples show




the following results for soluble phosphates in mg/1:




Raw Sewage      - Average - 14.5; Maximum - 30.4; Minimum - 3.2




Final Effluent  - Average - 13.3; Maximum - 31.6; Minimum - 2.8




            The city was considered by the Federal Water



Pollution Control Administration for a grant for a plant study



on phosphate removal in August  1965.  Some preliminary




meetings and tests have been conducted and an engineering




report prepared; however, approval of the project has not




been received.




            A private corporation is proposing the installation




of sanitary sewers in the fringe area east of Fort Wayne with




discharge of sewage and waste to the municipal sewage treatment

-------
                                                     459
                    B. A. Poole


plant for treatment.  These sewers would serve subdivisions


and commercial development and two or three major industries


in the area.


            The municipal water works has received final


plans and specifications for water works improvements which


include provisions for abating the discharge of waste lime


sludge from the water softening process to the Maumee River.




New Haven




            The city is providing effective operation of its


sewage treatment facilities.




BuHerman-Maumee River Plant
            Diversified Utilities, the private corporation


operating a 0.5 mgd plant serving a residential area east 01


Fort Wayne, has experienced difficulty in maintaining effective


operation during initial phases of start-up.  However, treat-


ment efficiency has improved and further improvement is


anticipated in the near future.




Salisbury Division, Dana Corporation, Fort Wayne


            Inspections and results from the effluent

-------
                       B. A. Poole                 460




monitoring program indicate that waste control is adequate.




The Corporation's effluent monitoring program has been in




effect for 13 years.








Essex Wire Corporation, Fort Wayne








            Inspections and effluent data indicate that




additional waste treatment is needed.  Expansion of the waste




treatment facilities and additions to the effluent monitoring




program have been requested.








Franke Plating Works, Inc., Fort Wayne








            Inspections and results of effluent monitoring




program indicate that additional treatment of metallic ions




and cyanide is needed.  Expansion of the waste treatment




facilities and effluent monitoring program has been requested.








General Plating and Engineering, Inc., Fort Wayne_








            Inspections and effluent data indicate that




treatment of cyanide wastes and heavy metals is needed.  This




is a small job shop and expansion of treatment facilities and




the effluent monitoring program have been requested.

-------
                    B. A. Poole                        461




Gladieux Oil Refinery, Inc., Fort Wayne








            Inspections and effluent data indicate that



waste control is generally satisfactory.  In-plant studies




are being made to locate and eliminate periodic oil spills.



An effluent monitoring program is being established.








ITT Federal Laboratories, Fort Wayne








            Effluent data and inspections indicate that



waste control is generally satisfactory.  In-plant studies



are being, made to locate and eliminate periodically  high



concentrations of heavy metals.  An effluent monitoring



program was initiated in March, 1966.








International Harvester Company, Fort Wayne








            During 1965* additional industrial wastes were



connected to the Fort Wayne sewerage system; however, the



results of the effluent monitoring program indicate that




additional waste control is needed.  In-plant studies are



being made to locate sources of waste for discharge to the



municipal sewerage system.  The company is planning to



purchase automatic samplers and expand the monitoring program,

-------
                    B. A. Poole                       462



Magnavox Company, Fort Wayne








            During 1965* improved housekeeping practices




were initiated and waste control was substantially improved.



Inspections indicate that waste control is adequate.  An



effluent monitoring program is being established.








Parrot Packing Company, Fort Wayne








            Parrot Packing Company, as a result of a hearing



scheduled by the Stream Pollution Control Board, agreed to



connect to the municipal sewer system.  The city has not



constructed the proposed interceptor.  The company is negotiat-




ing with the City of Port Wayne and a nearby utility regarding



connection to the Fort Wayne sewerage system or the utility



system for disposal of all wastes.  An effluent monitoring



program has been requested.








Phelps Dodge Copper Products Corporation, Fort Wayne








            During 1965* an acid neutralization and water



reuse system was installed on the copper wire pickle line.



Rinse water and remaining industrial wastes were connected



to the Fort Wayne sewerage system.  The results of the

-------
                     B. A. Poole                  463



effluent monitoring program and inspections indicate that




waste control is adequate.  In-plant studies and improved




housekeeping practices have been instituted to eliminate



periodically high concentrations of copper in the effluent.








Zollner Corporation, Fort Wayne








            Inspections and effluent data indicate that only



cooling waters are discharged to the receiving stream.  Sewage




is discharged to the Fort Wayne sewerage system.  The plant



has no industrial waste.








Shaw's Dressed Poultrya Grabill








            Inspections indicate that waste control is



adequate.  An effluent monitoring program was not required.








B. F. Goodrich Company! Woodburn








            The effluent data and Inspections indicate that



waste control is adequate.








              ST. JOSEPH RIVER BASIN

-------
                     B. A. Poole                    464




Avilla








            The waste stabilization ponds serving this



municipality were placed in operation in December, 1965.  This



was the last sewered community in the Maumee Basin in Indiana



without secondary treatment.








Auburn








            The city on January 11, 1966, sold a sewer revenue



bond issue of $2,285,000 to finance a sewage works project



which includes plant additions and effluent chlorination



(Federal grant of $411,900).  The city is Installing new




sanitary sewers in several sections of the city and eliminating



some combined sewers with the project now under construction.



Combined sewers are prohibited in all newly-developed areas.








But ler








            The city is providing effective operation of its



sewage treatment facilities.  The mayor advised, in reply to




this Board's letter of January 11, 1966, that sewer separation



was required in newly-developed areas.

-------
                   B. A. Poole                         465



Garrett








            The city is providing effective operation of its



sewage treatment facilities.  The mayor advised, in reply to




this Board's letter of January 11, 1966, that separate sewers



would be required in newly-developed areas and that effluent



chlorination would be instituted to protect the Fort Wayne




public water supply source.








Waterloo








            The town is providing effective operation of its



sewage treatment plant; however, one lift station is not in




effective operation due to surface and ground water problems.



The town has been requested to take action to improve this



situation.








Crane Edmund Corporation, Butler








            Inspections indicate that waste control is



satisfactory.  During 1965, a static rinse tank was installed



and housekeeping improved.  An Affluent monitoring program has



been established.

-------
                 B. A. Poole                466



Universal Tool and Stamping Company, Inc., Butler








            During 1965, a static rinse tank: was installed




following the zinc plating bath and cyanide dragout nas been




reduced considerably.  Inspections indicate that additional



waste control may be required.  A partial effluent monitoring




program has been established.  Expansion of the monitoring




program has been requested.








Kitchen-Quip, Inc., Waterloo








            Inspections indicate that treatment for plating



wastes is needed.  An effluent monitoring program has not



been established.








T. H. Products Corporation, Waterloo








            Inspections indicate that waste treatment is



satisfactory.  An effluent monitoring program was not required








Auburn Tankage Company, Auburn








            Inspections indicate that waste control is



adequate.   An effluent monitoring program was not required.

-------
                    B.  A.  Poole                           46?




County Line Cheese Company, Auburn








            Inspections Indicate that waste control is




adequate.  An effluent  monitoring program is being established.








Warner Motive Division, Borg Warner Corporation, Auburn








            An effluent monitoring program has been established




and will be expanded.  The results show high oil and suspended



solids in the effluent.  Extensive in-plant studies are being




made to locate and eliminate the source of oil and suspended



solids.








Sechler and Sons, Inc., St. Joe








            A partial effluent monitoring program has been



established.  Inspections and previous data show that additional



treatment is needed.  A consulting engineer has been employed



to prepare plans and specifications for waste treatment




facilities and plans have been submitted to the Stream Pollution



Control Board.








                      ST. MARY'S RIVER

-------
                    B. A. Poole                        468




Berne








            The city is providing fairly effective operation



of its waste stabilization ponds; however, the Stream Pollution



Control Board has suggested operational adjustments to improve




efficiency.  (The city was operating the two cells in



parallel.  Series operation was recommended.)








Decatur








            The city is providing effective operation of its



sewage works facilities.








Central Soya Company, Inc., Decatur








            Inspections and results of the effluent monitoring



program indicate that waste control is adequate.  The company's



effluent monitoring program has been in effect since December,



1964.

-------
                     B.  A.  Poole




            MR.  STEIN:   One  of the recommendations was,




 wasn't  it,  that all  the  municipalities have chlorination




 as  well as  secondary treatment?




            MR.  POOLE:  No.  The recommendation was that




 the municipalities that  have coliform counts in water




 intakes which exceed 5,000  per 100 milliliters, or for




 water that  is used for body contact sports which exceeds




 1,000 per  100 milliliters.




            MR.  STEIN:  You  have no water contact at all?




            MR.  POOLE:  I had asked my crew to take me down




 the Indiana portion  of the  Maurn?e last September.  We have




 a 14-foot boat  with  a 5-horsepower motor, and they said,




'You can't get down the river unless you want to drag the




 boat half-way," and I didn't want to be a party to that,




 so  we didn't make the trip.



            I don't think in the Indiana section there are




 body contact sports, knowing the characteristics of the




 river.   I don't know where  they start in Ohio, and this is




 the reason  that I indicated that if and when that is deter-




 mined,  why, we  will  hold up our end.




            MR.  STEIN:   £re  there any comments or queistions?




 If  not, thank you very much, Mr. Poole.




            MR.  QUIGLEY:  Mr. Stein?




            MR.  STEIN:   Yes.

-------
                                                    470
                     B. A. Poole

           MR.- QUIGLEY:  One question:  Before I am tempted

to make quick quips about Kitchen-Quip meeting its compli-

ance, why are they the one hoId-out?

           MR. POOLE:  I think possibly, Mr.  Quigley,

because they are a small installation.  They are way up

on the headwaters, and we probably just haven't breathed

down their neck as yet as much as we have some of the

others.

           It is one of these smaller industries where it

would be difficult to establish a sampling program and

make arrangements for laboratory facilities.   I don't  know

whether it is big enough to go on the Secretary's list.

           MR. QUIGLEY:  He might not want to discriminate.

He might want some small ones as well as some big ones.

           MR. STEIN:  As long as we are getting into  that

detail, let me raise another point with you.

           In Point 8 you state:

           "The City of Fort Wayne has a routine program

       of patrolling three times each week all regulating

       chambers at storm overflow points on the sewer

       system."

           This means whether it rains or not.  Is that

right?

           MR. POOLE:  This is correct.  Of course, you

-------
                                                     471
                     B.  A.  Poole

understand that in my opinion,  at least,  in our larger

cities — and I am talking  of cities of even lesser size

than Fort Wayne — from  there on up -- that the storm over-

flow problem is not necessarily confined  to periods of

rainfall.  You have periods of peak flow  and you have a

chunk that comes down the sewer, or this  or that thing, that

interferes with the diversion in the interceptor.

           My personal observation has been that many of

the problems associated  with storm overflows come at other

than times of rain, and  I think, as far as I said  in Fort

Wayne, that this every-other-day patrolling is a pretty

reasonable type of program, not perfect.

           MR. STEIN:  Thank you, Mr. Poole.  That implica-

tion was pretty clear to me, but I would  like to see it in

the record.

           Thank you.

           I wonder if we may call on Pennsylvania.

Mr. Lyon?

-------
                                                     472
                     W. A. Lyon
         STATEMENT OF WALTER A. LYON,  CONFEREE


         AND DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF SANITARY


         ENGINEERING, PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT


         OF HEALTH





           MR. LYON:  Mr. Chairman, Mr.  Commissioner,


Conferees:


           I am sorry I don't have too many copies of  this


report, but the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is happy  to


report that with the exception of Recommendation No. 8,  all


of Pennsylvania's waste sources are in essential compliance


with the recommendations of the last conference.


           Compliance with Recommendation No. 8 would


appear to be dependent, as we said this  morning, upon  the


findings and recommendations of the Technical Committee,


which I assume will continue its work.


           If you recall, of course, the assignment of


that committee included a request concerning the specific


levels of phosphate to be maintained in the lake, and


levels of phosphate or possibly other  nutrients to be


removed by waste sources.


           After your last conference  on September 15th,


a detailed report concerning the recommendations and

-------
                                                       473




                     W. A.  Lyon




conclusions of the conferees was given to the Pennsylvania




Sanitary Water Board.  The  Board took the necessary action




to implement those recommendations.




           Specifically, it was necessary to take action




on Recommendation No. 8, where we asked each of our




municipal waste sources to  conduct studies of their treat-




ment plants in order to determine what levels of phosphates




were being removed and what more could be done in order




to enhance phosphate removal.




           Now, our report  here, and I won't go into detail,




gives us the results of these.  Of course, the City of Erie




is our most important source of sewage.  It, like all of




our sewage sources, has complete or secondary treatment.




At this point, the phosphate reductions vary between 7.5




and 26.6, which is very low, but the city is planning to



conduct research studies in cooperation with our Pennsyl-




vania State University in order to see what can be done to




enhance this.




           I might also point out that as part of the




report on the abatement of Pennsylvania's industries, we




are going to have a brewery discharge to the Erie sewer




system, and I understand this will have a beneficial effect




on the removal of phosphates.  Maybe we should have more

-------
                                                      474
                     W. A. Lyon



breweries.



           Mr. Chairman,  I am skipping through the report,



but I would like to have  the entire report incorporated



into the record.



           MR. STEIN:  Without objection, the entire



report will be in the record as if read.



           MR. LYON:  Thank you.







"Mr. H. W. Poston                      May 26,  1966



Regional Program Director



Federal Water Pollution Control Administration



U. S. Department of the Interior



433 West Van Buren Street, Room 712



Chicago, Illinois 6060?



"Dear Mr. Poston:



           "With reference to your letter of May 16, 1966, I



am  happy to report that with the exception of Recommenda-



tion No. 8 all of Pennsylvania's waste sources are in



essential compliance with the recommendations of the Lake



Erie Conference.  Compliance with Recommendation No. 8



would appear to be dependent upon the findings and recom-



mendations of the Technical Committee appointed in accordance



with Recommendation No. 26.  If you recall, the assignment



of that committee included a request for a recommendation

-------
                                                        475
                     W.  A.  Lyon


"on phosphate  levels  to  be  maintained  in  the  Lake and waste


 effluents.


           "On September 15*  1965* a  detailed report

 concerning the recommendations and conclusions  of  the

 conferees was given  to  Pennsylvania's Sanitary  Water Board,


 and the Board took: the  necessary action  to implement those


 recommendations.   A  copy of the Board's  September  15 minutes


 is attached  for your information.

           " On May 18,  1966,  the Department  of  Health again


 reported to  the Sanitary Water Board  on  all  items  on which

 the Board found a need  to  take action in September 1965.  I am

 attaching a copy  of  the Department's  report  to  the Board, and

 I believe that this  material  will provide you with the  informa-


 tion you need to  inform you of Pennsylvania's action to

 implement the recommendations of the  conference.


           "If you need any further information concerning

 this matter,  please  do  not hesitate to contact  me.

                           Sincerely  yours,

 Att.                      C. L. Wilbar, Jr., M. D.


 RS #168                   Secretary  of  Health"
                           * * *

-------
                    W.  A.  Lyon                    4?6



                                   Vol.  44-5




                                   May 18-19,  1966








II.  Section Section -  Items for the Board's Information



     1.  At Its September 1965 meeting the Sanitary Water



         Board took action to Implement  recommendations made



         at the conference called under  the enforcement




         provisions of  the Federal Water Pollution Control



         Act convened on August 10, 1965 to consider inter-



         state portions of Lake Erie and its tributaries.



         The staff was  directed to report to the  Board  in six




         months on steps taken to comply with the recommendations



         of the conferees.




         Recommendations of the conferees requiring action  by



         the Board and  the steps taken to comply  with the



         Board's action are as follows:



         RECOMMENDATION 8.  Secondary treatment plants  be  so



            designed and operated as to  maximize  the removal



            of phosphates.



         Board Action;   That municipalities in the Lake Erie



            Basin that  have significant  sewage discharges be



            notified to:




                1.   Conduct a study to determine  the present



                    degree of phosphate  removal and  the type




                    of  operation of the  present treatment works

-------
            W.  A.  Lyon                        4?7




        that will  provide maximum phosphate removals




        and,




   2.   Report  to  the Board within six months.




Report:  Letters were directed to the Boroughs of




   North East,  Girard, Albion and Lake City and the




   City of Erie.  A summary of the replies follows:




   1.  North East  - Tests to determine phosphate




       reduction at the Borough sewage treatment plant




       were conducted from November 1965 through March




       1966.  No consistent phosphate removal was




       achieved; however, removals of up to 5^ were




       recorded.




   2.  Girard - Results of tests made from December




       1965 through February 1966 indicate that the




       Borough sewage treatment plant was removing



       approximately 3C$ of the phosphate load on the




       plant.  The design of the plant makes it im-




       possible to vary the existing flow pattern in




       an effort to improve phosphate removal.




   3.  Albion - Initiated tests recently, has not




       enough data to submit a meaningful report to




       the Board.




   4.  Lake City - Tests conducted from November 19&5




       through March  1966 indicate phosphate removal

-------
           W. A. Lyon




       approaching 50$ i  Plant renovations were




       completed in February 1966 improving phosphate




       reductions and permitting revisions in the




       plant flow pattern which could be made in an




       attempt to improve phosphate removals.




   5.  City of Erie - Tests conducted in February and




       March 1966, indicate phosphate reductions of




       7.Jfo and 26.6$, respectively.  Studies are in




       progress to improve phosphate removal while




       retaining the present general flow pattern in




       the plant.  The city has been in contact with




       Dr. Nesbitt of the Pennsylvania State University




       who is conducting pilot plant studies on phos-




       phate removals at the university sewage treat-




       ment plant.  When these studies are complete a




       feasibility study will be made for phosphate




       removals at the Erie sewage treatment plant.




RECOMMENDATION 11.  Combined storm and sanitary sewers




   be prohibited in all newly developed urban areas,




   and eliminated in existing areas wherever feasible.




   Existing combined sewer systems be patrolled and




   flow-regulating structures adjusted to convey the




   maximum practicable amount of combined flows to




   and through sewage treatment plants.

-------
            W. A. Lyon                        479






Board Action;  That the City of Erie be notified to:



   1.  Report on its program of patrolling flow




       regulating structures to assure that the



       maximum practicable amount of combined flow



       is directed to the sewage treatment plant.



   2.  Report on any programs the city is considering



       for the elimination of combined sewers.




   3.  Report to the Board within three months.



Report :  The City of Erie in a letter dated December



   9, 1965* reported that the city has made an overall




   study of the cost of eliminating its combined



   sewer system.  The estimated cost of this project




   is $22 million.  The city has begun separation of



   storm and sanitary sewers in redevelopment areas.



   Complete separation of storm and sanitary sewers



   in the 12 block: Liberty-Sassafrass redevelopment



   area has been completed.  A second project in the



   downtown area is now under design.  The city  is



   investigating methods of financing the cost of




   complete separation of storm and sanitary sewers.



