PROCEEDINGS
VOLUME 4
Conference
In the matter of Pollution of
the Interstate Waters of the
Grand Calumet River, Little
Calumet River, Calumet River,
Wolf Lake, Lake Michigan
and theirTributaries
MARCH 2-9,1965
U. S DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
-------
-------
1021
I UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT
2
3 HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
#***
5
6
Conference in the matter of pollution of
7
the interstate waters of the Grand Calumet
8
River, Little Calumet River, Calumet River,
g
Lake Michigan, Wolf Lake and their tribu-
taries (Indiana-Illinois).
11
##**
12
MR. MURRAY STEIN, CHAIRMAN
14
15
»*#*
16
17 McCormick Place
Banquet Room
9:30 o'clock a.m.
March 5, 1965
19 Chicago, Illinois
20
21
22
Unvironmrtil Protection
23
24
25
-------
1
2
3
4
Regional Program Director, Illinois
5
MR. BLUCHER A. POOLE, Technical Secretary, and
6
7
State Board of Health, Indiana
8
MR. CLARENCE W. KLASSEN, Technical Secretary, and
9
10 State Sanitary Water Board, Department
of Public Health, Illinois.
11
MR. PRANK W. CHESROW, President, and
12
1022
CONFEREES:
MR. H. W. POSTON,
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare,
U. S. Public Health Service, Division of
Water Supply & Pollution Control,
MR. PERRY MILLER,
Stream Pollution Control Board,
MR. RICHARD NELLE,
MR. GEORGE A. LANE,
13 The Metropolitan Sanitary District of
Greater Chicago, Illinois
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
"joriTiVV'T''! 0"^ kCEKC**.
T~>-p7-> ''I'1 ^ i.kJ-1 f ' ' """* -""^ •
24
25
-------
1
STATEMENTS:
ft
3
4
5
Corporation
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
15
16
20
21
22
23
24
25
1023
INDEX
MR. A. J. COCHRANE, Assistant to the Operating
Vice President, The Youngstown Sheet and Tube
Company 1030
MR. ALLEN D. BRANDT, Manager of Industrial
Health Engineering, The Bethlehem Steel
MR. KENNETH G. JACKSON, Attorney, National
1083
Steel Corporation 1102
MR. ROSS HARBAUGH, Assistant to the Vice
President, Manufacturing and Research,
Inland Steel Company 1155
MR. M. C. LEAVITT, Assistant Plant Manager
Union Carbide Corporation, Chemicals Divi-
sion, Whiting, Indiana. 1175
MR. GRANVILLE A. HOWELL, Assistant to the
Administrative Vice President, United States
Steel Corporation 1188
(continued on page 1249)
14
MR. RUSSEL C. MALLATT, Technical Service
Superintendent, American Oil Company 1265
DR. G. H. MC INTOSH, Chief Chemist, American
Maize Products 1285
17
MR. A. G. GIANNINI, City Engineer, Sanitary
18 District, Hammond, Indiana 1365
(continued on page 1388)
19
MR. RICHARD D. TINKHAM, Attorney, Lever
Brothers Company, Hammond, Indiana 1412
(continued on page 1428)
MRS. GERALDINE HANSEN, Secretary-Treasurer,
South Lake County Stream and Pollution
Council 1445
-------
1
3
4
•*
5
6
8
9
10
11
19
\.tt
13
14
\ F
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1023-A
PREPARED STATEMENTS:
UNITED STATES GYPSUM COMPANY, presented by
Mr. B. A. Poole
MR. ALLEN D. BRANDT, Manager of Industrial
Health Engineering, The Bethlehem Steel
Company
MR. CHARLES SANDOR, Superintendent, Department
of Public Works, City of Hammond, Indiana
MR. PAUL WAGNER, City Engineer, City of
East Gary, Indiana
TOWN OP SCHERERVILLE, INDIANA
PORTER COUNTY CHAPTER, Izaak Walton League of
America
TOWN OF DYER, INDIANA
MR. THOMAS E. DUSTIN, State Secretary, Indiana
Division of the Izaak Walton League of America
MR. LILBURN J. TITUS, Mayor, City of Hobart,
Indiana
MR. DONALD E. WILL, Mayor, City of Valparaiso,
Indiana
BOARD OF TRUSTEES, Town of Porter, Indiana
MR. LEO LOUIS, President, Gary-Hobart Water
Corporation, Gary, Indiana
GEORGIA-PACIFIC CORPORATION
TOWN OF GRIFFITH, INDIANA
TOWN OF PORTAGE, INDIANA
MR. JAMES R. HOOPER, Central Division Chief
Engineer, Simmons Company, Munster, Indiana
MR. W. A. THIEL, Chief Engineer, LaSalle
Steel Company, Hammond, Indiana
1025
1091
1297
1307
1310
1310
1316
1320
1327
1328
1331-A
1333
13^0
13^0
13^3
1346
1350
-------
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
102
PREPARED STATEMENTS: (continued)
MR. ROLLIN M. SCHAHFER, Vice President,
Northern Indiana Public Service Company
TOWN OF HIGHLAND, INDIANA
CITY OF CROWN POINT, INDIANA
CITY OF WHITING, INDIANA
MR. A. G. GIANNINI, City Engineer, Sanitary
District, Hammond, Indiana
LEVER BROTHERS COMPANY, Hammond, Indiana
CHESTERTON, INDIANA, TOWN UTILITIES
TELEGRAMS, LETTERS, COMMUNICATIONS, REPORTS, ETC.
LETTER from ROBERT F. DOOLITTLE, Vice President
and General Counsel, The Youngstown Sheet and
Tube Company, to Hon. George H. Fallon,
Chairman, Committee on Public Works, U. S.
House of Representatives
REPORT: TREATMENT OF AMMONIA STILL WASTES
BY THE ACTIVATED SLUDGE PROCESS, presented
by Mr. W. W. Mat hews, Superintendent, Gary
Sanitary District, Gary, Indiana; and
DISCUSSION, by Mr. S. Mogelnicki, Research
and Development Engineer, Waste Disposal,
The Dow Chemical Company
3-B
1352
1357
1359
1361
1365
1412
1447
1077
1205
1242
-------
1024
CHAIRMAN STEIN: May we reconvene?
The conference will come to order and reconvene,
2
On my right now is Mr. Robert Snyder.
3
Mr. H. W. Poston will be a few minutes late.
Mr. Poole?
5
MR. POOLE: I went over the list of Indiana people that
6
were still on the agenda last night and it is impossible for
7
us to finish the Indiana presentation today if everybody
8
talks.
9
We are very anxious to finish today, but on the
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
other hand, we don't want to shut anyone off that we feel or
he feels has a real message which is apropos to the subject
under discussion here.
Now the thing I am proposing is that we
utilize our time wisely today. We have the large industries,
all of whom I believe I have left on my list that have been
mentioned in the Health, Education, and Welfare Report, and
then we have the smaller industries in the municipalities and
I would hope the others that are on our agenda. For those
who have prepared statements, bring them up to Mr. Perry
Miller and me. Maybe with some help we can get those all In
at the morning intermission. We will see that your statements
are not only filed in the record but if you want to leave
eight copies, that copies are passed around the table for each
of the conferees. The people that I think we must hear today,
and I am referring to United States Gypsum—should I take
-------
1025
l United States Gypsum off?
2 A VOICE: You have a statement.
3 MR. POOLE: We will put in the record the statement
4 of the United States Gypsum Company.