   The city has  instituted a program of patrolling



   flow regulating structures.  Personnel inspect



   flow regulating structures on a regular basis,

-------
            W. A. Lyon                  480




   adjust and make necessary repairs to the




   structures to prevent overflows except during




   periods of heavy combined flow.




RECOMMENDATION 12.  Programs be developed to prevent




   accidental spills of waste materials to Lake Erie




   and its tributaries.  In-plant surveys with the




   purpose of preventing accidents are recommended.




Board Action:  That a letter be directed to all




   industries in the Lake Erie Basin notifying them of




   the conferees' conclusion, asking them for a report




   of the measures that their company now takes or has




   taken to implement such a recommendation.




Report;  Letters were directed to 5^ industrial




   establishments in the Erie Basin asking for a




   report on measures now being taken to prevent




   accidental spills of waste materials to Lake Erie




   and its tributaries.  Replies were received from




   approximately half of the establishments to which




   letters were directed.  In all cases the replies




   indicated that steps were being taken to prevent




   accidental spills.  Replies were received from all




   industrial establishments which we feel could have




   a significant effect on Lake Erie.  The Clean




   Streams Law and the Sanitary Water Board Rules

-------
            W. A. Lyon                      48l



   and Regulations specifically prohibit discharges




   of this type.



RECOMMENDATION 14.  Disposal of garbage, trash, and




   other deleterious refuse in Lake Erie or its



   tributaries be prohibited and existing dumps along




   river banks and shores of the Lake be removed.



Board Action:  The Board requests the Department of




   Health to conduct a survey of existing dumps in the



   Pennsylvania portion of the Basin and, if there are



   any, take action to stop them immediately,



Report;  In November 1965* the Department of Health



   conducted a survey of all known solid waste disposal



   sites in the City and County of Erie.  Participating




   in the survey were representatives of the State



   Department of Health, U. S. Public Health Service



   and the Erie County Department of Health.  A total



   of 19 sites were visited, of these nine (9) were



   found to be contributing to the pollution of



   tributaries of Lake Erie.  Recommendations were



   made to close five (5) sites and to convert four




   (4) sites into satisfactory sanitary landfill opera-



   tions.  The landfill operations in Erie County are



   being kept under close surveillance to insure that



   water pollution from sanitary landfills is abated



   and prevented.

-------
           W. A. Lyon                     482




RECOMMENDATION 17.  The Michigan, Indiana, Ohio,




   Pennsylvania and New York: Water Pollution Control



   Agencies undertake action to insure that industrial




   plants discharging wastes into waters of Lake Erie




   and its tributaries within their respective juris-




   dictions institute programs of sampling their




   effluent to provide necessary information about




   waste outputs.  Such sampling shall be conducted




   at such locations and with such frequency as to




   yield statistically reliable values of all wastes




   outputs and to show their variations.  Analyses



   to be so reported are to include where applicable:



   pH, oil, tarry residues, phenolics, ammonia, total




   nitrogen, cyanide, toxic materials, total bio-




   chemical oxygen demand, and all other substances



   listed in the preceding paragraph.



Board Action;  The Board requests the Department of



   Health to review the adequacy of its industrial



   waste data on effluents from industries in the



   Pennsylvania portion of the Lake Erie Basin and



   within the next six months obtain any needed informa-



   tion suggested by the conferees.




Report;  The Department has reviewed information on




   file on industrial waste effluents to the Pennsyl-



   vania portion of the Lake Erie Basin and has found

-------
                 W. A. Lyon                        483




       that this information adequately describes the



       quality of these discharges.



2.  The Blue Coal Corporation has continued to discharge




    in accordance with the approved schedule of Glen Alden



    Corporation.




    During the period from April 5, 1966, to May 2, 1966,




    the pool elevation of the #5 South Wilkes-Barre Shaft




    was lowered 10 feet to 172.0 feet.  This is approximate-




    ly 108 feet below the critical elevation at which the



    Department of Mines and Mineral Industries would order




    the miners out of the adjacent workings.



    The range of flow at the Wilkes-Barre Gag;ing Station




    for the period April 5, 1966, to' May 3, 1966, has been




    9930 CFS to 36,500 CFS.



    The river has retained its alkalinity during this



    period.  There were no reported flush-outs of precipi-



    tated iron salts.



3.  Mineral Preparation Waste Regulations.



    We are planning to meet with representatives of the




    bituminous and anthracite industry as soon as the



    transcripts of the April hearing on proposed mineral



    preparation waste regulations are received and have



    been studied.  We will report to the Board on the



    results of this meeting as soon as possible.

-------
                  W. A. Lyon                   484



3.  The first session of the Conference called under the



    enforcement provisions of the Federal Water Pollution



    Control Act to consider pollution of Lake Erie was




    held in Cleveland, Ohio, August 3-6, 1965.  At that



    time pollution of Lake Erie and tributaries of Lake



    Erie in Michigan, Indiana and Ohio was discussed.



    The Conference was reconvened on August 10 in Buffalo,




    New York.  Testimony lasted two days at this session



    of the Conference.  The conferees met the third day



    to consider recommendations and conclusions.  Dr.



    Wilbar's testimony was given at the August 10 session



    in Buffalo.  A copy of Dr. Wilbar's testimony is on



    Pages 0.36 through 0.39.  Although the Public Health



    Service report on Lake Erie presented a pretty bleak




    picture of pollution control progress in the Pennsyl-



    vania portion of the Lake Erie Basin, the Public Health



    Service representatives stated in answers to questions



    that the Pennsylvania municipalities and industries



    have done a good job in pollution abatement in the



    Lake Erie Basin.  It was apparent from the testimony



    that the States of Michigan, Ohio and New York have



    some severe water quality problems, especially around




    the heavily populated areas such as Detroit, Cleveland



    and Buffalo.  Listed below are the recommendations

-------
                        W. A. Lyon

            and  conclusions of the conferees.  After  each

            recommendation we have listed  Department  comments  and

            recommendations, where appropriate, as  to action the

            Board  should take to  implement the recommendations

            and  conclusions of the conferees.


       RECOMMENDATIONS  AND CONCLUSIONS  OP  CONFEREES*

            LAKE ERIE ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE

            1.   The waters of Lake Erie within the  United States

                are interstate waters within the meaning of Section

                8  of the Federal  Water  Pollution Control Act.   The

                waters  of Lake Erie within the United States and

                its tributaries covered by sessions of  this con-

                ference are navigable waters within the meaning of

                Section 8 of the  Federal Water Pollution Control Act

                COMMENT:  No Sanitary Water Board action necessary.

            2.   Lake Erie and many of its  tributaries are polluted.

                The main body of  the Lake  has deteriorated in

                quality at a rate many  times greater  than its

                normal  aging processes, due to inputs of wastes

                resulting from the activities of man.

                COMMENT:  No Sanitary Water Board action necessary.

            3.   Identified pollutants contributing  to damages  to

                water uses in Lake Erie are sewage  and  industrial

 *Representatives  of:   Indiana, Michigan,  New York, Ohio,
Pennsylvania and U. S.  Department of Health, Education, and Welfare

-------
           W.  A.  Lyon                        486




   wastes, oils,  silts, sediment, floating solids and




   nutrients (phosphates and nitrates).  Enrichment



   of Lake Erie,  caused by man-made contributions of



   nutrient materials, is proceeding at an alarming



   rate.  Pollution in Lake Erie and many of its



   tributaries causes significant damage to recreation.




   commercial fishing, sport fishing, navigation,




   water supply and esthetic values.



   COMMENT:  No Sanitary Water Board action necessary.



4. Euthrophication or over-fertilization of Lake Erie




   is of major concern.  Problems are occurring along



   the lake shoreline at some water intakes and



   throughout the lake from algal growths stimulated




   by nutrients.   Reduction of one or more of such



   nutrients will be beneficial in controlling algal



   growths and euthrophication.




   COMMENT:  No Sanitary Water Board action necessary.



5. Many sources of waste discharge reaching Lake Erie



   have inadequate waste treatment facilities.  The



   delays in controlling this pollution are caused by



   the lack of such adequate facilities and the complex




   municipal, industrial, financial and biological



   nature of the  problem.




   COMMENT:  No Sanitary Water Board action necessary.

-------
          W.  A.  Lyon                       487




6.  Interstate pollution of Lake  Erie  exists.   Dis-




    charges into Lake Erie and  its tributaries from




    various sources are endangering the  health or




    welfare of persons in States  other than those in




    which such discharges originate, and in large




    measure this pollution is caused by  nutrients




    which over-fertilize the lake.  This pollution is




    subject to abatement under the Federal Water




    Pollution Control Act.




    COMMENT:  No Sanitary Water Board  action necessary.




7.  Municipal wastes be given secondary  treatment or




    treatment of such nature as to effectuate  the maxi-




    mum reduction of BOD and phosphates  as well as




    other deleterious substances.




    COMMENT:  Lake Erie and its tributary streams in




    Pennsylvania are presently classified as streams




    requiring treatment and all municipal sewage dis-




    charges are presently provided with secondary treat-




    ment. No Board action is necessary to implement




    this recommendation.




8.  Secondary treatment plants be so designed  and




    operated as to maximize the removal of phosphates.




    COMMENT:  Since all the municipal waste discharges




       in the Pennsylvania portion of the Basin now

-------
                                                   488
                   W. A. Lyon
     receive secondary treatment, some action should
     be taken to assure that these plants are operated
     to maximize the removal of phosphates.  As the
     conclusions indicate, the pollution found to be
     occurring in Lake Erie was caused by phosphates.
     The above recommendation was made by the PHS
     representatives and it was their thought that
     this maximized removal of phosphates be done
     with existing plants by changing methods of
     operation.  They did not contemplate at this
     time the construction of additional treatment units
     to remove phosphates.  There is some doubt as
     to what levels of phosphates can be removed by
     conventional secondary sewage treatment plants.
DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION;  That the Board notify the
     municipalities in the Lake Erie Basin that have
     significant sewage discharges to:
     (l)  Conduct a study to determine the present
          degree of phosphate removal and the type of
          operation of the present treatment works that
          will provide maximum phosphate rem'ovals and,
     (2)  Report to the Board within six months.
BOARD ACTION:  Motion Jones, seconded Bielo, unanimously
          carried,  the Board adopted the Department
          recommendation.

-------
             W.  A.  Lyon                      489




 9.   Disinfection of municipal waste  effluents be




     practiced  in a manner that will  maintain coliform




     concentrations not to exceed  5*000  organisms  per




     100 ml at  public water supply intakes,  and not  to




     exceed 1,000 organisms per 100 ml where and when




     the receiving  waters in proximity to  the discharge




     point  are  used for recreational  purposes involving




     bodily contact.  It  is recognized that  bathing




     water  quality  standards are established by statute




     in New York: State.




     COMMENT:  The  Sanitary Water  Board  now  requires




        chlorination of all sewage effluents in the




        Lake Erie Basin.   Beach 11 at Erie periodically




        has coliform levels exceeding 1,000  organisms




        per 100 ml.  The Department of Health is  in  the




        process of studying this problem and no further




        Board action is necessary  at  this  time,.




        We  will report to the Board on this  matter as




        soon as our study is complete.




10.   All new sewerage facilities be designed to prevent




        the necessity of bypassing untreated waters.




     COMMENT:  The Board now requires this and no




        further action is necessary.




11.   Combined storm and sanitary sewers  be prohibited

-------
           W.  A.  Lyon                   490




       in all  newly developed urban areas,  and  elimina-




       ted in  existing areas wherever feasible.




       Existing combined sewer systems be patrolled




       and flow-regulating structures adjusted  to




       convey  the maximum practicable amount  of




       combined flows to and through sewage treatment




       plants,




    COMMENT:  The Board now prohibits the construction




       of combined storm and sanitary sewers  and  no




       Board action is necessary on this portion  of




       the recommendation.  The following recommenda-




       tion deals with the existing combined  sewers  in




       Erie.




DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION;  That the City of  Erie




    be notified to —




    (l)  Report on its program of patrolling  flow




       regulating structures to assure that the maximum




       practicable amount of combined flow is directed




       to the  sewage treatment plant.




    (2)  Report on any programs the city is considering




       for the elimination of combined sewers.




    (3)  Report to the Board within three months.




BOARD ACTION;   Motion Charmbury, seconded Sheffler,




    unanimously carried, the Board adopted the




    Department Recommendation.

-------
           W.  A.  Lyon                      491




12.  Program be developed  to prevent  accidental spills




    of waste materials  to  Lake  Erie and  its tributaries




    In-plant surveys  with  the purpose of preventing




    accidents are recommended.




    DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION:   (l)   That a letter be




       directed to all  industries  in  the Lake Erie




       Basin notifying  them of  the conferees con-




       clusion, asking  them for a  report of the




       measures that  their company now takes or has




       taken to implement  such  a recommendation.




    BOARD ACTION;  Motion  Pierce,  seconded Jones,




       unanimously carried, the Board adopted tne




       Department Recommendation.




13.  Unusual increases  in  waste output and accidental




    spills be reported  immediately to the appropriate




    State agency.



    COMMENT:  The Board already requires this and no




    further action is necessary.




14.  Disposal of garbage,  trash, and  other deleterious




    refuse in Lake Erie or its  tributaries be pro-




    hibited and existing dumps  along  river banks and




    shores of the lake  be  removed.




    COMMENT:  The Board already prohibits such  dis-




    charges into the  waters of  the Commonwealth.

-------
          W.  A.  Lyon




    DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION;   The  Board  requests  the




       Department  of Health to  conduct  a survey  of




       existing dumps in the Pennsylvania  portion of




       the Basin and, if there  are any,  take  action




       to stop them immediately.




    BOARD ACTION;   Motion Bielo, seconded  Jones,




       unanimously carried, the Board  adopted the




       Department  Recommendation.




15.   The conferees met with representatives of Federal,




    State and local officials responsible  for agri-




    cultural, highway and community  development  programs




    for the purpose of supporting  satisfactory programs




    for the control of runoff which  deleteriously




    affects water quality in Lake  Erie.




    COMMENT:   No Board action necessary.




16.   Industrial plants improve  practices for  the




    segregation and treatment of waste  to  effect the




    maximum reductions of the following:




    (a)  Acids and alkalies




    (b)  Oil  and tarry substances




    (c)  Phenolic  compounds and organic  chemicals that




       contribute  to taste




    (d)  Ammonia and other nitrogenous  compounds




    (e)  Phosphorus compounds

-------
                W.  A  Lyon             493




    (f)   Suspended  materials



    (g)   Toxic  and  highly-colored  wastes




    (h)   Oxygen-demanding  substances



    (i)   Excessive  heat



    (j)   Foam-producing  discharges



    (k)   Other  wastes  which detract from  recreational



      uses,  esthetic  enjoyment, or other beneficial




      uses  of  the  waters.



    COMMENT:  The Board  already requires  maximum




    reductions  of the  wastes  indicated and  no  further



    Board actions are  necessary.




17.   The Michigan,  Indiana, Ohio,  Pennsylvania and



    New  York Water  Pollution  Control  Agencies  undertake



    action to insure that  industrial  plants discharging



    wastes into waters of  Lake Erie and  its tributaries



    within their respective jurisdictions institute



    programs of sampling their effluent  to  provide



    necessary information  about waste outputs.  Such



    sampling shall  be conducted at such  locations and




    with such frequency as to yield  statistically



    reliable values of all wastes  outputs and  to show



    their variations.   Analyses to be so reported are



    to include  where applicable:   pH, oil,  tarry



    residues, phenolics, ammonia,  total  nitrogen,

-------
           W.  A.  Lyon                      494



    cyanide, toxic materials,  total biochemical oxygen



    demand, and all other substances listed in the



    preceding  paragraph.



    COMMENT:  At  the present time the files of the




       Department of Health include information on




       industrial waste effluents in the Basin; however,



       this information should be reviewed in light of




       the conferees' recommendation.



    DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION;  The Board requests the




       Department of Health to review the adequacy of



       its industrial waste data on effluents from




       industries in the  Pennsylvania portion of the



       Lake Erie  Basin and within the next six months




       obtain  any needed  information suggested by the



       conferees.



    BOARD ACTION;  Motion Sheffler, seconded Bielo,



       unanimously carried, the Board adopted the



       Department Recommendation.



18.  Waste results be reported in terms of both



    concentrations and load rates.  Such information



    will be maintained in open files by the State




    agencies for  all those having a legitimate interest



    in the information.



    COMMENT:  The information obtained by the Health

-------
            W.  A.  lyon                    495



       Department  in connection with the Recommendation




       17 would be maintained  in open files under




       existing policies.   No  Board  action is  necessary.




19.  The Department of Health, Education, and  welfare




    establish water pollution  surveillance stations at




    appropriate locations  on Lake Erie.   Surveillance




    of the tributaries will be the primary responsi-




    bility of the  States.   The Department of Health,




    Education,  and Welfare will assist the States at




    such times  as  requested.




    COMMENT:  No Board action  is necessary.




20.  The Department of Health, Education, and  Welfare




    will be responsible for developing up-to-date




    information and experience concerning effective




    phosphate removal and  control of combined  sewer




    systems.  This information will  be reported to




    the conferees  regularly.




    COMMENT:  No Board action  is necessary.




21.  Regional planning is  often the  most logical and




    economical approach toward meeting pollution




    problems.  The water pollution control agencies




    of Indiana, Michigan,  Pennsylvania,  New York and




    Ohio, and the  Department of Health,  Education, and




    Welfare will encourage such regional planning



    activities.

-------
           W. A. Lyon




    COMMENT:  The Department on behalf of the Board




       already has a program to stimulate regional



       planning in Erie County and there is no Board




       action necessary at this time.



22.  Within six months after the issuance of this



    Summary, the State water pollution control agencies



    concerned will present a schedule  of remedial




    action to the Conferees for their  consideration



    and evaluation.



    DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION;  That the Board direct



       the Department of Health to prepare a report  to




       the conferees.



    BOARD ACTION;  Motion Charmbury, seconded Sheffler,



       unanimously carried, the Board  adopted the



       Department Recommendations.



23.  The Federal Conferee recommends the following




    for the consideration of the State agencies:



    (a)  Recommended municipal treatment - Completion



       of plans and specifications August 1966, comple-



       tion of financing February 1967> construction



       completed January 1, 1969, chlorination of



       effluents May 15, 1966, provision of stand-by




       and emergency equipment to prevent interrup-



       tions in operation of municipal treatment

-------
         W. A.  Lyon                        497






       plants August 1966, patrolling of combined



       sewer systems immediately.



    (b)  Discontinuance of garbage and trash dumping



       into waters immediately.



    (c)  Industrial waste treatment facilities to be



       completed and in operation  by January 1, 1969.




    COMMENT:  No Board action necessary.



24.  Federal installations waste treatment facilities



    to be completed and in operation by August 1966.



    COMMENT:  No Board action necessary.




25.  Representatives of the United States Corps of



    Engineers meet with the Conferees, develop and



    put into action a satisfactory program for disposal



    of dredged material in Lake  Erie and its tribu-



    taries which will satisfactorily protect water



    quality.  Such a program is  to be developed within



    six months after the issuance  of this Summary and



    effectuated as soon as possible thereafter.



    COMMENT: No Board action necessary.




26.  The Conferees will establish a Technical Committee



    as soon as possible which will evaluate water




    quality problems in Lake Erie relating to nutrients



    and make recommendations to the Conferees within

-------
              W. A. Lyon                   498



    six months after the issuance of the summary of




    the conference.



    COMMENT:  No Board action necessary.  Committee



       has been established.



27.  The Conference may be reconvened on the call of




    the Chairman.



    COMMENT:  No Board action necessary.




At the conclusion of the Cleveland session of the



conference the following was included among the



conclusions and recommendations of the conference:



    "Pollution of navigable waters subject to abate-




    ment under the Federal Water Pollution Control



    Act is occurring in the Ohio waters of Lake Erie




    and its tributaries.  The discharges causing and



    contributing to the pollution come from various




    municipal and industrial sources, from garbage,



    debris, and land runoff.



    "Pollution of the Ohio waters of Lake Erie and



    its tributaries within the State of Ohio endangers



    health and welfare."




A question has been raised concerning the jurisdiction



of this conference over intrastate Ohio waters.  The




conferees agreed to present this question to the



Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare and the



Governor of Ohio for clarification and resolution.

-------
                    W. A. Lyon                       499






     4.  It was not quite clear what action the Board desires




         on the publicizing of corrected mine drainage viola-




         tions and we would like to raise this point again.




         Since a report of violations by the Ponfeigh Smokeless




         Coal Company and the Manor Hill Coal Company was




         printed in the newspaper, we released to the news-




         papers in the same area a report of the Board's action




         acknowledging compliance by these companies.








                  •**###•**•*









                WATER POLLUTION CONTROL IN




       THE PENNSYLVANIA PORTION OF THE LAKE ERIE BASIN




Statement to be presented by Dr. C. L. Wilbar, Jr., M. D.,




Secretary of Health, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, on behalf



of the Pennsylvania Sanitary Water Board




                     Buffalo, New York




                      August 10, 1965




Introduction




             I am appearing today as the representative of




the Pennsylvania Sanitary Water Board.  The Board has invited




representatives of local government, industry and conservation




groups to present statements at this conference.  I will intro-




duce these speakers at the conclusion of my statement.

-------
                   W. A. Lyon                       500



             We in Pennsylvania are intensely interested in




Lake Erie.  The lake is an important source of public and



industrial water supply and is a popular summer playground for



Pennsylvanians as well as tourists from other States.




             The Sanitary Water Board has, over the years,



endeavored to protect this valuable resource from pollution



by establishing complete degree treatment as the treatment



requirement for all waste discharges to the lake and its




tributaries.



             Because of the importance of Lake Erie in Pennsyl-



vania's economy we support the need for the Public Health



Service Comprehensive Study of the Lake Erie Basin.




             The abatement of water pollution is a complex



business, and intelligent action must be based on comprehensive



long-range planning in which all pertinent  facts are




considered.








Description of the Basin








             The Pennsylvania portion of the Lake Erie Basin



includes portions of Crawford and Erie counties and encompasses




an area of 512 square miles.



             Agriculture is one  of the principal industries in



the basin.  Grapes and other fruit crops and early maturing

-------
                   W. A. Lyon                      501






vegetables are the most important crops.  Some heavy Industry



is concentrated in and near Erie.




             The population of the basin is approximately



260,000, of which about 140,000 live within the City of Erie.



             Numerous small streams enter the lake from the



Pennsylvania portion of the basin.  The U. S. Geological Survey




does not measure flow in any of these streams on a regular



basis.  However, it has been estimated that they contribute an



average of about 420 cubic feet per second to the lake.








Water Use








             Uses of the waters of Lake Erie in Pennsylvania



are many and varied.  Recreational use of the lake includes



bathing at the many beaches, fishing and boating.  The best



known and most heavily used beaches are a series of broad



sandy beaches in Presque Isle State Park near Erie.  Yearly



attendance at the park exceeds 3 million people.  The estimated



dollar value of this facility in terms of annual income to the




area is 45 million dollars.



             Boating interest is evidenced by the numerous




pleasure boats to be seen in the Erie City area on most summer



days.  Reports indicate that fishing, although less popular in

-------
                   W. A. Lyon                     502




recent years because of a decline in numbers of the more



desirable game fish, is still a very popular form of recreation,




Commercial fishing has also declined.  Nevertheless, it still



offers a livelihood or a supplemental source of income for




some Pennsylvanians.



             The lake serves as a source of municipal water




supply for the City of Erie and surrounding communities.  Water



is drawn from two intakes which extend several thousand feet



out from the western shore of Presque Isle.  The average water




use for this purpose is approximately 39 million gallons per



day.  Water use exceeding 50 million gallons per day during the



summer months is common.  The estimated population served is



200,000.  The remainder of the population in the basin is




served by private on-lot water Supplies or by public water



supplies which use tributary streams or ground water as



sources of supply.  Total industrial water use is about 220




million gallons per day.  Most of this is used for cooling



purposes.








Pollution Control Progress








             All of the municipalities in the basin which



maintain public sewer systems are served by complete degree



sewage treatment works.  Complete treatment is that treatment

-------
                   W. A. Lyon                   503






in which a minimum of 85$ of the bio-chemical oxygen demand



load is removed.  It effects the removal of substantially all




suspended and settleable solids as well as the removal of




oils, greases, acids, alkalis and of toxic, putrescible, taste



and odor producing substances.  A number of schools and




business establishments in the basin do not have access to



public sewers and therefore must provide complete degree




sewage treatment prior to discharging to streams.  A tabulation




showing the status of sewage treatment in the Pennsylvania




portion of the Lake Erie Basin is attached to copies of this



presentation.




             All of the industrial establishments in the Lake



Erie Basin are meeting the Pennsylvania Sanitary Water Board's




waste treatment requirements or are making satisfactory progress



toward meeting this goal.  The latter group have submitted time



schedules for necessary corrective action and are on schedule.



A tabulation of the industrial establishments in the basin



indicating their water pollution control status are attached




to copies of my presentation.



             An important case presently making satisfactory



progress is the Hammermill Paper Company plant at Erie.  A



change in the company's manufacturing process about ten years



ago created a waste which is not amenable to treatment by



conventional methods and created a serious pollution problem.

-------
                    W. A. Lyon                    504




After a great deal of research the company has chosen to



dispose of its strong waste to deep wells.  One of the two



planned wells has been in operation more than a year.  On



July 20 of this year, the company received a permit from the



Sanitary Water Board to begin operation of its second well.




These wells by this time should be effectively handling two



million gallons per day of highly concentrated pulp mill



waste.  These wastes constitute most of the company's high



BOD waste.  All other wastes from the mill receive treatment



prior to discharge to Lake Erie.  In the near future, we plan



to evaluate the effect on lake quality of the plant discharge




to determine if additional pollution abatement steps are



necessary.



             Water quality in the eastern end of Presque Isle



Bay has been adversely affected by discharges of both sewage



from combined sewers and of industrial wastes.



             Overflows from the Erie City combined sewer and



storm drain system during periods of heavy precipitation con-



stitute a source of pollution to the bay.  The city has in-



tensified its preventive maintenance program to eliminate



unnecessary discharges from combined sewers.  Because of the



very nature of combined sewer operation we will continue to



have periodic discharges of wastes to the Bay and some of



its tributary streams during periods of heavy precipitation.

-------
                    W. A. Lyon                     505
                                         /


The city has estimated that to separate storm and sanitary



sewage systems in order to eliminate periodic discharges



would cost 20 million dollars.



             Discharges of industrial wastes to the bay



through city storm sewers and streams tributary to the bay



caused a series of fish kills in Presque Isle Bay during the



summer of 1964.  A cooperative survey made by the Pennsylvania



Department of Health and consultants for the City of Erie



has pinpointed these sources of pollution and most of the



discharges have been abated.  Satisfactory progress is being



made toward abatement of the remainder.  We plan to study the



effect of these discharges on the bay after planned abatement



woric in the city is completed in order to determine if any



additional action is needed.






Water Quality






             The quality of the streams entering Lake Erie



from Pennsylvania is generally good.  The only exceptions are



Cascade Creek, Mill Creek and Garrison Run which receive the



combined storm and sanitary sewer discharges above mentioned



General compliance with Sanitary Water Board waste treatment



requirements and the rural nature of much of the watershed



combine to preserve the quality of the other Pennsylvania

-------
                   W. A. Lyon                    506




streams at a high level.  Conneaut Creek:, the only interstate




stream of significant size, receives several treated waste



discharges, but quality is good at the State line.



             Water quality in the lake proper has been




generally good except for a zone immediately east of Presque



Isle.  The effects of the Hammermill Paper Company discharge



which entered the lake in this shallow cove have been readily




apparent.  The dark brown color and propensity to foam have




been obvious to the casual observer.  Winds from the northeast,



which are infrequent and opposite to the prevailing wind



direction, have several times in the past caused the waste



to concentrate In the cove and in Presque Isle Bay to the



extent that dissolved oxygen was seriously depleted and fish




were killed.



             Extensive sampling of the Presque Isle Beach




area for bacteriological analysis over the years has indicated



acceptable quality at all beaches except Beach 11 at the



eastern point of Presque Isle.  High coliform levels at



Beach 11 have been correlated with occasional winds from the



east which carry the chlorinated effluent from the Erie



sewage treatment plant in the direction of the beach.  The



sewage treatment plant discharges to the lake through a




submerged outfall about a mile from the Presque Isle Beaches.



Operation and control changes have been made at the sewage

-------
                    W. A. Lyon                     507




treatment plant in an attempt to eliminate this problem.



             We have no information available to us that



indicates that pollutonn of Lake Erie in relation to



Pennsylvania is occurring from another State.



             An indication of the eutrophication of the




waters of the lake is observed periodically in the Erie area.



Heavy mats of algae are washed ashore creating nuisance




conditions and discouraging bathing.








Summary and Conclusions








             Significant pollution control progress has been



made by the municipalities and industries in the Pennsylvania



portion of the Lake Erie Basin.  We will continue our program



aimed at abating the remaining inadequately treated waste



discharges in the basin.  We realize that effluents from



complete degree treatment works and agricultural runoff contain



residual pollutants that can adversely affect water quality.



Nutrients which speed up the eutrophication process fall in




this category.



             We expect that the Public Health Service study



report will indicate  the effect of these nutrients on the



lake, where they come from, and how much it will cost the



people in the basin to abate this type of pollution.

-------
                                                    508




                      W. A. Lyon




           We have no information that indicates that




interstate pollution involving Pennsylvania is occurring




in Lake Erie.




           Pennsylvanians have devoted a great deal of




effort toward abating pollution in our portion of the basin.



The economy of the Pennsylvania portion of the lake Erie




Basin depends upon preservation of lake water quality.




We intend to continue to do everything in our power to assure




that water quality requirements designed to enhance the value




of the lake are met.

-------
                                       SEWERAGE STATUS
                                                                                    509
                                       Lake Erie Basin
Case I\Tama
Conneaut Valley
Union Jt« Elem.
School
Albion
Erie
Erie Co. Hone
Fairview Sen.
Xaiikwa Club
Terrace Rest
Wennsr's Esso
Station
Girard
Wattsburg
B eh rend Center
(Penn. St. IWv.)
Harborcreek
Twp,, School
Lake City
Hunble Oil &
Refining Co.
Georgetown
Popular White
North East

Presque Isle
Municipality
Spring Twp.

Albion Boro.
Erie City
Fairview Twp,
Fairview Twp,
Fairview Twp,
Fairview Twp»
Fairview Twp.
Girard Boro.
Greene Twp,
Harborcreek
Twp.
Harborcreek
Twp.
Lake City Twp.
JfcKean Twp.
McKean Twp.
McKean Twp,
North East
Boro.
Presque Isle
W
3
County
Crawford

Erie
Erie
Erie
Erie
Erie
Erie
Erie
Erie
Erie
Erie
Erie
Erie
Erie
Erie
Erie
Erie

Erie
Population
Served
220

1900
UjQ,000
675
700
200
115
20
2500
600
loo
hOO
1700
128
1*0
300
U200

200
Receiving Adequate Treat.
Stream Provided
Conneaut Cr.

Conneaut Cr,
Lake Erie
Trout Run
Trout Run
Walnut Cr,,
Brandy Run
Brandy Run
Elk Creek
Four Mile Cr.
Trout Run
Trout Run
Elk Creek
Trib. -
Thomas Run
Elk Creek
Elk Creek
16-Mile Cr,

Erie Harbor
Yes

Yes
Yes*
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

Yes
State Park

-------
              SEWERAGE STATUS
                                                              510
              Lake Erie Basin
                /
Case Kama
Talarico Truck
Stop
Larry's Truck
Stop
Howard Johnson
Motor Lodge
Oakdale Corp*
(Holiday Inn)
Rondale Conva-
lescent Home
Summit School
Dist
Travelers Rest
Municipality _ County
Springfield Erie
Twp.
North East Erie
Twpo
Summit Twp* Erie
Summit Twp. Erie
Summit Twp, Erie
Summit Twp, Erie
Summit Twp. Erie
ity LjVJ)
Population
Served
*7
100
1*20
350
13U
110
175
Receiving Adequate Treat
Stream Provided
Raccoon Cr.
Averill Run
Walnut Cr,
Walnut Cr.
Trib. -
Walnut Cr«
Walnut Cr»
Walnut Cr.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Industrial waste discharges to storm sewers not
included in this tabulation.  The City is presently
working on a program to eliminate all the industrial
waste discharges to its storm sewer system.

-------
                                                                                       511
                                      INDUSTRIAL WASTE STATUS

                                         Lake 3rie Basin
 Case Na-,i3      Type
and. Location    Waste

CRAWFORD co.
 Springboro
   Borough

  Albro Packing  I.W.
  Co.
  Sealtest
  Foods

SRIS COUNTY

 City of
 Erie
I.W.
  Hsjicnenaill
        Co,
I.W.
Interlake     I.W.
Steel Corp.

Kaiser Alum.  I.W.
& Chemical
Corp,
  Penelec Co.   I.W.
  Ruberoid Co.  I.W.
 -Kcrth East
  Borough

  The Elec.     I.W.
  Materials Co.
             Type
         Establishment
Food processing


Milk processing
Integrated Pulp
and paper Co,
                         Integrated Steel
                         Kill

                         Manufacture Alum.
                         Products
         Electric power
         product

         Coated Asphalt
         product
         Elec. Equipment
                     Receiving
                      Street
                              Conneaut Cr.
                                            Conneaut Cr.
                                            Lake Erie
                              Lake Erie


                              Motch Run
                     Erie Bay


                     Erie Bay
                     Trib. - Six-
                     teen Mile Cr.
                                                            Adequate Treat,
                                                               Provided
                                                                 Yes
Yes
                                          Yes
                                                                 Yes


                                                                 Yes
                   Remark!
           *Study will be
            conducted to
            determine if
            reduction
            standards are
            met after
            second deep
            disposal well
            is in operatic
                                                      V-SP. Comple-
                                                      tion of treat.
                                                      facilities
                                                      scheduled for
                                                      Sept. ,-1965.
                                                                             V-SP.
                                                                             tion of
                                                                             f ac .
                                                                          at.

-------
                                                                                      512
 C*cLSO iW^IIO

p -pc^ T r* ^ •X't" •? <^v;
o-IxU, x,o^ tiu^-Oxi



 Y-r^^V ]?C<3V
 i\U* Ufci, iJ^-iS U
                                       INDUSTHIAL WASTS STATUS

                                           Laics Brio Baoin
                         Establishment
                      Receiving
                       Sire era
                                                              Adequate Treat*
                                                                  Provided
                                                                          Hamarkc
 Juice Co.
Wesleyvillo
  Borough

 J. MeCosnick   I.ft.
 Ccnstr. Go«

Millereok  T.-TO«

 Erie CerccrLcs  I,W.
     of Erie
 Erie Brewing  I,W.
 Company
Fairvieu T^p*

 Fair\rie^.? Txp.   Savage
 Indus, ITovcj
 Ksnt Corp,
Food processing      Sixteen Mile
                      Creek
                                                                     Yes
Construction
Materials
Porcelain Enamel
products
Brewery
        ^
 cerar.iicc      Sewage
                         Concrete Pipe
KLckel ELats   I.W.      Sand Washsry
                                              Four Mle Cr.
                                              Unnar.cd Trib.
                                              to Lake Erie
                                              Mill Creek
                      Trout Run
                      Trib,-Walnut
                      Creek
                                               Trout Run-
                                                     Yes
                                                     Yes

                                                                   Yes
                                                                   Yes
                                            Yes
 Pa
I.W.     Metal  Prod.
                      Trout Run
                                                                   Yee

-------
                                                                                    513
                                      IIGuS?2IAL WASTE STATUS

                                          Lake Brio Be:.- in
                                                  «*
Case !\ano      Typo
/:d loco.tion    Waste
Girarcl Boro.

 C-unnison
 Brothers
Laurence Perk
  Townshit)
Gon. Elec.Co. I.W.
 Sterilizer
             Typa
         Establishsiant
I.W,     Tannery
                        Heavy machine
                        afg.
        Cci-p.   I.W,     Steol Products
Receiving
 Stream
Brandy Run
                              Lake Erie
                        Hospital Equip,       Cascade Or*
                              Unnamed  trib,
                              to Lake  Erie
                                                             Adequato Treat.
                                                                 Provided
                                                                  Yes
Remarks
                     Yes
                                                    Yes
                     Yes
             Legend -  I.W. - Industrial Wastes
                       V-SP - Violation-Satisfactory Progress

-------
GO <
 ..-L
            533-A

-------
                     W. A. Lyon                      514




           MR. LYON:  Thank you very much.




           MR. STEIN:  Thank you.




           Are there any comments or questions?




           (No response.)




           MR. STEIN:  I would like to ask  you some




questions on some of the details here.




           I do not want the record to indicate that we are




just asking Pennsylvania the detailed questions.




           How about Beach 11 on Presque Isle?  Have you




opened that yet?




           MR. LYON:  Beach 11 on Presque Isle is opened




normally.  There are times when we get an unusual wind




from the east side of the lake, when the coliform levels




on that day exceed 1,000, which is the limit.




           We believe that this is largely  due to the




present discharges of the Hammermill Paper  Company, and




occasionally due to the discharges from the combined sewers




at Erie.   We think, however, that it is primarily coliform




from the paper mill, which are not pathogenic.




           As I indicated, we plan to make  -- and you will



find this in our report — a rather complete study of not




only the beach, but the Hammermill discharge situation as




soon as Hammermill has put in its second disposal well.  We




will include a study not only.of Beach 11,  but of all the

-------
                                                      515
                     W.  A.  Lyon

beaches, to see if this  has abated this,  what really is

a minor problem.  It occurs about once a  year,  when we get

an easterly wind,  which  is  very unusual.