5 STATEMENT OF THE UNITED STATES GYPSUM COMPANY
6 The United States Gypsum Company, 101 South
7 Wacker Drive, Chicago, Illinois, having been designated
8 by the State of Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board as
g a participant in a conference in the matter of pollution
10 of certain interstate waters in Illinois and Indiana,
H submits the following statement to the conferees:
12 It has long been the policy of the United
13 States Gypsum Company to cooperate fully with local, state
,. and Federal authorities in their efforts to reduce and
14
even to eliminate water pollution. Consistent with that
15
policy, the United States Gypsum Company constructed its
16
East Chicago, Indiana, facility so as to minimize the
quantities of material which might be discharged into the
18
Indiana Harbor Canal. The Company's early recognition
13
that substantial efforts should be made to reduce water
20
pollution is no doubt largely responsible for the fact that
A*
today the relative quantity of industrial wastes discharged
£*&
Into the Indiana Harbor Canal from its East Chicago plant
23
is extraordinarily small.*
*A
25
-------
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1026
* See Table VI-5Q, Report on Pollution
of Waters of the Grand Calumet River,
Little Calumet River, Calumet River,
Lake Michigan, Wolf Lake and Their
Tributaries prepared by the U.S. Department
of Health, Education, and Welfare, etc.,
February 1965.
Since its East Chicago plant was originally
constructed, the United States Gypsum Company has taken
additional steps to further minimize the quantity of any
industrial wastes which might be discharged into the Canal.
Although it has no way of accurately estimating the
quantity or type of material which may be discharged into
the Canal, the Company believes that the "suspended solids"
referred to in the HEW Report of February 1965 consist
either largely or entirely of fine gypsum dust, in 1951
the Company spent substantial sums to install dust collectors
at various locations throughout its plant to catch the
fine gypsum dust generated during the manufacturing process.
These dust collectors sharply reduced the quantity of dust
which have been discharged into the Canal. Furthermore,
the Company has for some time been working on a plan to
increase the effectiveness of these dust collectors. If
this plan proves feasible, it is believed that the
increased efficiency of these machines would very materially
reduce whatever small amount of gypsum dust might currently
be discharged into the Canal.
In addition to the dust collectors, the
-------
1027
1 Company has long utilized pieces of machinery called Save-alls,
2 This machinery catches virtually all the cement, asbestos,
3 and sand passing through it from the Company's shingle
4 plant and retains these materials for re-use in the manu-
5 facturing process, thus preventing their being discharged
6 into the Canal. These Save-alls, in conjunction with the
7 dust collectors, have enabled the Company to keep the
8 quantity of whatever solid material may be discharged into
9 the Canal down to quite insignificant amounts.
10 In conclusion, the United States Gypsum
Company reaffirms its willingness to continue to cooperate
12 fully with those who seek to decrease the quantities of
13 polluting substances discharged into the Nations waterways.
14 Dated: March 2, 19&5
Norman A. Lang
15 Assistant Secretary
United States Gypsum Company
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-------
1026
! UNITED STATES GYPSUM COMPANY
2 Mr. B. A. Poole
Technical Secretary
3 State of Indiana
Stream Pollution Control Board March 4, 1965
4 1330 West Michigan Street
Indianapolis, Indiana 4620^
s
Dear Mr. Poole:
6
I have Just had a chance to examine
your most thorough and complete presentation
8
to the conference on Grand Calumet River,
9
Little Calumet River, Calumet River, Lake
Michigan, Wolf Lake and tributaries (Indiana-
Illinois) called by Secretary Anthony J.
12
Celebrezze, Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare starting March 2, 1965, at
14
Chicago, Illinois, dated February 1965.
15 While I find that the portions of that re-
1R
port dealing with the United States Gypsum
17
Company are generally accurate, there is one
18
error therein which I would like to call to
19
your attention.