           MR. STEIN:  Walter,  for the benefit  of the group

here, we have been doing studies on paper mills and sugar

beet wastes, and I don't think  our scientists go along

with the recommendation  any more that they are  not pathogenic.

They have some in the waste beets of the  sugar  beet mills,

and I think the tendency is not to say automatically that

they are not pathogenic, but in the cases we have analyzed

they have recommended chlorination of these wastes,  I

think that that may be borne in mind.

           As far as the cities of Lake City and Girard,

when will those enlarged plants be in operation?

           MR. LYON:  Lake  City — let me look this up.

Tney are now in compliance. The report indicates in Lake

City the plant was completed in February of this year.

           MR. STEIN:  But  they plan to include chlorination?

           MR. LYON:  All of our sewerage systems are

chlorinated.

           MR. STEIN:  Are  they chlorinated now:

           MR. LYON:  Yes.

           MR. STEIN:  Year 'round?

           MR. LYON:  Year  'round.

-------
                                                      516
                     W.  A.  Lyo n
           MR. STEIN:  In Girard too?
           MR. LYON: As  far as I know,  they are.
           MR. STEIN:  And  their expansion is completed?
           MR. LYON:  There was no expansion, as  far as  my
record here shows,  indicated in Girard.   I would  be happy
to check into that  for you.
           MR. STEIN:  I think our record indicates -- but
let's just check that,
           MR. LYON:  Yes,  I will certainly do that.
           MR. STEIN:  Now, I think that I would  like to
read the report that we  have on the Hammermill situation,
and I want at least the  group here to recognise what we  are
attempting to get is a factual situation and that is why we
do this here.
           We have  gotten the report from Mr. Lyon on
Hammermill which indicated  that when the deep well was in,
the problem would be solved.   Our report on this is less
than a page double-spaced,  but I think the whole  thing
should be given to  you to give you the picture and see if
we can dovetail on  the agreed facts :
           "Hammermill Paper Company's waste outfall
      is located just east  of the mouth of trie Harbor,
      with prevailing winds in the area from the  west.

-------
                                                517
                W.  A.  Lyon
     "Hammer-mill effluents affect the water quality
and esthetic appearance of beaches and boating
areas for 10 to 20 miles eastward.  This line of
foam and foul-smelling colored water hinders the
development of eastern portions of the basin as a
water supply source and a recreational area.  It
also reduces the usefulness and value of lake front
property.
     "In addition to their adverse esthetic effect,
these discharges cause severe problems with taste
and odors in domestic water supply which require
costly additional treatment.  Periodically Erie is
forced to close its eastern water intake to avoid
high tannin concentrations.  At the time of the
August 1965 conference, Hammermill Paper Company
was contributing 90 percent of the total oxygen
demand load to this area of water.  They have
since completed installation of a deep well disposal
system which has corrected some of the BOD problems.
However, the serious problems caused by the dis-
charge of tannins and lignins from spent pulping
liquors still remain."
     Is this correct?
     MR. LYON: I. think that what you have said

-------
                                                     518
                     W. A. Lyon
concerning the effect of the Hammermill Paper Company on
the beaches is essentially correct.
           Our regional office just  last week conducted
an aircraft surveillance of that area,  and there is  a
definite effect on the beaches to the east from the  company.
There apparently are occasional taste and odor problems.
           As soon as, as I have indicated to you, Well No.
2 is in full operation — it is now  in partial operation;
they have not geared up all of their wastes to disposal in
Well No. 2, but they have indicated  this will be done by
July 1st or thereabouts — we expect that the most serious
problems will be solved.
           It is difficult to tell at this time whether
the entire problem will be solved.  Our regional office
will conduct a study later in July in order to see whether
or not there is any remaining problem,  and if there  is any
remaining problem, appropriate orders will be issued by the
Board.
           This also applies to any coliform problem that
might arise from that discharge.
           MR. STEIN:  All right.  Thank you.
           Are there any other questions or comments?
           Mr. Oeming?
           MR. OEMING:  I don't have a question particularly

-------
                                                  519



                     W. A. Lyon




with reference to Mr. Lyon's statement,  but I am concerned




here about some confusion that seems to  be arising with




respect to the disinfection of paper mill wastes.




           Now, I would like to have this cleared up here,




because we are requiring the papers mills in the Monroe area,




as one of our requirements, to disinfect these effluents,




and I would like to know if we are requiring something that




is not necessary.  If so, I want to go back and take it out.




           MR. STEIN:  I will tell you our scientists




think it is necessary.




           MR. OEMING:  This is the Board here.  I am  just




asking.




           MR. STEIN:  I can Just speak  for our people, but




that is why I raised the question with Pennsylvania.




           MR. LYON:  Well, the point of the question  is



this:  That most of their waste is going into a deep well.




There may not be a coliform problem once they have done




this, you see.




           In other words, they essentially are abating




their most important discharges by disposing of them by the




deep-well disposal method, which is to put them in very




deep geological formations, which will not affect any




surface water or water resource.




           So, if there  is still a coliform problem after

-------
                                                     520
                     W. A. Lyon

that, we will certainly see to It that it is corrected.

           MR. STEIN:  Do you have any further questions?

           MR. OEMING:  No.

           MR. STEIN:  I think it is fair to say this:

That if we find coliform in the paper mill or sugar beet

wastes, I think our scientists will not go along with the

notion that there are no pathogens present.  They find that

if the coliform count is positive, it requires chlorination

for. disinfection.

           MR. OEMING:  I accept this, Mr. Stein, but I

mean the question has been raised here, and I wanted to

clear the air.

           MR. STEIN:  Well, you don't have any problem

with that concept, do you, Mr. Lyon?

           MR. LYON:  No, not at all.

           MR. STEIN:  All right?

           MR. OEMING:  All right.

           MR. STEIN:  Thank you.

           If there are no further comments, may we hear

from New York?

-------
                                                   520-A




         (The following letter was submitted for the




record:




                 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA




                    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH




                        P.O. BOX 90



                      Harrlsburg 17120




                        July 7, 1966




C. L. Wilbar, Jr., M.D.




Secretary of Health









Mr. Murray Stein, Chief




Enforcement Program




Federal Water Pollution Control




    Administration




Department of Health, Education, & Welfare




633 Indiana Avenue, N.W.




Washington, D. C. 20203








Dear Murray:




         At the Lake Erie Conference held in Cleveland on




June 22, 1966, I informed the Conferees that in Pennsylvania




all sewage treatment plants discharging to Lake Erie have




chlorination.  At that time, you questioned me concerning




Girard and Lake City.




         The Borough of Girard has no chlorination

-------
                                                    520-B



facilities.  They do have a time schedule submitted which




calls for compliance by August 30,  1968.   The schedule in-




cludes for completion of sewage treatment plant modifica-




tions, including the installation of chlorination facili-




ties.




         Lake City just completed construction of modifica-




tions which includes a chlorinator and contact tank.  We




plan to inspect these new facilities in the near- future.




         I apologize for my oversight and would request




that the conference record be amended accordingly.




                               Sincerely yours,




                  /a/          Walt




                               Walter A,  Lyon, Director



                          Division of Sanitary Engineering)

-------
                                                    521
                     D. Metzler
         STATEMENT OP DWIGHT METZLER,  CONFEREE
         AND DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, NEW YORK STATE
         DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH


           MR. METZLER:  Mr. Quigley,  Chairman Stein:
           I am Dwight Metzler,  New York's latest import.
           We heard this morning from  the Secretary of some
of the progress which New York is making in providing some
leadership in this area.  There  certainly has been an
organizational upgrading of the  entire water pollution
effort in New York State since the last conference.
           New York State's Pure Waters Program is imaginative
and realistic.  It is based upon several major points.
           The first is that financing is a problem, and
therefore the State will provide for a part of the financing.
           You have already heard about the billion dollar
bond issue.  I like to call this a thousand megabucks,
but everyone can use his own terminology.  New York voters
have voted a thousand megabucks to help finance this program,
30 cents on the dollar coming from the State, and it is
advancing another 30 cents on the dollar to local communities
for what we hope we might be reimbursed if the Federal
Government catches up with us.

-------
                                                       522
                     D. Metzler



           The second portion of this is a tax incentive



program for industry.



           The third deals with water quality standards



which have been under way in development in New York State



for a period of time., and are now adopted.



           The fourth point involves bringing people to



hearings, and I can say to you that every major polluter



in New York State will have been in on hearings before



the summer is out.



           In the last six months — again, I am reporting



State-wide, because I have been in New York almost two



weeks now so I know only the very general outlines of the



program — but in the last six months we have approved or



are reviewing plans for nearly half a billion dollars --



that is, five hundred megabucks -- of treatment plant



construction, and over three times this is the total Federal



investment in the whole country this year in the construc-



tion grants program.



           We welcome this opportunity to participate in



the conference and in this demonstration of Federal-State



responsibility.



           I have asked Mr.  Hennigan to present to you the



details on how we have reacted to the findings of the



conference since it met.

-------
                                                      523
                     R.  D.  Hennigan


         STATEMENT OP ROBERT D. HENNIGAN, CONFEREE
         AND DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF WATER RESOURCES,
         NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH


           MR. HENNIGAN:  Mr. Quigley, Mr. Stein, fellow
Conferees, Ladies and Gentlemen:
           The New York State program has been covered to
some extent by Secretary Udall.  We appreciate his remarks.
It represents, in terms of a State, a commitment to effective
water pollution control, a landmark in this country.
           When the Lake Erie Conference was called some
ten to eleven months ago, New York State|s program was a
hope and held great potential.  Although the main elements
had been enacted into law prior to the conference, there
was some trepidation as to what the people would do when
the issue was presented to them in the election of November
2, 1965.  The possibility of the New York State program
and its effectiveness is no longer speculative; the people
of New York gave the most resounding endorsement in State
history to Proposition No. 1, which called for a billion
dollar bond issue to finance the construction grants feature
of the Pure Waters Program.
           Eighty percent approval, 60 percent voter

-------
                                                     524
                      R. D. Hennigan

participation, uniformity of results from area to area,

and the exercise of discrimination on the remaining 11

issues on the ballot all point out the uniqueness of this

endorsement by the people for an effective water quality

management program.

           You are all familiar with segments of the

intense activity and great strides forward which have taken

place in the past year.  My purpose is to present the

totality of the Pure Waters Program and its impact across

the State.

           A number of things have contributed to the

mounting public concern and awareness of water pollution

control.  This awareness continues to grow and there does

not appear to be any sign of diminishing interest.  The

obvious fact of pollution, the increasing population, the

pressures for more water for every use, the generation of

more and more wastewater to be disposed of, the drought of

the past four years focusing particularly on the water

supply problem of the City of New York, the tremendous news

media coverage, plus the publication of such books as

"Silent Spring" by Rachel Carson, "Disaster by Default" by

Frank Graham, Jr., and "Death of the Sweet Waters" by Donald

E. Carr, have all aroused public opinion and have kept It

at a very high pitch.  There will never be any returning

-------
                                                     525




                    R. D. Hennigan




to the old days of "too little too late." The threshold




of tolerance of the people is very low; continued public




demand and support is to be expected.




           In the Great Lakes picture, from Lake Superior




through Lake Erie, New York State is the State more sinned




against than sinning.  It is the downstream State.  All




the water in the Great Lakes system eventually passes




through the front yard of the City of Buffalo and continues




down the Straits of Niagara into Lake Ontario.  Consequently,




we are very concerned and have a great interest in seeing




effective pollution control activities carried out by our




sister States upstream.




           New York State has the most dynamic, forward-




looking pollution control program in the United States and




perhaps in the world.  It has been maturing since 19^9 and




reached fruition with the vote of November 2, 1965.  It



combines the necessary fiscal and planning commitments




with vigorous enforcement activities and technological tools




needed to effectively combat this threat to our very



existence.  However,  we in New York recognize that no matter




how effective the New York State program, it cannot be




totally successful unless there is an effective program on




the national level and in each of our sister States.  The

-------
                                                      526




                    R. D. Hennigan




geographic and hydrological characteristics of New York




State place great emphasis on this need.  We are involved




in International waters on our western and northern



boundaries, and are party to no less than seven interstate




compacts relating to water resource development and water




pollution control.  As John Dunne said, "No man is an




island unto himself," and New York State cannot carry out




an effective water resource development and water quality




management program without effective action at both the




Federal and State levels.




           The growth and development of the Federal program




from 1948 through 1965 and its continuing development with




the proposed legislation in this session, reflect the great




national concern and surely indicate the desire of the




people for government at all levels to move effectively in




the area of water pollution control.  We not only welcome



Federal concern and programming in this area; we think it is




an absolute essential, including meaningful financial




participation.  There must be a national policy on water




pollution -- one which establishes minimum criteria with




which all State programs must conform consistent with local




conditions and peculiarities.  Without this, there is the




threat of industrial relocation from areas with vigorous




pollution control programs to areas with weak pollution

-------
                                                     527
                    R. D.  Hennlgan
control programs.   Although it has been my personal  ex-
perience that in most instances this  threat is  more  potential
than actual.  The Federal  financial commitment  for construc-
tion grants must be commensurate with the need;  otherwise
remedial action will be stymied.
           One major need  if the campaign for effective
water quality management is to succeed is to reorient the
approach in thinking, particularly in the technological
approach to pollution abatement.  Instead of studying and
emphasizing the ability of our waters to take more and more
wastewater, we must focus  our energies on how to remove
those undesirable constituents in wastewaters before dis-
charging into lakes and streams.  There is so much waste
that is subject only to imperfect control that we must
remove the maximum amount  of contaminants from our waste-
waters that is technically and fiscally feasible. The waste
assimilation capacities of our lakes  and streams has been
overworked to the point that the very concept has played
a major role in the deterioration of  water quality across
the country.  This should be of concern only after we have
effected maximum removals and should  not be used as  an
excuse for minimum effort and minimum treatment before dis-
charge into the waters of the Nation.  The construction cost

-------
                                                   52-S




                    R. P. Hennlgan




for the total sewer utility is divided 70-90 percent for




collection and 10-30 percent for treatment; yet we still




have people who will try to effect questionable economies




by insisting on less than full treatment, a phantom economy




at best which in reality represents a small part of the




total capital investment in the sewer utility.




           Continual urban-industrial development, which




will follow our increasing population, makes effective




action in this area even more urgent -- action which must




cover the whole gambit of water resource management; not




solely water pollution control.  Although without effective




water pollution control, effective management of our water




resources is impossible.  We are long past the time for




quibbling about the need.  The need is obvious.  Future




demands even in face of decreasing birth rates will be




enormous.  Effective programs are needed at the Federal,



State and local levels.  A partnership must be welded in




the public interest which will insure that these three




levels of government work together effectively to meet



these demands.




           New York State has shown the way.  The people




will support a realistic aggressive approach.  Interstate




and Federal cooperation and participation is essential as




is a strong national policy and program.  The future is

-------
                                                     529





                    R. D. Hennigan




bright; the time for action is now,  as expressed by these




words of Shakespeare:




           "There is a tide in the affairs of men




           Which, taken at the flood,  leads on to fortune;




           Omitted, all the voyage of  their life,




           Is bound in shallows and in miseries.




           On such a full sea are we now afloat;




           And we must take the current when it serves




           Or lose our venture."








          New York State Activity Regarding



           Recommendations and Conclusions




             of the Lake Erie Conference








           Although the recommendations agreed upon at the




Lake Erie conferences last year were developed in a short




period of time, implementation by New  York State in the




past ten months has demonstrated, with only minor exception,




that the action of the conferees was sound and reasonable.




Of the 27 items cited at the conferences, 6 were conclusions




and 20 were specific recommendations for action both by the




States and the Federal Government.  The final item was




administrative in nature, having to do with reconvening this




conference.

-------
                                                      530
                    R. De Hennigan
           The conclusions reached are both specific and
general in nature.  They are specific in order to establish
jurisdiction and general in order to provide a foundation
for State and Federal action, recognizing that our single
problem -- pollution of Lake Erie — is made up of a myriad
of individual technical, economic, legislative and planning
problems.  New York State welcomed the conclusions reached,
and it has been demonstrated to us that they have been of
significant assistance in the promotion and conduct of a
vigorous State program.
           Implementation of the recommendations has been
done within the framework of our ongoing State-wide pollu-
tion control activities.  New York State drainage to Lake
Erie is minor -- reportedly accounting for about 37$ of
the phosphate input, h% of the industrial outfalls, less
than Vjo of the suspended solid input, and a fraction of a
percent of the chloride and nitrogen input.  While the
existence of a drainage area to Lake Erie is a hydrological
reality, the boundary of the drainage area is but an artifact
when considered with the configuration of our political
subdivisions.  Hence our activity has not been limited to
the drainage area per se, rather to a broader municipal base,
including the entire areas of Erie, Chautauqua, Cattaraugus,
Genesee and Wyoming Counties.  The ability to construct

-------
                                                     531





                    R.  D.  Hennigan




public works rests with municipalities  who are,  incidentally,




located in one or more  sub-drainage areas.




           Some comment should be made  in regard to our




activity associated with specific recommendations of the




conferees.




      1.   Item 7 — the need for secondary treatment




           to effectuate the maximum reduction o-f BOD



           and phosphates.  Every municipality in the




           State, including, of course, those in the Lake




           Erie drainage basin, has been notified of




           treatment requirements.  This amounts to a




           requirement  of at least secondary treatment




           in all cases.  Appended is a resolution by the




           State Water  Resources Commission supporting



           this policy.  It is fundamental that a defini-




           tion of secondary treatment  be adopted.  This




           has been done and is also appended.




      2.   Item 8 -- the need to design plants which




           maximize phosphate removal.   This recommendation




           is important from the standpoint of our abate-




           ment schedules.  Unless answers are forthcoming,




           delays can be expected.  We await information




           and guidance in regard to this matter from the

-------
                                               532



              R. D. Hennigan




     Federal Water Pollution Control Agency as



     described in Item 20 of the Recommendations




     and Conclusions of the Conference.  We have




     attacked this design problem through our Health




     Commissioner's Special Committee on Algae and




     Related Problems and have made studies of removal




     by conventional treatment processes.  Frankly,  we




     are far from a complete answer.  Our findings




     will be shared with the hope that, in partnership




     with Water Pollution Control Administration,




     practical solutions will be found.




3.   Item 9 -- disinfection of municipal waste




     effluents.  All treatment facilities are being




     designed to comply with this recommendation.




     New York State has a statute which sets standards




     for the bacteriological quality of surface waters.



     To meet the requirements of the statute, con-



     tinuous chlorination is required.




k.   Item 10 -- treatment plant design to prevent by-



     passing untreated wastes.  We welcome this rein-




     forcement of existing State policy.




5.   Item 11 -- elimination of and prohibition of




     combined sewer construction; surveillance of



     overflow structures.  Prior State policy prohibits

-------
                                              533



              R.  D.  Hennigan




     the  construction  of  combined  sewers  in




     urbanizing areas.  Our sewage treatment  plant




     operation and maintenance grant  program  has




     served  as an additional tool  in  guaranteeing




     the  surveillance  and proper operation of over-




     flows and flow-regulating devices.   (A copy of




     a  status  report on our O&M program is appended.)




     It is not enough  to  prevent new  construction




     of combined  sewers and surveillance  of overflow




     devices.   We all  face the problems caused by




     existing  combined sewers.  This  is a particu-




     larly difficult problem in Erie  County.   The




     major thrust of the  recently  initiated State-




     sponsored Erie  County Comprehensive  Sewerage



     Study will be directed toward the investigation




     of methods to ameliorate current problems




     associated with combined sewers. We are hopeful




     that the  methodology developed for use in Erie




     County  by this  study will be  applicable  to other




     areas  facing similar problems.




6.   Item 12 and 13  — prevention  of spills of waste




     materials and reports of spills. Industries




     have been alerted to the need of continuous




     surveillance of operation within their  plants  to

-------
                                             534



              R. D. Hennigan




     prevent accidental spills.  An alerting system




     for accidental spills was Instituted In the




     Niagara River area some 10 years ago.  This system




     covers most of the Industries in the New York




     portion of the Lake Erie Drainage Basin.




7.  Item 14 — disposal of solid wastes to Lake Erie




     and its tributaries.  The mere prohibition of




     dumping is not sufficient.  There mnst be a




     logical plan established and then Implemented for




     the handling and disposal of solid wastes.  The




     1966 Legislature has enacted a statute which




     enables municipalities to make comprehensive




     studies of solid waste needs.  The program is




     similar to our comprehensive water supply and



     sewerage needs study programs.




8.  Item 15 -- control of run-off.  We understand




     area meetings have been held and are planned for




     the New York State-Pennsylvania area.  Of course,




     we have a Pesticide Control Board now.



9.  Item 16 -- improved practices for reduction of




     industrial pollutants.  A routine portion of our




     enforcement contacts with industry includes




     review of practices to reduce contaminants.  The




     matter is formally reviewed by consulting engineers

-------
                                               535





     submitting engineering reports  to  the  State




     Health Department.



10.   Items 17 and 18 —  sampling of  industrial wastes



     and maintenance of  records.  Chapter  595 of  the



     1966 Laws of New York State was discussed in



     detail earlier.  This strengthens  the  State's



     previous general authority in this area.  Chapter



     595 is specific; it permits the State  to comply



     completely with item 17.   State files  on pollu-



     tion are open files.

-------
                                                    536
                   R. D. Hennigan
           All Industries In the basin have been advised
of the conclusions and the results of the Lake Erie
conference.  They have been advised that the State policy
Is to proceed on formal legal proceedings,  and we are
moving In that direction.
           In terms of specific orders Issued In the
Lake Erie Basin as a result of legal proceedings, orders
have been issued against Moench Tanning, Brocton Village,
National Aniline, Lawtons Can Company, Lancaster Village,
DePew Village, two sewer districts in the Town of Amherst,
Mt. Vernon sewer district, and the Village of Silver Creek,
which you might be aware of.
           We had another experience similar to that on
this particular watershed relating to a paper mill, and
that situation has been abated and the paper mill went out
of business.
           MR. STEIN:  Mr. Hennigan, I wonder, for the
purposes of the record, if at this point I might ask a
question?
           Since you issued the orders against those, do I
assume that you consider the progress in Buffalo in reducing
its BOD 22-\ percent; Tonawanda Township reducing its BOD
12 percentj and the following industrial firms — Socony
Vacuum Oil Company discharging oil, phenolics and cyanidesj

-------
                                                      537
                R. D. Hennigan
and Hanna Coal Company discharging phenolics, cyanides,
ammonia, oil, solids, and BOD; Republic Steel Company,
phenolJxjs, cyanides, oil and solids;  Federal Chemical
discharging inorganic wastes -- the progress there is
satisfactory so that you don't have to issue orders?
           MR. HENNIGAN:  We are going to issue orders
against everybody.
           We are now negotiating with Bethlehem Steel
and we have every indication that —  the important thing,
as far as the State program is concerned, is the formal
legal proceedings are becoming a part of every enforcement
action, including municipalities.  In other words, we are
not proceeding on the basis that somebody promises to be
good without a legal hold on them.
           National Aniline is now under order.  We are
negotiating with Bethlehem Steel.  We are negotiating with
Republic Steel.  This is all on a legal order basis.
           As I say, we are going to  issue the rest of
them in their particular Buffalo River complex.  The major
primary plants are Tonawanda in the City of Buffalo, operated
by the Buffalo Sewer Authority, which now discharges the
waste into the Niagara River, or a tributary of it, and
these municipalities have all been advised they are going
to have to put in secondary treatment.

-------
                                                      538
                     R.  D. Hennigan

         On a State-wide basis we are handling about

12 to 15 legal proceedings a month, and these people will

get into the pipeline when their turn comes around.

         As a matter of fact, we concentrated on the Hudson

River for quite a while -- that is, after we got the bond

issue passed.

    11.  Item 19 -- Federal surveillance of Lake Erie and

         State surveillance of tributaries.  A manual sur-

         face and ground water network has been in operation

         for several years.  Approval has been secured for

         a 60-station automatic water quality monitoring net-

         work, and two stations are presently being installed,

    12.  Item 21 -- conduct of regional plans involving area-

         wide solutions.  Appended are status reports on

         comprehensive sewerage and public water supply

         studies sponsored by the State Health Department.

         These are generally county-wide studies.  The Erie

         County comprehensive sewerage study was cited ear-

         lier as an example of these studies.  The Erie-

         Niagara Regional Water Resources Planning and

         Development Board Study is progressing rapidly and

         serves as a regional reference for the more speci-

         fic utilities studies which are being prepared.

     One thing that is important in the regional planning

-------
                                                     539
                   R. D. Hennigan

and one thing which  should have emphasis is the discharge

of sewers in the combined sewer problem,  which is very

acute in the Erie County area.

     13.   Items 22 and 23 — report of remedial action

           and construction schedule.  A  schedule has been

           submitted for evaluation.  The realities of the

           time involved to secure intermunlcipal coopera-

           tion, prepare preliminary and  final plans,

           process Federal grants and to  construct should

           be carefully reviewed.  As mentioned earlier,

           we are concerned over the development of a

           phosphate removal methodology and its insertion

           into abatement timetables.  Federal guidance

           followed by conferee agreement is essential in

           this area.

         We have established some sort of preference.  As

I mentioned, we go into the formal legal proceeding, the

start of a comprehensive study of both water supply and

sewage, qnd also the operation of the State operation and

maintenance program, and the requirement of additional

treatment facilities.

           At the present time, roughly some $500,000 has

been granted to 25 municipalities in this area.

           We have plenty of problems left, and I would be

-------
                   R. D. Hennigan




less than straightforward if I tried to give you the idea




that we had all the problems solved in the Lake Erie



Watershed, or any other place in the State.  The truth of




the matter is, we do not.




           We have the tools and we have the program, and




it is a program that is moving forward.  The construction




grant phase of it is just getting into gear.




           Public opinion has been all the way on this.




The reaction of the municipalities has been quite good.




Some of the industries are rather surprised that maybe the




State means business, but the whole program is moving ahead,




Within the next week or two a comprehensive report on the




first year of the entire State program will probably be




released from Albany.








            Details of New York State Activities
                          in the



                  Lake Erie Drainage Basin








           Additional activities in the areas of comprehensive




utility planning, construction grants, and operation and




maintenance grants are presented in tabular form.  Enforce-



ment details were submitted previously in accordance with




the Conference agreements.

-------
                                                 541



              R.  D.  Hennigan




Highlights of our activities in  the  basin  include:




     l)  Successful  legal ac-tion against the Village




         of Silver Creek.  Construction  is  under  way.




     2)  Accelerated enforcement hearings,  including




         major municipal and industrial  polluters.



         12 hearings and 9 Commissioner's  orders.




     3)  Complete involvement in comprehensive



         sewerage studies.




     4)  Comprehensive public water  supply studies




         for 6 areas cover the major portion of the




         drainage basin.




     5)  Sewage treatment plant  operation  and main-



         tenance grants paid to  25 municipalities at




         a cost of $475,9^.52.

-------
                                                     542
                    R. D. Hennigan
  Comprehensive Intermunicipal Public Water Supply Studies




                 Lake Erie Drainage Basin
           Status




Studies in Progress




      PWS-2
Erie-Cattaraugus Counties



    (Gowanda and Environs)
Study Applications




Being Processed



PWS-37




PWS-40




PWS-42
Genesee County




Orleans County




Wyoming County
     Local Action to Prepare Applications




                        Chautauqua County




                        Cattaraugus County

-------
                    -16-

STATUS OF COMPREHENSIVE SEWAGE STUDIES
       LAKE ERIE DRAINAGE BASIN
       Administrative
Countv
Cattaraugus
Chautauqua
Erie
Wyoming
TOTALS
In Progress Approval
0 1
Sewer Agency
0 1
Hanover (T)
2 2
Eden (T) Depew (V)
$18,014 Grand Island (T)
Holland (T)
$12,107
1 0
Arcade (V)
$18,450
3 4
$48,571
Disapproved
0
0
3
Lancaster (V)
and Environs
Lackawanna (C)
County Sewer
District #3
1
Sheldon (T)
4
Being Processed
0
2
Charlotte (T)
Chautauqua County
3
Elma (T)
Erie County Study
Collins (T)
1
Wyoming County
6

-------
STATUS OF SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE PROGRAM

    LAKE ERIE DRAINAGE BASIN

Municipality and County
Chautauqua County
Dunkirk (C)
Westfield (V)
Ripley (T)
Fredonia (V)
Cattaraucus County
Gowanda (V)
Erie County
Blasdell IV)
Buffalo (C)
North Collins (V)
Springville (V)
Lancaster (V)
Lancaster (T)
Hamburg (T)
- Sneldon Acres STP
Lackawanna (C)
Crcnard Park (V)
West Seneca (T)
Boston (T)
- Sewer District #1
- Sewer District #2
Grant
Approved

X
X



X

X
X
X
X
X









Grant Applications
Disapproved Beinq Processed Grant Request

$ 29,807*82
4,954.37
X 2,706,51
X

$ 4,657.04

$ 12,927.83
409,682<,14
2,171.72
3, 626 ,,57
5,256.76
X

X
X 60,172.66
X 2,795»49
X 33,119.62

X 231.50
X 534,70

-------
                                               -•IS-
                                                                                     545
.Vi^nicipality and County

Erie County (cont'd)

    Hamburg (l) STP
     -• 3enz STP

     - Lakecrest Terrace

     - Bethford

     - Wanakah S.D.

    Bepew (V)

    Hamburg (V)

    Mt. Vernon S.DU

    Erie County S.D» #2,
      North Plant

    Erie County S.D.,
      South Plant
 Grant
Approved
Grant
  -approved
Applications
Being Processed
Grant Requested
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
$ 15,883.72
583.34
667.22
1,171.95
4,570.65
8,816.13
6,719,61
4,877.00
5,600.87
12,134.11
Wyoming County

    Arcade (V)
    X
                                   $   2,860.27
                                              TOTAL GRANT APPROVED
                                              GRAND TOTAL
                                                 $ 475,944.52
                                              TOTAL APPLICATIONS ON HAND"    $ 160,585.08
                                                 $ 636,529.60
        includes some applications which will be disapproved

-------
                                                       546
                    R.  D.  Hennigan


            MR.  STEIN:   Thank you,  Mr.  Hennigan.


            Are  there any  comments  or questions?


            (No  response,, )


            MR.  STEIN:   If not,  I don't think  that  the


 characteristic  candor  of  Mr.  Hennigan  should  Indicate  to


 anyone that the New York  program isn't moving along as well


 as  the other State  programs.   It probably  is, but, you know,


 there  are  different ways  of  saying it.


            No further  comments  or  questions?


            MR.  POSTON:  Wait  a  minute.


            MR.  STEIN:   Yes.


            MR.  POSTON:  I was expecting to hear  some tenta-


 tive dates that you might expect to come forth with on the


 construction of the needed facilities, and it seems to me,


 as  a conferee,  that this  is  one of the things that we  are


 here for,  but I don't  know whether this is —


            MR.  STEIN:   I  don't  know.   I thought  possibly


 we  would go over these  points,  particularly the  dates, with


 all the States  together in the  summary, if they  didn't


 offer  it in their original statements, to  reconcile it and


 get a  statement from all  the  States concerned.


            We do have  these  two recommendations, and I think


 you all know this — probably the  key  recommendations


for  this Meeting are Recommendations 22 and 23.

-------
                     R. D.  Hennigan




         Recommendation 22  says:




         "Within six months after the issuance of




     this summary,  the State water pollution agency




     concerned will present a schedule of remedial




     action to the  conferees for  their consideration




     and evaluation."




         The Federal conferee then, in No.  23, recommended




some dates for consideration by the State agency, dealing




with municipal treatment,  discontinuance of trash and




garbage dumping, and industrial waste treatment facilities.




         I think what we have attempted to  do here is




allow the States to present their reports as we usually do




in their own manner, and try to see what reconciliation




and what compliance we can  get.




         I do think that it is quite clear  that we have



pretty substantial  agreement among the States -- and I think




this is a very good point -- from Recommendation 7 right on




through all the recommendations.




         I think one thing we will have to  clarify and




attempt to get a precise,  simple statement  on is the




schedule of remedial action for the various States.  It




might be wise to go over this No. 23 with each State to-




gether and see if we can collate those.




         If that procedure is satisfactory, maybe we can

-------
                   R. D. Hennigan




wait until we have this go-around and call on each State




point by point.  All right?




           MR. BOSTON:  All right.




           MR. STEIN:  Well, thank you,  Mr. Hennigan.



           Are there any other statements?




           MR. METZLER:  Mr. Chairman, I have a question of




procedure.  I hope you will bear with me because I am  a




late-comer to this conference,




           MR. STEIN:  Dwight, we have worked together for




all these years.  You probably have more experience in




conferences than anyone else in this room except me, but go




ahead.




           MR. METZLER:  Well, actually I wanted to draw




on that experience, Murray, just briefly, to inquire if, as




I have noted we have done elsewhere, there was an oppor-




tunity for the delegations who may be along with the States




also to make a contribution.  I hope that you weren't  going



to wind this up before they had a chance to.




           MR. STEIN:  No.  We will give you an opportunity




to do that.




           Let me give you the commitments we have here.




           MR. METZLER:  All right.




           MR. STEIN:  A lot of the people at the table had




come here with the notion of a one-day meeting.

-------
         We all welcomed -- I include myself,  of course  --




the addition of the Secretary and the other dignitaries  we




have had here.




         Recognizing the importance of that from a  Federal-




State-city-industrial push on the program,  we  are way ahead




in having the Secretary here.  I believe he gained  an




appreciation in hearing and being with you  people here and




in the course of the boat trip that he never could  get in




Washington by hearing this second-hand from Mr.  Quigley  or




myself.




         However,, I think by getting these  additions, we,




of necessity, must be more brief.  Some of  the State people




did not expect to stay more than one day.   Now,  with that




in mind, if they expect to leave tonight,  I would appreci-




ate it if any people you called on kept their  statements




brief.  We have to run through the summary  and also try  to




have the conferees here make their commitments.




         We recognize that we used several  hours for a




boat trip and other things which were not contemplated when




we originally came.




         With that, Mr. Fetzler, you may go ahead and call




the people.




         MR. METZLER:  Thank you.  I actually  have  a request




for a two-minute statement from one of New  York's representa-




tives, and he is the only one.

-------
                                                     550
                   S. P. Spisiak
         STATEMENT OF STANLEY P. SPISIAK, REPRE-



         SENTING THE NEW YORK STATE CONSERVATION


         COUNCIL






           MR. SPISIAK:  Thank you.


           I can talk fast, but I don't believe I will


make It In quite two minutes.


                                               I   am a


citizen of New York State, and am quite proud of the leader-


ship that New York State has assumed, although Ohio seems


to be doing a better propaganda job in claiming credit for


a million dollar program.  When I heard that presented, I


wanted to ask that you give us a little bit of credit also.


           Be that as it may, I am concerned with only one


particular point, and this is a very important point.  Up


to this time, we have had so much harmony and peace that


perhaps a word or two of friendly criticism would not be


amiss.






                                       S ometimes I find that


it is necessary for me to express my opinion, which is not


always favorable, and at this moment I would feel in a


kindred position.

-------
                                                        551
                   S. P. Spisiak
           The Federal people have asked us so many
questions, and we have answered them diligently.  I think
it time now that we ask just one question.
           I am concerned about something that is of great
Importance and can have an immediate beneficial effect.
This pertains to something that I hoped our boat trip
people would have been able to visit with and see a little
bit more distinctly.  However, this pleasure was somehow
denied them.
           This is the dredging of material from your
river,                     andj more importantly, the one
that I am more concerned with, the removal of debris from
the Buffalo River.
           You heard Chairman Stein just a few minutes ago
ask our good friend, Bob Hennigan, about Republic Steel,
National Aniline, and a few other contributors to an open
sewer commonly called the Buffalo River.  This is a sub-
sidized sewer which exists primarily for the purpose of
removing waste material for five major industries in the
Buffalo area.  The solids and settleable solids, the acids,
the phenols, the  cyanides, the oils, the tars -- every
deadly and undesirable type of material is discharged by
these industries into this Buffalo sewer or Buffalo River,
if you will.

-------
                                                       552
                   S.  P.  Spisiak

           This material, the major portion of it — in

fact, I think there has been a waste here some place,

because the discovery  of heavy water could have been many

years sooner if they had just made a trip up the Buffalo

River, because certainly the buoyancy of this water is

such that even wood finds a hard time floating upon it,

and ship captains refer to this as the scrubbing river.

When they need to refinish their hulls, they only spend,

with their metal hulls, an overnight trip in the Buffalo

River, and their hulls are completely scoured when they

come from it, so that  they can have them repainted without

any additional work.

           Now, through the courtesy of the Corps of

Engineers and the United States Government, 125,000 cubic

yards, or, more specifically, 25 million gallons, since

this is a liquid and should be measured as such, of this

deadly and toxic material is removed each year, and then

taken from a river where it would no longer   do any harm.

We are placed in double jeopardy because this material is

removed and, like a caged tiger, is released upon our

bathing beaches.  This is dumped into what is called the

Woodlawn Beach, in a one-mile square area, where this

125,000 cubic yards each year has been disposed of in a

one-mile square area,  which was 12 feet deep before this

-------
                                                     553
                   S. P. Splsiak

discharge started, and which now, more than a quarter of

a century later, is still 12 feet deep.

           Realize that this material is moving, as all

liquids will, with the will of the wind and the wisp of

the waves, and it is finding its way all along our bathing

beaches, to the point that the State of New York, through

the good grace of the Federal Government, has had to close

the majority of the beaches.

           In fact, every single beach in the State of New

York should be closed largely as a result of the discharge

of these materials, which are placed in a position where

they can render the greatest deal of harm.

           This, I think, is a question for us to have

answered, not as evasively as it was answered this morning

by the Corps of Engineers.