20
The table on page 51 of the Report states,
21
in effect, that the United States Gypsum
22
Company has no industrial waste treatment. As
23
I pointed out in my statement to the conference
«x
on March 4, 1965, the United States Gypsum
25
utilizes both dust collectors and save-alls whose
-------
1029
1 combined effect is to reduce sharply what-
2 ever solid material may be discharged into
3 the Indiana Harbor Canal from its East Chicago
4 Indiana plant. I believe these machines
*
5 qualify as industrial waste treatment devices
6 and should have been so included in your
7 report,
8 Sincerely,
9
10 Norman A. Lang
Assistant Secretary
11 United States Gypsum Company
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-------
1030
MR. POOLE: Then, Youngstown Sheet and Tube and
Inland Steel. Then, I am going to do something that I
swore yesterday I wouldn't, and that is we've got two
people that have to make plane connections and we would
follow Inland Steel by Bethlehem and follow Bethlehem
Steel by Midwest and then come back to United States Steel.
Then, we would have Union Carbide, American
Oil, American Maize and the City of Hammond and Lever
9 Brothers.
10 Now, this is without question going to take
n a good portion of the day.
12 So, I will take it by consent and if some-
13 body feels that he just must speak, all he needs to do
H is not bring his prepared statement up here at the
is morning recess.
16 We will now call on Youngstown Sheet and
17 Tube, Mr. A. J. Cochrane, Assistant to the Operating Vice
18 President.
19 CHAIRMAN STEIN: For the record, Mr. Ben Leland is
20 now sitting with Mr. Klassen for Illinois.
21 Mr. Leland is in charge of the Chicago office.
22 MR. COCHRANE: Mr. Chairman, conferees, ladies and
23 gentlemen: My name is A. J. Cochrane, and I am Assistant to
24 the Operating Vice President of the Youngstown Sheet and Tube
25 Company. We have a plant located at East Chicago on the
Indiana Harbor Canal.
-------
1031
l Mr. B. A. Poole of the Indiana Stream
Pollution Control Board has asked us to tell you of our
2
0 progress in the Indiana Harbor Works waste control
3
program. I will review for you, first, some historical
aspects of the area water problems; second, the program
5
e we have under way for solving them; and last, the consid-
D
erable progress we have made in the past few years and
the scheduled program with the State of Indiana for the
8
future.
9
In much of the Nation the accepted way of
life until after World War II permitted the discharge of
untreated sewage and industrial wastes into the waterways.
That way of life has been changing. With increasing recogni-
13
tlon of the value of the water resource, efforts to protect
14
it are providing accomplishment.
The Lake County, Indiana - Cook County,
16
Illinois, area preceded most of the Nation in doing some-
thing about its waste problems. Reports already given
18
are testimony to this. The motivation was protection to
19
health. That goal was accomplished. The citizens of the
20
area do have safe drinking water.
21
In order to accomplish this, however, unique
22
approaches were employed. The location of this metropolitan
23
area in the pocket at the south end of Lake Michigan made
24
the unique approach a necessity.
25
-------
1032
1 1 Since the known methods for treatment of wastes leave
2 | a residual, there must be some course for ultimate
disposal.
To provide it in this area required reversal
of a river. It also took a court to get agreement and action
started, but the Job was done.
The provisions for pollution abatement
to meet the court decree represented the best engineering
9 I! talent then available for both municipal and industrial
10 treatment. Since then our understanding of the effects
of pollution has developed. So has the potential for
12
13
u
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
pollution, for this area has experienced large industrial
growth with a variety of industries. These industries have
offered Jobs and Jobs bring people, so the population
has increased as well.
The waste treatment facilities considered
adequate 20 years ago anticipated neither this growth
nor the wastes which new industrial processing would
create. The increasing concentration of municipalities
and industries is but part of the story. The hurdle of
geographic location faced by those who started pro-
ecting the water supplies over 60 years ago still remains
as a major factor.
This Is particularly so in the Indiana
25 Harbor ShlpOanal. Plow in the Canal may be to Lake
-------
1
2
3
4
5
6 flow to the Lake — wastes can accumulate and then
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1033
Michigan, away from the Lake or stationary. The Indiana
Harbor Ship Canal drains the Grand Calumet River
and carries the discharges from sewers of cities,
steel, oil and chemical companies. Because it can hold
stationary for periods of time — with little or no
with a change in wind direction or with rainfall in
the area, the Canal content moves into the Lake.