           Here I would just like to read very briefly one

paragraph of a letter from Senator Kennedy:

           "Thank you for arranging the trip on the

      Buffalo River on June 17, 1965.  I found the

      conditions on the river from a visible standpoint
      shocking.  Dredging the wastes from a river bottom

      and depositing them in the harbor seems to offer a

      great danger of contamination to local water

      supplies."

-------
                                                      55^
                   S. P. Spisiak


           I might add our water intake is downstream


about one mile from the discharge point of these deadly


toxic materials, and at times -- at times has entered the


public drinking supply in the City of Buffalo.


           In Point 25 of the recommendations of the


conferees of this group last year, representatives of the


United States Army Corps of Engineers are to meet with the


conferees, develop and put into action a program for the


disposal of dredged material in Lake Erie and its tributaries,


which will satisfactorily protect water quality.  Such a


program is to be developed within six months after the


issuance of this summary and effectuated as soon as possible


thereafter.


           The report this morning was that this matter is


bogged down and tied down one year and a few days later, and


has reached no satisfactory conclusion.


           At this very identical moment, the discharge of


these materials is continuing, and will suspend within one


week, having completed its job.  You and your Cuyahoga


River here are disposing of not just 125,000 cubic yards,


but nearly 8 to 10 times as much of this material, and you


are placing yourselves in double jeopardy.


           I think it would be nice if we left this group


here today with some assurance that the Federal Government

-------
                                                   555



                   S. P. Spisiak




will meet its responsibility and that this double jeopardy




will cease to exist.




         Thank you.




         MR. STEIN:  Thank you, Mr. Spisiak.




         You know, I really think good propaganda jobs




are important, because they show people are interested.  While




I am all for them and would like to encourage them,  I wonder




sometimes, with your $1 billion bond issue and the appeal




and approach and the focus on this of Governor Rockefeller




and Senator Kennedy, and with that wonderful  speech you just




made, how we can possibly accuse Ohio of doing a better




propaganda job than New York.




         (Laughter.)




         I think the propaganda job that you  have done in




New York has been wonderful.  As a matter of  fact, the



Secretary and everyone in Washington knows about that $1



billion bond issue you passed in New York.




         MR. SPISIAK:  It bears repetition.




         MR. STEIN:  I know it bears repetition, but I




wish some of the other States would do the propaganda job




that New York has done, because this is what  starts pollution




control moving.



         Are there any comments or questions?

-------
                                                      556
                   S. P. Spisiak
           MR. POOLE:  What do you want?  Pollution control
or propaganda now?
           MR. STEIN:  I think they go hand in hand.
           (Laughter.)
           MR. SPISIAK:  Nothing happens until the sale is
made.
           MR. STEIN:  Do we have any other comments or
questions?
           (No response. )
           MR. STEIN:  Or do any of the other conferees
have invitees from their States?
           (No response. )
           MR. STEIN:  If not, we can, I think, proceed
with the summary.
           I think we can indicate that we have substantial
agreement on most of the recommendations and adherance to
those by the States.  I don't know — they have been
repeated over and over again — whether we have to go over
these again,  about secondary treatment from the munici-
palities;  the removal of phosphates from municipal treat-
ment plants to the maximum; the disinfection of municipal
waste effluents where required; the design to prevent the
necessary bypassing and the problem of elimination of the
combined sewer problem; the program to prevent accidental

-------
                                                     557



                   Summary




spills, and the reporting of accidental spills;  the




prohibiting of dumping garbage,  trash and other  deleterious




substances into Lake Erie; and,  the question of  the highway




and community development programs for controlling of



runoff.




         This last point may be  one we may want  to discuss,



because, as I have heard the reports here, as far as I see




it, the reports are not completely or materially going to




solve the problem.




         We have a problem here.  As I understand it, the




road officials are going to achieve earlier ground cover.




As I understand the proposal, there is no program, and




possibly no feasible way during  the construction to stop




the runoff.  We are going to be  plagued with the problem




continually until we do that, unless we devise a method




of constructing roads which will prevent runoff.  However,




I don't think there is any point in deluding ourselves




that we have solved our problem.  If I am wrong  on that,




let me know.



         Is it fruitful to have  any further meetings with




the roads people to see if we can improve this practice?




Phis isn't just roads, you know.  It is subdivisions too.




         Mr. Metzler:




         MR. METZLER:  I just wanted to point out that in

-------
                                                   55&
                     Summary
New York State, as I understand it -- and I think Mr.
Hennigan referred briefly to this -- we attacked the
biggest one first, and that was the road-building people.
          Governor Rockefeller is very much personally
interested in this aspect of the approach, but you are
quite right in saying we have no solution.  However, we
found some responsible people who are willing to be
cooperative on this part of the program.
          MR. STEIN:  My view on this, gentlemen, is that
as long as we have the road program and the runoffs, we are
going to get complaints.  There is nothing like silt to
give you a complaint.
          You know, I think we have done a tolerably
decent job on the Potomac River in eliminating the health
hazard, eliminating largely the sight and odor nuisance,
except in late August generally, when we still have the
algae die off.  As long as that river remains muddy, people
say you haven't cleaned it up.
          My notion is, if it is agreeable to the conferees,
that we, in the technical meetings with the road committee,
before the next meeting see if we can report some progress;
because if we let the problem go, then nothing is going to
be done.

-------
                                                   559
                     Summary
          I don't know that we have a complete solution
on the roads problem now, but I think this Is going to
require continual cooperation and meeting with the people.
Possibly we can find someone to come up with some proposal
in road construction to minimize the problem.
          Mr. Lyon?
          MR. LYON:  Mr. Chairman, I believe I understood
from Mr. Boston that there is an agreement being drawn up,  or
some type of --
          MR. POSTON:  A directive has been written.
          MR. LYON:  A directive has been written that
will communicate from your agency to the Department of
Commerce?
          MR. POSTON:  Prom the Bureau of Public Roads
to the directors of public roads of --
          MR. LYON:  Prom the Bureau of Public Roads  to
the appropriate State agencies?
          MR. POSTON:  Yes.
          MR. LYON:  It seems to me essential that the
Bureau of Public Roads recognize that it will cost them
additional money to attain these pollution abatement  steps
in the process of highway construction.
          In working with our Department of Highways, we
have found that in a number of instances they have apparently

-------
                                                  560




                     Summary




not allowed the funds that were necessary to prevent



pollution, and it would seem to me essential that the




Federal Government agencies come to some agreement on this.




          MR. STEIN:  Mr.  Lyon, I will tell you,  I think




you are entirely right; but I think this is somewhat




analogous to the stormwater separation problem that we had




with urban renewal.




          The point is, once we have a plan or a  feasible




way of doing this during construction and preventing it, I




think this has such an appeal the funds will be forthcoming.




          The difficulty and the difficult position that




we are in at this time is  that given that directive, can we




go to the Bureau of Roads  or the State Roads Departments




or the contractors and say, if you will do so-and-so and




so-and-so, this will only  cost you X more thousands of




dollars and we won't get this runoff?  We do not  have a




proposal like that yet.



          My notion is that we should try to develop some-




thing possibly by the next conference and see if  we can




work in that direction, because I don't see daylight in




solving this road problem  yet.  We can ameliorate it slightly




by putting on the ground cover a little faster.



          MR. POSTON:  I think this should apply  not only




to roads, but also to agricultural runoff.

-------
                                                   561
                      Summary
           MR. STEIN:  Let's take one at a time.
           Again, I will speak, certainly, on the record here,
As you know, and a lot of you do here, and Dwight has been
out in the West — the hardest group to deal with in pollu-
tion is the agricultural interests.  There are so many and
they are really well vested.
           I think with the roads program, though, again I
say this is analogous to the storm sewer program.  This is
largely a Federal program with 90 percent Federal money.
           If we can come up with a method to handle the
roads program or a reasonable method, we will sell it.
           Let me mention one more thing.  The people who
handle the roads program in the  Congress are the same
people who -handle the pollution  legislation.  We go before
the same committee and the same  people, and we have a
very, very sympathetic group that will look at this as a
public works problem that they are ready to solve if we
can give them a solution.
           I say-let's take the  first things first.  That
agricultural problem is going to be harder and we are going
to have to do a lot more selling to get that accepted.
           If we would do that,  Mr. Boston, if you could
continue the committee, or possibly get one of the bright
scientists to come up with a proposal for consideration,

-------
                                                      562
                      Summary



maybe we can, in dealing with the States,  come up with a


consensus on a proposal that would minimize runoff during


road construction.



           We go to No. 16:  Industrial Plant Practices.


           I think we are pretty much in agreement on that.


We have the list down here of the substances.  As we all



know, these industries have to be dealt with on a case-by-



case and plant-by-plant basis.



           I think we are fortunate that in the five


States represented here we have highly sophisticated


industrial waste sections in each of the States, people who


are familiar with the problems and in dealing with the



industries.  I am sure adequate proposals  are being developed



for each industrial plant.



           I think the sampling program by industries is



proceeding apace, as I see it, from the five States; and


the results, I would say, have exceeded my most optimistic


hopes on this.  I think the data disclosure program is


proceeding very well too.


           I think we are on the verge of getting pretty


complete sampling, and some of the States  like New York



are forming it into law.  We are on the verge of getting



pretty complete disclosure of information on a routine basis,


which should help.  This is one of the real accomplishments

-------
                                                        563
                      Summary

and the States should be commended on that.

           No. 18 relates to the same thing.  The surveillance

program on Lake Erie to be established by the Federal Govern-

ment is proceeding, and they are working with the States on

that.

           The phosphate removal program I think has pro-

ceeded a little better than some of us had expected.  We

had proposals now — I know I am with Mr. Poole.  He did

not get his results, but in long association with Mr. Poole

I have learned that he is a wise man to listen to and we

should heed his advice.  Some of our people ha^p indicated

to us that the phosphates can be removed by changes in

operations of the plant at a cost much less than we would

have anticipated.

           I think what is called for now are some pilot

plant demonstrations, and possibly we can hope to get going

on that.

           I think you have two cities of interest here,

and possibly we can move forward with those -- one is

Detroit and the other is Fort Wayne.  Possibly, if the

conferees wish, we can recommend that the Secretary try to

expedite these projects and see if we can come up with

plans which will remove the phosphates.  Since we have two

willing guinea pigs in that area, I suggest we accept their

-------
                                                      564
                      Summary
offers and go ahead.

           The next point on regional planning I think

has been adopted by most of the States.

           Let me skip 22 and 23.

           I think the Federal installation program is

moving forward and we will be in operation by August of

1966, except for that one base.

           How about  Selfridge?  When are you going to have

that finished?

           MR. POSTON:  Selfridge  is out of the basin.

           MR. STEIN:  I know, but just  for my information.

           MR. POSTON:  I can't answer that.   We can ask

Mr. Earlow.

           MR. STEIN:  George, are we home free on Selfridge

with a commitment, or do we still  have .that up in the air?

           MR. HARLOW:  No.

           MR. STEIN:  We are not  home?

           MR. HARLOW:  No.

           MR. STEIN:  So while it is out of the basin, I

think the Secretary indicated that he was working with that.

We will work with Michigan on that and hopefully report to

the conferees to see if we have solved that problem the

next time we meetr

           The next point is the point that Mr. Spisiak

talked on, on the Corps of Engineers' dredged material.

-------
                                                      565
                      Summary

           I don't know if the Corps man is here,  but I

don't see, with the exchange of correspondence,  gentlemen,

that we have seen daylight on that yet.

           I am not sure I understand why we are going into

a cost-benefit ratio study on this at all.  As far as I am

concerned, if the dredged material is to be kept out of the

lake, it is to be kept out of the lake.

           We have never asked the steel representatives

or the municipal representatives to go into cost-benefit

studies on whether they should remove their wastes from the

lake.  If they did, I don't KFIOW how far we would be along.

           We have indicated that these wastes have to be

kept out.  I wonder if we could get -- and you may have

had this -- an agreement on how much this is going to cost

and present It to the Corps and see if they will do it.

           However, unless there is disagreement here, I

don't see the relationship of a cost-benefit study to

removing deleterious dredged material from the lake.

           Mr. Metzler?

           MR. METZLER:  I don't know that it has any

connection, Mr. Chairman, with the matter at issue, but I

do understand why the Corps asked for a cost-benefit study.

           As you know, they are required to show the

Public Works Committee -- .Senator Ellender especially this

-------
                                                         566
                      Summary
year is very adamant on this point -- a cost-benefit ratio
on all its work.  They can't go back into the Congress with
less than a substantial cust-beneflt ratio, or they will be
turned down by the Public Works Committee.
           Now, the Public Works Committee is the committee
on appropriations, and I believe this is the reason.
           But the only reason that I make this explanation
is that I think it requires probably a partial answer
rather than one which can be answered entirely.
           MR. STEIN:  This is true in regular rivers and
harbors work, but I think in pollution control work we
haven't had that.
           I think the thing we have to find out is how
much extra this will cost the Corps of Engineers a year
to put the dredged material in appropriate places, behind
dikes, rather than dumping it in the lake, and see if they
or the Congress want to buy it in addition to the cost-
benefit.  But I would simply, in going before the people
we go before in the Congress, use the principle of clean
water overriding other cost benefits.
           MR. POSTON:  We gave that figure this morning —
the Corps did — General Dodge.
           MR. STEIN:  I didn't know that that was read.
Yes, it was.  It is estimated about $110 million over a

-------
                                                       567
                      Summary

ten-year life, which is $11 million a year.

           MR. BOSTON:  He has an annual charge of $16

million more.  He says that it is $16 million a year.

           MR. STEIN:  $16 million a year to prevent

dredged material from getting into Lake Erie?

           MR. BOSTON:  Right.

           MR. STEIN:  I would say here and  now I think it

is a bargain, but, of course, it is for the  Congress to make

the decision.

           The reason that I say it is a bargain is because

I think if we were to deal with a municipality having  that

kind of a problem and you were a State and that was what it

was going to cost them, I don't think we would have any

hesitancy in making the recommendation to a  municipality.

I think the Government should assume its obligation.

           The next point is the Technical Committee.

           MR. LYON:  May I comment?

           MR. STEIN:  Yes.

           MR. LYON:  Mr. Chairman, I have to catch a plane,

so, with your permission, I would like to designate Mr.

Miller as Pennsylvania's conferee for the remainder of the

conference.

           MR. STEIN:  Will he be prepared to talk as to

dates?

-------
                                                        568
                      Summary

           MR. LYON:  Yes.  He has all the Information.

           MR. STEIN:  All right.

           MR. LYON:  With regard  to Item 26,  I feel,  as I

think is generally agreed, that the Technical  Committee

should not only be continued, but  should continue to  devote

itself to the questions which remain very largely unanswered

that were set forth in the adoption of the technical  report

presented this morning.

           In this connection, I want to emphasize again

that although, as you have indicated,  a  number of pilot

plant studies are going on that will tell us how better

to remove phosphates, and certainly there are  many ways  of

doing this, our knowledge in this  area needs to be expanded.

           However, even more than that, I feel, as I think

most of the conferees, or all of you do, that  phosphates are

an important oollution problem of  this lake.

           Many of the experts that spoke to our committee

made it very clear that our knowledge of the pollution and

its effects on this lake is extremely limited, and it would

seem to me essential that we devote much more  effort  than

we have so far done to answering the question as to what,

in addition to ohosphates, are some of the other things  that

have caused the problems of this lake.

           Thank you very much.

-------
                                                     569
                      Summary


           MR. STEIN:  Thank you.


           Mr. Oemlng:


           MR. OEMING:   Mr. Chairman and members of the


conference:


           I would support Mr. Lyon In his remarks on the


report of the Technical Committee.


           It Is my understanding from several of the


members that they did not have the opportunity to go Into


this report thoroughly, review it and concur in It.  There


are also some questions that I believe are not answered


to the full satisfaction of me, at least, and to answer the


charge that was given to the committee fully.


           So I would like to urge that this committee be


continued as an active  committee and devote itself to further


study and obtain more of a consensus as to the conclusions


in the report that were made here today.


           Now, while I have the floor here for a moment, I


may be out of order, but as to some of the points you have


already covered, I raise a question as to the emphasis that


these conferees have placed in the past upon the removal


of phosphates from the lake from all sources.  Recognizing


certainly that there are some unanswered questions, we are


hopeful that they will be answered promptly enough to get


at this problem of phosphate removal.

-------
                                                  570



                     Summary


          However, I want to ask again here as to how  much


emphasis should the States put on this matter of phosphate


removal?


          MR. STEIN:  I don't know whom you are asking.
                                        /

          MR. OEMING:  I am asking the Chairman to poll


the members.


          MR. STEIN:  I will tell you the way I feel about


this, and, of course, I am not sure that all our scientists


agree.


          Mr. Lyon and you raise doubts that certainly I


have.  I have seen these notions of what we are getting


excited about come and go in the pollution field through


the years.  As a matter of fact, it used to be some  of the


industries sitting around here, and then it becomes


detergents, or pesticides, or something.  We always  get  on


something that seems to be the current fad.  I think we  are


on a phosphate kick now, and I don't mean the kind you get


at a soda fountain.


          Now, I do believe that theoretically the


scientists are probably right.  If you remove the phosphates


or you cut them down, it can only prove to help the  lake.


Whether this is the complete answer, or whether it is


really going to slow up eutrophication, or whether


there are other factors we don't know

-------
                                                       571
                      Summary

about at this time, I think are very,  very good  questions.

           We all have these doubts,  and I think we  all

understand each other on that point.

           The point is in an area like this,  in dealing

with a lake as we are dealing, we can  only do  what we know

how to, or we can only deal with substances that are indi-

cated to us.

           Now, I am not sure, and I  don't think anyone IS

sure that even if our wildest dreams  are true  on this

phosphate removal and we do a good job, that this is going

to be a panacea and we are going to see a tremendous

reduction in this plankton or algal growth in  the lake

necessarily.  Maybe we will.  Maybe some of the  biologists

who contend that will do it are right, but I think again,

as professionals -- and I think we are all professionals

in this field -- we must recognize that what we  are  presented

with is a theoretical concept that makes a considerable

amount of sense in order to put it through and to follow it.

It seems to be the only reasonable thing we know how to do

now, and the chances of it working may be fairly good.

           If we develop a method of putting this into

operation that won't really increase the cost  of waste

treatment, we might adopt that as a standard practice in

the lake.

-------
                                                     572
                      Summary

           The point is because we are faced,  on the other

hand, up here with this other thing,  while we  are debating

it and arguing and sharpening our criteria, the lakes may

be gone.   We can't wait that long with Lake Erie.  We have

to do now what we know now, and the phosphates seem to be

one indication.

           I think the Technical Committee will have to

keep going and see if we can refine this problem further.

           MR. OEMING:  I am not fighting this.  There may

be other factors.  I think you have touched on the point

that concerned me as a result of this session here today.

The question of phosphate removal and the necessity of it

is debatable.

           Are we talking about a debatable subject?

           MR. STEIN:  I don't think it is debatable now.

I don't think it is a debatable subject.  I think we have

agreed on maximum phosphate removal.

           I think the only thing tnat the conferees have

to have in mind is that we have a pretty good hunch that

this is going to be effective.  Certainly, it is not going

to hurt.

           Whether this will provide the comolete answer,

we don't know, and this is what we have to have the Tech-

nical Committee for.  I have heard no one say that it isn't

-------
                                                     573
                      Summary

a good idea to remove those phosphates.

           MR. OEMING:  I was convinced of that.

           MR. STEIN:  Yes.

           MR. OEMING:  After two seconds.

           MR. STEIN:  Yes.

           MR. OEMING:  But I want to know if that has

drifted off into the great beyond and we are not  concerned

with it now.

           MR. STEIN:  No.  I think unless you get this

phosphate removal, with t-.he best knowledge that we have,

all the treatment is going to do is not going to  get at one

of the key problems in the eutrophication of that lake.

           MR. OEMING:  In other words, secondary treatment

now, as we know it, is not the full answer.

           MR. STEIN:  It is not the full answer.  We must

remove the phosphates, and once we remove them, we may have

a more complete answer, but we still may not have the full

answer.

           Are there any comments or questions?

           MR. OEMING:  Would you rule, Mr. Chairman, on

this matter on what is going to happen to this committee,

the Technical Committee, that was given some assignments?

           MR. STEIN:  Yes.  I think I have a consensus

here, as I see it, that the Technical Committee should

-------
                                                   574
                      Summary


continue.

           It might broaden its base in getting at the

other problem that you talk about.  It may wish to consult

with other experts and bring them in; and the committee,

if they are going to broaden this, I think they may have

made a first stab.


           I don't look at this as horrendous in coming in

with a report that looks pretty good.  I have never seen

a technical committee on a subject like that arrive at a

consensus in the time that this operation has been working.

I think the report should be circulated, as you probably

have for the States, but the Technical Committee should

begin to get the comments back from the State agencies

and the State administrators represented here, and get out

another draft report which will more nearly, or, if possible,

completely reflect the consensus.

           Now, that can be done.  We did this.  Mr.

Kittrell, I think, and the industries and the States  did

this on Lake Michigan.  I think you can do it here.  It

takes a lot of work and you are going to have to get  together

for several meetings before you can possibly do it on a

subject like this.

           MR. OEMING:  Mr. Stein, may I clarify my position?

           MR. STEIN:  Right.

-------
                                                    575




                     Summary




           MR. OEMING:  I think you are indicating that  I




am dissatisfied.  I am not dissatisfied with the work of



the committee.




           The committee has done a lot of work.  What I




am saying is that I don't consider that the job has been




done, and I don't consider that the report as presented




reflects the consensus as you have indicated here.  I would




like to see that done.




           MR. STEIN:  I think everyone is in complete




agreement.  I don't think anyone disagrees with what you




said, Mr. Oeming.




           I think this is the next job of the Technical




Committee.  Your job is to do this, as  I see it, and you




have the details.




           Let me explain this:  If we  are going to meet




again, as I expect we will, on a complicated problem like




this, firstly, you have to come up with the Technical Com-




mittee reports which reflect the consensus of the Federal




Government and the five States; secondly, come up with a




pretty clear and as precise a statement as we can on the




phosphate problem and progress; and, third is the identi-




fication of what other problems we see to explore on dealing




with the lakes and what we have to do about them.




           Mr. Poston?

-------
                      Summary                       576




           MR. POSTON:  I would like to make sure that the




mission which the conferees developed and gave  to the




Technical Committee — they confined their work to these




specifics — you can add any other specifics that you would




care to, but I would like that to be well defined to them.




           MR. STEIN:  Right.




           MR. POSTON:  And that be the entire  scope of




their work.




           MR. STEIN:  Yes.  Well, I don't think there is




any question there.




           May we go on to the next point.  This is probably




the reason why we are all here, this question of the time




schedule for the work.   Maybe we can work back from the




middle.  The easier one is the discontinuance of garbage




and trash dumping into the waters immediately.




           Have any of you had any doubt about  adopting  that




as a policy, or not putting it into effect?




           MR. OEMING:  It depends on what you mean by




"immediately."  If it means right now, I don't  think so.




           I think so far as the Michigan report is concerned,




there is now an adequate statute and regulations that are




attacking this problem.  It certainly will be attacked with




vigor.  If that means "immediately," within the next few




months —



           MR. STEIN:  Yes.

-------
                                                       577
                      Summary

           MR. OEMING:  — It will be done.


           MR. STEIN:  I would suggest that  I don't think

there Is any way to handle a problem like we have on Lake

Erie without a progress meeting every six months, or recon-

vening every six months.


           Without anticipating whether the  conferees are

going to do that now, I would expect on the  assumption

they are not going to propose that later, that we do that --

that in six months from now, when we come back, we all have

a pretty good report on the question of the  dumping of


garbage and trash, and how far we have moved with this,

with the hopeful substantial elimination of  this.

           This is the kind of policing operation that you

can never completely eliminate.  I suggest,  though, that

we try to get substantial elimination of this by the next

time we come in.

           Mr. Poole?

           MR. POOLE:  Mr. Chairman, I don't buy that as


long as you say "substantial elimination."

           I would remind you that we have had a law for,

I guess, ten years that makes it illegal to  dump garbage

and trash along the road or into any stream, and it makes

it the responsibility of every local law enforcement officer

to enforce that law.

           We still can't keep all of the beer cans out of

-------
                      Summary                        578




the streams in Indiana.  Everybody who is involved in this




has to realize that any program has to be tempered with




some policing.




           MR. STEIN:  We all recognize the limitations




on that.




           Now let's take up Subparagraph (c), Industrial




Waste Treatment Facilities Completed and in Operation




by January 1,  1969.



           Let's go down the States as they appear in order.




Let's do this  from west to east, as is usually done.




           Michigan?




           MR. OEMING:  The final date for industrial




compliance with effluent restrictions is November 1, 1969.




           MR. STEIN:  November.  You are a little beyond?




           MR. OEMING:  Yes.




           MR. STEIN:  November 1, 1969.




           How about you, Mr. Poole?



           MR. POOLE:  I think we can meet it.  January of




1969.



           MR. STEIN:  Ohio?




           MR. EAGLE:  Right.  January 1, 1969 -- 100 percent




completion,,




           MR. STEIN:  Pennsylvania?




           MR. MILLER:  By the end of 1966,  they should all

-------
                                                     579
                      Summary

be in compliance.

           MR. STEIN:  And New York?

           MR. HENNIGAN:  There always has to be somebody

to disagree.

           The New York State program is predicated on a

six-year program for the entire State, which brings us to

1971.

           The general policy followed throughout the State

is to use as tight a schedule as we can, depending on

circumstances, the concluding date being 1971.

           MR. STEIN:  You know, the problem we have here

is trying to get this in an equitable operation, arid I

think we are going to have to have a fairly uniform date

for the conferees in all the States.

           MR. METZLER:  Murray, you and I have had a lot

of experience in this business, and we have set dates, and

we have gone back and then changed them, altered them.

           It seems to me that one of the things we might

learn about this is that one wants to adopt dates

realistically.  I have not been in New York long enough

really to have enough information on this point to be sure,

but it appears to me, as I understand the problem, that if

we are to start building tomorrow some of the things that

need to be done, and assume that everyone would build as

-------
                      Summary                         580




fast as he could physically, I doubt very much if we could




ask to get it done by 1969.




           I am afraid that is a thing which would bother



us.




           MR. STEIN:  Yes.




           MR. METZLER:  We are pushing ahead just as




rapidly as we possibly can.  We shouldn't allow any delays.




           MR. STEIN:  No, but I am thinking in terms of




the five-State operation.




           Let me make a proposal here on this to try to




put it in the middle.  Three States say they can meet




January 1, 19&9j two don't; one says November.




           Supposing we say for this operation here for




the conferees, at least maybe New York — you can have




your reservations but I am talking about the Secretary,




and he is going to come up, I am pretty sure, a proposal as




to this -- my recommendation is a proposal and possibly



a consensus, if you want, that we say "as early as possible




but not later than January 1, 1970."  That is in the middle,




           MR. POOLE:  Mr. Chairman, could I make a



suggestion that we might borrow a lead from the Lake




Michigan conference?




           I have forgotten the date we agreed upon there,




but we did agree upon a date with the understanding that




there might be an occasional extenuating circumstance here

-------
                                                     581
                      Summary

or there.  If someone could come In and  document  real

reasons for a longer time,,  that it would be acceptable.

           How would you react to that?

           MR. STEIN:  Well, as Dwight  says,  we  have worked

together for a long time.  Mostly we have worked  on con-

sidering the extenuating circumstances.

           However, I think this is right, and I  think

this is implicit in any date we set.  I  don't think if

we come up with this, that  this would be too unreasonable.

           MR. OEMING:  What date are you talking about

now?

           MR. STEIN:  January 1, 1970.

           MR. POSTON:  If  you are going to provide for

extenuating circumstances in some cases, why not  leave

that at January, 1969?

           MR. STEIN:  Well, you could do that except you

have two of the major States that say they cannot comply.

           The point is if  we can get these within striking

distance, and I think if we could put the date of January

1970 in we can get all the  States in with New York within

striking distance and maybe most of their projects within

striking distance, it would help.

           The difficulty that I have in setting the date

very tight — and it always looks nice at a conference --

is that once you get too many of these extenuating

-------
                      Summary                         582




 circumstances we are back here changing the dates.




            I would think that the January 1970 date, in




 view of the fact that we have two major States — and I




 know the  problems in both of these — the Detroit complex




 and the Buffalo complex are not going to be easy, and




 neither will the Cleveland one — these are among the




 toughest  cases that we have in the country to get going.




 I think we  have to recognize these problems.




            MR. OEMING:  Mr. Chairman, may I comment a




 moment as being one of these States that seems to be longer




 than the  others here?




            MR. STEIN:  Yes.




            MR. OEMING:  I would point out to the conferees




 that the  dates that were arrived at in Michigan were only




 arrived at  after long consideration of the magnitude and




 the extent  of the problems in the area.




            The November 1, 1969, date is the one that applies




 to the longest ones.  There are many of these that will




 mature in 1967 and 1968.



            MR. STEIN:  Yes.




            MR. OEMING:  I would also point out to the




 conferees the danger here when a program has been changed




 of tightening it up to the point where you now get into a




 legal hassle and you get into appeals and proof of the



necessity and  the  practicability  and  the  reasonableness  of

-------
                                                  583
                      Summary


shortening the time.  With this you can lose all of the


time you think you have gained, by setting an unrealistic


date in court.


           MR. STEIN:  Right.  You recognize that the first


date, January 1, 1969* was just the date that was proposed


by the Federal conferee.  Now we are here to decide on a


date.


           I do think, in light of that, the 1970 date


might be a date, but I would suggest one modification, in


light of what you said and in light of the experience and


practice we have had with Mr. Hennigan in New York,, that it


is recognized that this be the outside date for each


industry.   We are dealing with just industries, but I


suggest we do this with the cities too.  I would suggest


by the next progress meeting — and I assume we are going


to have that in six months — the States will come up with


a time schedule for each industry as to their completion


date, industry by industry.


           MR. OEMING:  You have that from us.


           MR. STEIN:  Yes, it is true some of the States


have done it, but I am talking for all the States.


           MR. OEMING:  All right.


           MP  STEIN:  And this we have found, at  least in


dealing with  New York on other problems, to be a very

-------
                      o                              584
                      Summary




satisfactory way of doing this, because you almost




anticipate your extenuating circumstances.  The easy ones




we are really speeding up, so perhaps we can try that.




           MR. POOLE:  We are settling on January 1, 1970?




           MR. STEIN:  Not later than that, and as early




as possible.  Within six months all the States will come up




with a figure on the operation of every industry, and when




they are to be completed, at the next conference, and they




will report that.




           The next point we have is the municipal treat-




ment facilities to be completed.  Let's work backwards.




We had the same date, January 1969, for the municipalities.




I guess there is some validity in having the municipal  dates




and the industrial dates coincide, but let's hear from




Michigan.



           MR. OEMING:  Here again, Mr. Chairman, the




longest date is November 1, 1970.  There are two, I believe,



with that maturing date.  There are some in 1969 -- I can't




find it here exactly, but there are some in advance of this.




           I would say this, Mr. Chairman, and this applies




both to municipalities and industries :  We have to recognize




we are already experiencing in Michigan, and I think else-




where, that you have problems of getting contractors and




you have problems of getting equipment deliveries.  As  of

-------
                                                      585
                      Summary

now we are being delayed eight and ten months  on equipment

deliveries for waste treatment facilities.   All of these

things have to be taken into account when you  decide on

what date you want.  Some of these were taken  into account

-- not all of them -- because they did not  exist at the time

we set these schedules.

           MR. STEIN:  Could we do this again?  I think

there is some validity in having the same date.  You did

it and we have done it here in the original proposal.  I

think if we have January I, 1970,  we might  consider doing

the same thing for the municipalities, if this is agreeable.

           Now, with the same proviso, I would suggest that

in six months we come up at the next meeting with an

indication of not later than January 1970,  but the ones

we can do before — and I have a suggestion that I just
thought of here -- rather than work out the other dates here,
just recommend municipal treatment and completion of plans

and specifications, completion of financing, construction

started, as we did in the development of the individual

schedules for municipalities, recognizing that completion

will not be after January 1, 1970.  The States will assign

dates for all these points for each municipality, so we

will have that tailored for everyone.

           MR. POOLE:  A question there, Mr. Chairman.

-------
                      Summary                       586




           MR. EAGLE:  Mr.  Chairman,  I don't believe that




it would be practical to try to break it down to that



extent this soon,  because many of these cities and counties




have to make extensive studies and prepare general plans




and reports.  This is just  going to take time.




           Many of ours are under way, but others are going




to take a year from now to  be completed before they even




know what they are going to build, so you can't very well




schedule detailed  plans of  financing and all of that sort




of thing.




           I would recommend that we break this down to




the point of having studies and general plans completed by




not later than July 1, 1967, and construction completed by




not later than January 1, 1970.




           I don't see that you can,  in all cases, break  it




down much finer than that at this point, because we don't




know what we are going to do until we get the report and




general plan.



           MR. STEIN:  Are there any comments on that?




           MR. POOLE:  My only comment is this:  I have




no quarrel with the dates,  providing we have an understanding




about phosphates.




           That is, we have heard a lot about phosphates  in




August, and again today, but, as of this moment, I don't




know what to tell  Port Wayne, Indiana, to do in the way of

-------
                                                     587
                      Summary
phosphate removal.
           Now., I heard today that you found an answer
down in San Antonio, but, candidly, it involved a lot of
money.  I would like to see it tried in a few more places
before we attempt to impose it on our taxpayers.
           I just want to find out if we are talking about
this business of phosphate removals in these dates, or if
we are talking about secondary treatment and chlorination.
To me, they can be two different things.
           MR. OEMING:  Mr. Chairman?
           MR. STEIN:  Yes.
           MR. OEMING:  In a case where we have set dates
here -- and I believe it is November 1, 1970 — this in-
cludes phosphate removal, 80$ phosphate removal.  The same
schedules were set on that basis, that there was work needed
to be done here to determine what kind of facilities to
design for Detroit and Wayne County.  This introduced a
period of time in which the investigations needed to be

made.
           We talked this morning, or earlier today, about
pilot projects.  I think you will find that it is physically
impossible to do the pilot projects, or even the Federal
research project coming up with design criteria by fall to

get a $110 million project in Detroit built by January 1,

-------
                                                     588
                      Summary

1970.

           MR. STEIN:  I think the phosphate problem is a

serious one and obviously will have to be taken into con-

sideration.

           I think adequate phosphate removal should be

incorporated in the plant.  Of course, it may be a more

economical thing to put it in -- you don't know whether

to put it in at the beginning — or you may be able to go

back and design with the notion of hooking it on at the

end.  I do agree that it should be done.

           I think we did set the dates with this notion.

I suspect that no one is going to ask you to put the tax-

payers' money of any of the cities here into a phosphate

removal operation that we don't think is going to work.

We are going to try to do this.  I think we are all in

agreement, Mr. Poole, that the information we have on

phosphate removal needs a little pilot plant work to see if

this works out.  If it does — I have looked into this and

it looks fairly good — it may work.

           However, I think these dates should consider

the notion that we are going to design the plants for the

maximum removal of phosphates.  I suspect, as we stated,

that that has some flexibility.

           MR. OEMING:  Well, from the conference record,

-------
                                                     589
                      Summary
Mr. Chairman,—
           MR. STEIN:   Yes?
           MR. OEMING:  -- we talked a good deal about  80
percent removal as being attainable.
           MR. STEIN:   Yes.
           MR. OEMING:  Now we have to apply the technology
that still has to be established to getting that 80 percent.
           Now, there  is one more point I would  like to
make.  You pointed out the desirability of concurrent dates
with industry.  In most of the industrial problems,, the
methods are fairly well known as to what you can do, but
we are dealing with something different when we  are dealing
with the municipal problem.
           If we were  just talking secondary treatment,
you could perhaps do this, but we are trying to  get at  the
phosphate problem.  I think for this reason you  cannot  use
concurrent dates with industries and municipalities,,
           MR. STEIN:   You set it up yourself with concurrent
dates.
           MR. OEMING:  No, no.
           MR. STEIN:   Yes.
           MR. OEMING;  No, we didn't, not in the case  of
Detroit.
           MR. STEIN:   What is your date of completion in

-------
                                                     590
                      Summary
Detroit?
           MR. OEMING:  1970 -- November 1, 1970.
           MR. STEIN:  You are a year later?
           MR. OEMING:  That is right.
           MR. STEIN:  Well, what is your feeling  on that?
           MR. HENNIGAN:  Murray, why can't we proceed on
your suggestion of January 1, 1970,  and on the phosphate
removal thing it is going to be kind of speculative.  We
are going to have to depend on the Technical Committee and
the resources of the Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration on what the economical and practical means
to incorporate the phosphate removal into the general
plant design are, both new plants and existing plants.
           We are in an area we are  not too sure of, so I
think we are going to have to proceed on a basis that we
are going to find out reasonably quick.
           MR. STEIN:  Right.  Again, with this we will
get schedules from each one.
           MR. OEMING:  Well, Mr. Chairman, unfortunately
this concept throws a program that has  been all established
with dates all firmed up here, at least in my case.
           Now, wftat do you suggest  here?
           MR. STEIN:  Do you have completion of plans
and specifications?