As the representative of the Youngstown
Sheet and Tube Company, I want to tell you about how
our program is influenced by this Canal and how we
are attempting, with State guidance, to determine
with sound data both cause and effect so that the
construction of treatment facilities will provide
adequate protection of the water resource.
The Indiana Water Pollution Control
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Board has given this conference a summary report on
accomplishments in preventing and abating pollution
in Lake County. Undoubtedly, these actions would not
have taken place without the Board's direction and
insistence. There may have been a change in attitude
by the public in what is acceptable but mental attitude
by the public must be translated to specific directives
and objectives if effective pollution abatement
facilities are to be constructed.
-------
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1034
The Indiana Board's policy has been to
require adequate treatment for all new production
facilities and a continuing program for controls on
older process operations. Our Company has been
complying with that policy. However, as was mentioned
earlier, facilities which would be adequate without
question on a flowing stream may not do the Job on this
tidal Canal.
The HEW report has summarized the
occurrences of problems at water supply intakes, on
the beaches and in respect to the appearance of the
Ship Canal. The report has also provided data on
maximum and average concentrations of some of the
water quality characteristics measured during its com-
prehensive three-year survey,
In some respects the data as presented
are inaccurate but of greater significance, in our
opinion, the report offers no real guidance for
solution of the more difficult problems. The recom-
mendation for exclusion of certain types of waste
discharges is totally unreasonable for an area so
heavily industrialized and which uses such vast volumes
of water in processing. The alternative offered of
treatment is without guidelines as to either method
or degree.
-------
1035
The proposal that the companies institute
permanent programs of sampling waste discharges to provide
A
more complete information on the waste characteristics
and then provide the data to the State to be kept in
open files does not provide guidance to answer problems.
5
It does offer the concept that pollution is measured by
6
the sum of the discharges, not by the quality of the
7
receiving water.
8
The concept of the State of Indiana and much of
9
industry, certainly Youngstown Sheet and Tube, is to
10
determine what water uses are being affected and what
11
causes the adverse effect. Past surveys by this Company
12
have shown that it takes more than the routine proposed
13
in this report to accomplish protection of water.
14
If the cleanup of the Indiana Harbor
15
Ship Canal, and we agree it is polluted, is to be
16
accomplished within a reasonable time, the answer must
17
be something other than total exclusion of discharges or
18
long-term detailed chemical analyses of discharges.
19
A first requirement is to determine the
20
water uses to be protected and the quality necessary
21
for that protection. This means there must be a reconcilia-
22
tion of individual opinions and desires and a deter-
23
mination of what uses are in the best public interest.
24
25
-------
1036
l As an example, the water intakes in Lake
2 Michigan should with reasonable treatment be able
3 to provide safe and palatable water. Another example
4 would be recognition that the Indiana Harbor Ship Canal
. is an industrial harbor and not a site for recreation.
O
. In this report I hope to convey to you some of
6
the concepts which guide our pollution control program and
to show the accomplishments to date and scheduled as well
8
as some of the problems remaining. The program has been
9
a continuing one and directed to meet State requirements
of protecting reasonable water uses.
Indiana Harbor Works
12
To set the background, let me point out that
13
The Youngstown Sheet and Tube property is on the west shore
14
of the Indiana Harbor Ship Canal and fronts on Lake
lo
Michigan. The Indiana Harbor Works is an integrated steel
16
plant with 3 blast furnaces, coke plant, open hearth
furnaces, rolling mills, pipe mills and sheet
18
and tin mills. The district employs an average of
iy
11,000 persons and has a rated capacity of 3,420 ingot
tons annually.
21
The Company is presently expanding its operation
t»i
To provide the necessary land for a multimillion dollar
23
expansion, a slag fill protected by a breakwater is
24
being extended into Lake Michigan.