-------
                                                    591
                      Summary
           MR. OEMING:  Yes,  we do.
           MR. STEIN:  What are your dates?
           MR. OEMING:  Here is the  schedule for Detroit --
it is the same for Wayne County and  the City of Riverview,
I think, and the City of Trenton,  Grosse lie Township,  and
we have three dates for Detroit — complete engineering
study and basics of design by April  1,  1967; construction
plans and specifications approved  by November 1- 1968;
finish construction by November 1, 1970.
           Now, in the case of Wayne County, complete
preliminary engineering study on basis  of design by April
1, 1967; construction and the plans  and specifications
approved by November 1, 1968; finish construction November
1, 1970.
           For the City of Riverview, the same dates and
same requirements.
           For the City of Trenton,  the finishing of con-
struction is the same as the preliminary engineering study,
by April 1, 1968, and they are doing a pilot plant study on
their own.
           These have all been established, Mr. Chairman,
and I think it would upset the whole program here if we
have to go back and start all over with these people.

-------
                                                  592
                      Summary
           MR. STEIN:  I don't know that we want you to
start all over.
           MR. OEMING:  When you said January I, 1970,
then we are just out of business.

           MR. STEIN:  I am not sure, but let's  see  if we

can work this out.
           What was that interim date that you suggested?
Let's see if we can work back.  I have your date, July
1967, but what did you suggest should be prepared?
           MR. EAGLE:  General plans, report and proposals

by July 1, 1967, with completion of construction by  January

1, 1970.  That is what I suggested.

           MR. STEIN:  I don't know about that general  plans
and proposals.  I am not sure exactly what that means.

           MR. EAGLE:  It means what we are going to do,
and how we are going to do it.
           MR. STEIN:  Does that mean completion of  plans
and specifications, or is that the preliminary plans?

           MR. EAGLE:  General plans -- general plans and
report.  You may not want to give them that much time to
complete this phase, but I think in some cases it is going
to take about that long.
           We have a tremendous shortage of consulting

engineers in Ohio, like every place else in the country.

-------
                                                  593




                      Summary




Most of ours will be completed before then.




           However, I would like to give an  example of the



westerly treatment plant here in operation,  where secondary




treatment is being required.  They are having a study of




this made to decide whether they are going to do it at




this site or some other site, or completely  abandon and




dump it over to the easterly plant.  These things will




take time.




           MR. STEIN:  What I am getting at  is this, Mr.




Eagle:  Let's suppose you want to do this.  Why can't you




fit your dates -- and I am trying to get at  it and we will




come to yours later, Larry -- why can't you fit your dates




into something similar to what has been proposed by Mr.




Poston?



           By the way, this is not unique here„  On the




completion of plans and specifications, completion of




financing, and construction started, you say that you can




give that six months from now.




           Let me put it this way:  If you can say six




months from now that you expect to have general plans and




specifications for all these projects by this date,, until




you get these you can't fill these in yet.  This may be a




report, given the situation in Ohio, that we can get.



           Then, as soon as we get that

-------
                      Summary




        we can fill in the blanks,  but I think because




they have some other interim reports -- I recognize there




is a specialized situation here --  I think it might be




an advantage if we kept these and filled these in as soon




as we possibly could, as long as we stayed with these dates.




           MR. EAGLE:  Yes, I will  agree to that, Murray,




that as soon as we get these general plans and reports,  we




should be able to fill in the other dates.




           MR. STEIN:  Yes.




           MR. EAGLE:  But without  that, we are just




guessing.




           MR. STEIN:  Let's do that, and you may have




something.  At least, the record will show how far we have




moved in the next six months.




           MR. EAGLE:  Could we permit Mr. Birkei to speak?




           MR. BIRKEL:  Mr. Stein,  we have had $11 million




worth of construction at the southerly plant in the last




three years.  There hasn't been anything said here, but




when you are operating a plant and  you are enlarging it




and improving it and you are trying to run it, you can only




construct so much at one time.  Otherwise, the other solu-




tion is to turn over one or two regions to the river and




tear the plant apart and put in your construction, so any




construction schedules that are dug up have to take this

-------
                                                      595



                     Summary




Into consideration.




          This applies to our southerly;  it applies to




our westerly plant; it applies to the Detroit plant,  I




think, and any other existing plant.   You can only have




so many contractors going at one time.  Otherwise, they



get into each other's way, and if you try to operate,  it is




simply impossible.




          MR. STEIN:  Sir, I absolutely agree with you.




          I would hate to add up the  years of experience




on this problem that you have sitting up at this  table




here (indicating conferees).  This is the problem we  deal




with all the time.



          What I am suggesting,  though -- and this isn't




unique to Cleveland -- we have had this in every  large city



where they are expanding or changing  the system -- Is  that




for each specific plant we would like to have the States




along with the cities work out the schedule for what  they are



going to do.  Then we can make a judgment and the people can




make a judgment whether progress is being made.




          We want all these schedules to be reasonably close




together, so that one State is not three years ahead  of the




other. That is what we are driving at.  This is the kind of




thing that six months from now,  we hope, or as soon as




possible, we hope, Ohio will be able to come in and tell us




about-.

-------
                                                  596
                      Summary

           Now, no one Is arguing that you are to suspend

operations or that you should proceed at a pace faster than

it is physically possible for you to proceed.

           Again, I don't know if we can get agreement

here.  We have agreement on the industrial waste disposal.

           Could we say that the Federal conferee has

recommended, in listening to this, that the municipal

treatment works be constructed and in operation by January

1, 1970?  However, recognizing the large and complex  opera-

tions here, we would like to consider completion of plans

and specifications, completion of financing, construction

started operations, as well as construction completed dates,

if those interim dates can come in as soon as possible, to

be done as soon as possible.  However, we want a report

plant by plant at the next meeting.

           Now, if there are cases, such as Mr. Oeming

has going out otherwise, we would, in addition, like about

a month before the next meeting for each of the States to

make these plans available to us.

           That will give you, say, five months.  You can

do this now.

           MR. OEMING:  What do you mean, "plans"?

           MR. STEIN:  Not plans, but dates.  I am sorry.

You get your dates in on your cities and say Michigan can

do this now.  The States can get these dates in by five

-------
                      Summary




months from now.  We will circulate this to the  other



States.  Then each of the States will come In with detailed




dates on each of their municipalities.




           The conferees will then be able to make a




judgment as to whether the other ones are reasonable under




the circumstances, and perhaps we can adopt, as  I think we




have done In New York, pretty detailed  schedules tailored




to each individual industry and municipality in  your area.




           Would that be agreeable?




           MR. OEMING:  Mr. Stein, I have a couple of




comments.




           MR. STEIN:  Right.




           MR. OEMING:  First of all, Michigan has presented




its program here today.  That will be the same program we




present six months from now as to what  the time  schedules



are and what is required in the way of phosphate removal




and other constituents.



           No. 2, with the introduction and what you said




here, that the Federal conferee recommends January 1, 1970*




you immediately place the State of Michigan in opposition




to the Federal conferee.




           Now, what happens in a case like this?




           MR. STEIN:  I don't know that you are in




opposition to the Federal conferee.

-------
                                                  598
                      Summary


           MR. OEMING:  We already are.


           MR. STEIN:  Wait a moment.   The Federal conferee


recommended January I, 196"9, in August of 1965, and I don't


know that your being in opposition to  the Federal conferee


wilted your confidence or caused your  program in Michigan


to falter one second.  I am not sure that we are going to


face any greater catastrophe at this point by any theoretical


opposition like that.


           The point is, what we are doing is the Federal


conferee is giving all the people a reasonable target —


what he thinks would be a reasonable target.  I think what


we have to do in a complicated case of this kind is to get


all your dates in.


           We already have them in Michigan.  The other


States will come in and the conferees  will be able to deter-


mine whether the circumstances in which you have created


your dates, and the variance you have  from these dates, if


any, in writing your total program will be an equitable


solution to the problem.


           MR. OEMING:  Well, suppose  they are not?  Then


what do we do?


           MR. STEIN:  Well, I don't know.  This is a


question.  I wouldn't say they would not, and I wouldn't


take that pessimistic an attitude; but again I think as

-------
                                                599
                      Summary
we work in this field, we are getting more sophisticated
and we are getting more complicated data.
           We set up dates on the Hudson River Valley.
Bob Hennigan in New York came up with a series of dates
on these.  Some were a little before and some a little  after
the dates we set at the conference.
           Now, given the complexity of the problem and

the financing of everything on the Hudson  River,  I would

say — and this has nothing to do with this Meeting
I have to go back to the other conferees ~- that  that is
substantial compliance.
           This is the way we are going to have to do this.
Of course, we are going to have to talk to New Jersey and
the Interstate Commission.
           Now, I think if we are going to try to  get an
equitable solution here, if we try to set  a median date
that we are shooting for and try to get all of you people
to come in with individual dates, so that  we can judge
progress for individual cities, and if these dates kind of
cluster around this meeting, and you have  enough maybe
before and maybe a few after that, we will recognize that
we have an equitable program.  By doing that we will be
able, in coming back at six-month intervals, to judge
progress and have the people judge progress on the  individual

-------
                                                600
                      Summary

plants and the dates you set up yourself.

           This is the best way I know of  to arrive at

this on a five-State basis, because,  otherwise,  we are

going to have one date for all, and this does not seem  to

be working.

           I am trying to work out an equitable  basis,

so each State will come in with different  dates  for each

industry and each municipality, but all clustered around

one central date, so that it will be an equitable operation

that will move forward.  All right?

           MR. OEMING:  Well, I have this  other  question,

Mr. Stein, of what these people do who had appeared for

hearings and have agreed upon dates.

           What kind of reaction would you expect from

them?  It is possible they could sit around and  say, "Well,

we are going to wait and see whether the Federal conferees

and everybody agrees to this or not."

           MR. STEIN:  No, no, because these are outside

dates.

           MR. OEMING:  We were told January 1,  1970.

That is an outside date you are talking about.

           MR. STEIN:  We would hope that  the States would

set up a date sooner than that.

           Now, if you have a date after that, I think  you

-------
                                                   601



                      Summa ry




might want to present, like they do in every other State,




with your persuasive powers, and your own persuasive




powers to show the extenuating circumstances, and possibly




get a little variance if it isn't outside the ball park.




           This is what Mr. Metzler was speaking about




before.  I think we have worked like that for the past




year with you on your dates.  I don't think this is going




to disrupt any program.




           MR. OEMING:  I hope not.




           MR. STEIN:  Well, I am confident it won't.




           If Mr. Poston's proposal did not so embarrass




you or shake you where you felt that you were in such




narrow confines that you could not move, and you came up




here with a date of November 1971> and you did that, and




you got 36 of your 37 people to comply, I think you are




moving along pretty well.




           MR. OEMING:  But you are still off on the dates.




           MR. STEIN:  The point is, you are a little




ahead of the others.  There is no assurance that some dates




in the other States —




           MR. OEMING:  Maybe there is an appendage attached




to this.  Maybe we should have waited.




           MR. STEIN:  I don't think you should have waited,

-------
                      Summary




and I think with your program, you get enough built-in




delays in these programs without creating any yourself that




come up, so I don't think you should wait.




           I think you are ahead.  Being ahead,  it seems




to me -- and again I don't want to sit here as a judge —




I am here as a conferee -- but being ahead and moving ahead




gives you certain equities.




           MR. OEMING:  All I have to say, Mr. Chairman, is




that the dates are established.  If you change any dates,




I don't know how it is going to be done as far as the State




is concerned.




           MR. STEIN:  Right.




           DR. ARNOLD:  Mr. Stein, I would like to comment




to you that our program is based upon a permit system, and




many of the industries, or all of the industries and




municipalities in this State and in the Lake Erie Basin




that have appeared before us, have been given these permits




with these conditions of compliance.




           MR. STEIN:  Yes.




           DR. ARNOLD:  What you are asking us for is to




redo this in six months.  All of this is in our report now.




           MR. STEIN:  We are not asking you to redo




anything.




           DR. ARNOLD:  You are asking us to update their

-------
                                               603
                      Summary
activity during this period.  These permits are good for
one year in most instances,  or within six months,,  if we
are having special problems.
           MR. STEIN:  Yes.
           DR. ARNOLD:  So I can't see any great advantage
to calling or reconvening this conference and asking for
detailed reports of the planning and accomplishments of
these people, when we have already given them a year, in
almost every instance, to do these things.  I just don't
see the reasonableness.  I don't know why you have this
discussion.
           MR. STEIN:  Well, here is our finding here.  If
the conferees don't want to  reconvene this, this is fine
with me, except you know generally this is the Secretary's
decision that we reconvene.
           My notion here is that we have many, many
problems in a complicated case like this that call for a
constant review, or else you fall behind.  We have a
phosphate problem that we have not seen our way out of the
woods on yet.
           I would think we would want to get together and
report and see where we are with the Technical Committee
on phosphates.

-------
                                                 604
                      Summary

           We have a question here where we have not
gotten a list that is agreeable,  and I think this should
be presented to all conferees for their consideration on
the agreed-upon dates for the whole program.
           Now, this is the kind  of thing that all the
conferees should consider.  I am  not suggesting that  you
have to rework your program, but  what I am suggesting here
is that we should get a submittal of detailed dates on these
projects which the other conferees will be able to go over
to see that we are all in agreement on the time schedule
for all the other conferees.  I don't think we have done
that, and it is going to take a little agreement to do this.
           I would hope we would  have a report as to  where
we are going on that dredging, and a report to give you
within six months.
           I would say on the experience that we have had
in the Missouri and- Mississippi Rivers, that if you don't
reconvene these conferences and have a meeting at the end
of every six months, you will find your program falling
apart.
           I will say this:  Our  experience has been  that
the State administrators have been the ones who were
clamoring for these meetings.  They said that they were the
most helpful tool that they had in helping to move their

-------
                                                   605
                      Summary
program forward, and I think these people are well known
to youp  You can check with them on their experience.   I
have found that these are helpful in moving things forward.
           MR. OEMING:  Mr. Stein, just for my benefit,  you
have our schedule.
           MR. STEIN:  Yes.
           MR. OEMING:  What further do you expect from
Michigan in six months?
           MR. STEIN:  On the schedule?
           MR. OEMING:  We are talking schedules now -- time
schedules.
           MR. STEIN:  Nothing.
           MR. OEMING:  What do you expect from us in six
months?
           MR. STEIN:  Nothing.
           MR. OEMING:  All right.  That's all I want  to know
           MR. STEIN:  However, in six months, before  the
next meeting, your schedule presumably will be examined by
the other conferees.
           MR. OEMING:  I don't care.
           MR. STEIN:  Or, if they have the schedule here,
if this is all done, fine; but I think what I hope to
accomplish at the end of six months -- and I think it  is
too complicated to do here because we couldn't get a

-------
                                                   606
                      Summary

universal date for five States in as complicated a situation

as you have here -- is, say, that every one of the States

has time schedules for every one of their identifiable

sources which will meet the program in a way which is  satis-

factory in general to all the conferees.

           MR. OEMING:  You answered my question in the

first sentence.  I am all through.

           MR. STEIN:  All right.

           Are there any other comments or questions?

           (No response. )

           MR. STEIN:  If not, perhaps we can call this

meeting to a close.

           MR. EAGLE:  I have one.

           MR. STEIN:  Go ahead.

           MR. EAGLE:  I have a comment.

           This is not exactly related to this conference,

but it has a bearing on it.

           I would like to ask Mr. Poston, No. 1, when we

may expect a comprehensive report on the findings of the

Lake Erie field stations, the findings on recommendations

on, No. 1, the Maumee River, and, No. 2, on Lake Erie.

           Now, we are going to be confronted with a matter

of setting up our criteria and standards for both of these

bodies of water, and we certainly should have the benefit

-------
                                                  607





                      Summary




of the Federal findings and recommendations  to  guide  us.




           As a matter of fact,  we have very little informa-




tion on lake Erie itself.  This  has been an  extensive survey




over the last three years,  and we have  been  given various




dates for the release of these reports, most of which have




long passed.  I think that  we need some kind of a commitment




here as to when these reports might be  available.




           MR. POSTON:  For the  Maumee  River, I think we




have said to you that you would  have this in July of this




year.  Right?




           MR. EAGLE:  You said  May.  I had  not heard the




July date.




           MR. POSTON:  To the best of  my knowledge,  it




will be available in July.   I did not check yesterday on




this, but a couple of weeks ago  they told me that it would




be available in July.




           MR. EAGLE:  We expect to hold hearings in




September, and we certainly need this report.




           MR. POSTON:   Very well.  We will have this




available.




           Relative to the Lake Erie study,  I think that




is  in the end of this year.  You will get the data and the




end  report on the Lake Erie study.




           I don't know  whether Mr. Hubbs is here right now

-------
                                                 608
                    Summary

           MR. EAGLE:  I have talked to Mr.  Hubbs and have

not been able to secure a date from him.

           MR. POSTON:  We will have a report for you by

the end of this year.

           MR. EAGLE:  Thank you.  That Is what I want to

know.

           MR. OEMING:  Mr. Chairman,  I have one more

question.

           We have received the proceedings  of the Cleveland

conference In August of last year.  We do not yet have the

transcript of the conference at Buffalo.  Could you tell me

when we might expect those1"

           MRS. PIERE:  That has  gone  to the printer, but

it was the one which we got such a very bad  transcript en.

           MR. STEIN:  Off the record.

           (Discussion off the record.)

           MR. STEIN:  I think everyone is about exhausted

and ready to adjourn.

           I would like to thank you all for coming.  I

think we have moved pollution abatement forward.

           I think we are making as much progress in this

case,  considering the complexity of the case, as any case

we have ever been on,  I do think that you have helped us

and our Department and our Secretary by your reception here

-------
                      Summary




and all these activities.




           At this time.,  we will stand adjourned.




           (Whereupon, at  5'^5 p.m.,  an adjournment was




taken. )

-------
                                                 610




           (The following document was submitted for1




     inclusion in the record after completion of the




     record:









            THE LEGISLATURE - STATE OP MICHIGAN




                  WATER RESOURCES PLANNING






                            Manly Miles Building




                            1*405 South Harrison Road




                            East Lansing, Michigan 48823




                            Phone 517/337-1323




                        June 21, 1966




Chairman




Conference Re Pollution of




Lake Erie and its Tributaries




Cleveland, Ohio








Dear Mr. Chairman:




          In recognition of the growing public concern with




the problems of water management, the Michigan Legislature




has created a Joint Committee to assess and evaluate




programs relating to this vital natural resource.   In addi-




tion to examining the need for new legislation, the Commit-




tee will develop a state-wide water policy and initiate




long range planning to provide a framework for future

-------
                                                   611



activities.  The problem of water pollution abatement is




receiving highest priority.




          I am taking this opportunity to offer our Commit-




tee's support for these proceedings.  I am certain that




you will hear from our Water Resources Commission of the




remarkable progress that is being made on the Michigan




water courses tributary to Lake Erie.  You may recall a




similar conference was held in the Detroit area at the



request of Governor Swainson in 1961.  The efforts and




studies initiated at that meeting are now bearing fruit.




          The benefits arising from these conferences have




been demonstrated in our State as well as in other regions




of the country.  Their stimulus and catalytic effect cannot




be minimized.  We wish you success in your endeavors with




Lake Erie.



                           Very truly yours,



                      /s/  William R. Copeland



                           Chairman




WRC:Ib)
                        * # #
                                       *US GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 19660—228-679

-------