25
-------
1037
i Water Supply
2 The district purchases its drinking water
3 from the City of East Chicago. There is some limited use
4 of this for Industrial operations.
s Industrial process and cooling water is
6 supplied by two large pumping stations.
7 No. 1 intake is located at the entrance
8 to the canal, within the breakwater. This station pro-
9 vides 132 million gallons a day. Since it pumps water
10 from the canal, the quality of the water is the same as
n that in the canal. Measuring the concentration of
12 substances in this water when it leaves the plant gives
13 an impression of waste discharged even when nothing is
14 added by the plant operation. Unless waste loads
15 discharged from a plant are corrected by substracting
16 the intake loads, the data are in error.
17 No. 2 intake is located on Lake Michigan.
18 This station at present provides 101 million
ig gallons a day.
20 As plant enlargement requires more water,
21 the additional supply will be taken from the lake. And
22 as part of the Company's program for water control,
the present plans include the eventual abandonment of
23
the canal intake and the obtaining of the total supply
„, from the lake. This will automatically reduce the
-------
1038
measured waste load to the canal. It will also provide
2 more of a diluting effect on the waters in the canal.
3 Sewage
All sewage from the plant is connected
4
directly to the East Chicago sewerage system. None is
5
discharged from our plant directly to any waterway.
D
All sewage from the sanitary facilities to
be located in the new mill construction will also be
8
connected to the municipal sewers.
Blast Furnaces
There are three blast furnaces in which
iron ore, limestone and coke are processed to free the
Iron from impurities. The large volumes of hot air
forced through the furnaces carry some of this charged
14
material out. This flue dust is partially recovered
in dry dust catchers and the gas is then washed with
16
water to remove the remaining solids. This gas washer
is clarified in two large settling basins called thickeners,
18
One approach is to provide more effective
recovery to change the method of washing the gas. Use of
20
venturi washer reduces the amount of water required by
half. This in turn increases the time the water stays
22
in the thickener and provides more time for the solids to
settle down.
24
25
-------
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1039
One gas washer has been changed to
include the new type cleaning. Since Installation re-
quires the furnace to be down, installation on the other
units will be scheduled with furnace relining.
The Company has also been working on means
to recycle the blast furnace gas washer water so that
there will be no discharge to the stream. Such a pro-
gram is now under way at the Youngstown district plant.
With any new furnace construction at Indiana Harbor
the closed system would be included.
Of particular importance is the effect
of changing technology on waste loads. New methods
for preparing sinter and operating the furnace have
reduced the flue dust produced from 300 pounds per
ton to 97 pounds at the Harbor plant.
Rolling Mills
The polluting materials originating in
rolling mills are mill scale and oil. The scale is
broken loose by high pressure water sprays from the
ingots, billets, strip or pipe and flushed to settling
basins where it can be prevented from going to the
canal or lake. Lubricating oil lost on the mills is
also carried by this cooling and flushing water.
Because the scale pits in the main part
of the steel plant were too small to be modified for
-------
2
4
1040
effective scale removal, a new, very large scale pit
was constructed at the Lake Shore in 1956 and the three
3 sewers which carried the discharges from the existing
scale pits were connected to it. In 1964, oil recovery
c facilities were added to provide continuous oil removal.
w
c Prior to that when oil accumulated it would be pumped out.
D
When the seamless mill was constructed in
o 1955 an adequately sized basin was provided to settle scale
O
and trap oil. This discharge and the discharge from
9
the large terminal settling basin Just described are the
only two on the lake front.
Turning to the canal discharges, the hot
strip mill is the principal source of scale and oil.
1 w
In 1957 a new scale recovery basin was installed. This
14
basin is adequately sized and has a bucket crane located
over it to permit regular cleaning. Oil recovery from
16
this unit has not been effective, so a new oil recovery
system was designed and is now under construction.
18
Completion of the project is scheduled
for April 1965. This source is the largest oil loss
zu
in the plant, amounting to about one half the total loss.
21
The only other scale pit is at a small
pipe mill operation. This scale pit requires modification
23
by installation of baffling to make it effective. This is
24
scheduled as part of the program.
-------
1041
There are three rolling mills with
2 sewers discharging to the canal. In the cold rolling
3 operations an emulsified oil is used. Such oils are
4 dispersed in water as long as there is adequate agitation.
5 When the oil -water mixture is allowed to stand quiescent,
6 the oil separates and floats on the surface.
7 The practice on these cold rolling mills
8 is to recycle the oil-water mixture until it becomes dirty.
Then the solution is replaced. Survey work by
10 Youngstown Sheet and Tube on movement of odor bearing
substances through water showed the important role such
12 soluble oils could have.
With the building of the new 6 stand
17
rolling mill, facilities were provided for breaking the
emulsion, separating and recovering both the oil and the
ID
accumulated fine scale.
16
The other two cold rolling mills are
older operations. To prevent difficulty from these
10
mills, the oil emulsion solutions are hauled to a slag
•ty
dump for disposal. These solutions formerly were dis-
charged to the Canal.
For the new installations under con-
22
struct ion on the lake front a new approach has been
23
adopted. The sewers from this area discharge to the
24
lake behind the breakwater. Since the mill scale in
25
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1042
some finishing mill operations is so fine, it presents
a color problem rather than an accumulation of solids.
To handle this the cooling waters in the mills have
been separated from processing water which could con-
tain either solids or oil. The process water after it
leaves the scale basins discharges into a pond or lagoon
which is being developed in this new fill area.
The lagoon will permit solids to settle
and oil to separate. The water will reach the lake by
filtering through the slag fill.
There is also a new cold rolling mill
under construction in this area. Treatment facilities
are provided to break the oil emulsions and separate
and recover the oil and solids. To provide additional
insurance the discharge from this treatment plant
also goes to the lagoon.
Spent Acid
The cleaning of steel in acid is
called pickling and the solution is called pickle liquor.
There has been a continuing program of
providing intercepting storage sumps and pumps to lift
the accumulated spent acid to trucks for haulage to the
slag dump for disposal. When the spent acid is dispersed
over the slag, it is neutralized by the limestone in
the slag.
-------
1043
Such facilities and haulage of acid have
2 been provided for conduit plant (1950), sheet mill
3 (1952-53), tin mill (1955), merchant mill (1962),
4 sheet mill (1963).
5 The majority of the acid is now hauled
6 to the slag disposal area. Only the hot strip mill
7 area acid is discharged to the canal.
8 YS&T is presently evaluating a new
g pickling practice which can change the technology
10 of pickling. It offers the possibility of recovering
and reusing acid rather than loss or haulage.
12 Metal Finishing
When the halogen tin mill was constructed
i3
in 1955, provision was made in accordance with the
Indiana Water Pollution Control Board regulation for an
intercepting sump which is not connected to any sewer.
16
This sump is to catch any solution which might be
,0 accidentally or deliberately discharged in the process
18
area. The waste is pumped to an elevated holding tank
la
where it is loaded into trucks and hauled to a slag
disposal area. There is also a neutralizing sump to
«*
provide mixing and control for rinse waters.
22
Repeated surveys using dyes and chemical
23
analysis have never indicated any of this material reaching
24
the lake from the slag disposal area.
-------
1044
Continuous sampling and daily analysis
. on the sewer discharge carrying the rinse waters to
ft
the canal are maintained as part of the state requirement.
3
In addition there is a daily analysis for the same con-
4
stituents in the canal. This acts both as a check on
O
the waste discharge and as background on canal water
6
quality to determine the influence of this operation.
Coke Plant
8
The HEW report correctly put emphasis
9
on the occurrences of taste and odor at the public water
10
intakes in Lake Michigan. The report, however, attempted
to utilize phenols as the means of tracing and assessing
12
responsibility for the trouble.
13
The fallacy of the approach has been well
documented. Measurement of phenol in water is
15
indicative of wastes from coke plants, chemical industry
16
refineries or even decaying vegetation as well as
17
sewage. However, not all tastes and odors are due
18
to phenol, and a program which would ignore causes
19
of taste and odor unless associated with phenol offers
20
little real help to the water plants.
21
The YS&T work in tracing taste and odor
22
causes at times of occurrence of trouble at a water
23
works is an example of the philosophy expressed earlier
24
in this report. Several years of surveys on the
Zo
-------
1C45
! Mahoning River provided adequate proof that phenol in
. itself was no criterion of taste and odor. These
tt
studies have been reported in the literature.
O
It was determined that odor can be
traced; that odor occurrences can be caused by high
O
concentrations of organics and that at such a time the
6
presence of a particular chemical may predominate and be
emphasized by the odor level of the other material
8
even though, if alone in the same concentration, it would
9
not be noticed.
10
These surveys, utilizing an analytical
method for odor developed at Dow Chemical Company,
prompted more work on odor analysis and tracing by
13
Mellon Institute, Gulf Oil Corporation, Manufacturing
14
Chemists Association and others and has resulted in the
15
refinement and adoption of the analytical procedure by
16
the American Society for Testing Materials.
17
This background is given as evidence
18
that solution of some waste treatment problems
19
requires development of means to locate the sources.
20
The work on the Mahoning River showed that attention
21
to phenols had diverted attention from sources of
22
waste which did not carry phenols but which caused
23
very bad tastes in the downstream water supply.
24
When odor was considered as an entity, sources of
25
-------
1046
trouble were found. The reduction in days of trouble
at this water intake from 47 days in 1956 to 6 days in
ft
1964 indicates the progress made. When sources of trouble
were defined, controls were provided to prevent
4
future difficulty.
5
The findings from the Mahonlng survey are
6
guiding the program at Indiana Harbor. In addition to
eliminating the losses of soluble oil, there is a pro-
8
gram scheduled in the coke plant to eliminate the
9
occasional losses of organics which have been shown to
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
be high odor carrying material.
The coke plant has a dephenolizer to
remove phenolics. There is also an ammonia still to
remove the free ammonia and lime is added to spring the
fixed ammonia. The dephenolized still waste goes to
the canal.
The sources of waste which have been found
to be high in persistent odor (even though low in phenol)
and which are of importance in causing taste and odor
problems are being collected for disposal in the coke
quenching. When the organics hit the hot coke they
are destroyed. This program will be completed by 1966.
Survey work in the canal and lake during
the 1959 steel strike and since has shown the
importance of the canal movement in taste and odor effects.
-------
1047
A program is planned with the Gary-Hobart
Water Company to identify and trace causes of taste
and odor as well as to determine the effectiveness of
3
the present program for eliminating the slug losses.
The HEW report emphasizes the ammonia
concentrations found in the Indiana Harbor Canal and along
6
the lake shore. The report observes that these
7
concentrations are much higher than those measured
8
in the middle of Lake Michigan. This should be
9
expected and points up the need to define the uses of the
10
11
12
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
water for the area. Any proposal that the quality of
the water in the Ship Canal and along the shore
should be the same as that in the middle of Lake
Michigan must contemplate closing down industries in
14
Lake County.
15
The HEW report notes the ammonia
16
concentrations at the Chicago intake as usually less
17
than 0.10 parts per million, in this report these
concentrations are considered as high and a significant
source of trouble in water plant operation. In the
HEW report to the conference on the Mahoning River, in
which YS&T participated, there was the statement
"Ammonia in surface waters comes from the decomposition
of organic matter, and in clean water rarely exceeds a
few tenths of a part per million."
-------
1048
This is mentioned not to excuse ammonia
discharged from industries but to suggest that all
sources of ammonia — natural, municipal and industrial ~
be put into proper perspective and also to determine its
effect accurately rather than simply by comparison to the
6 concentration in the middle of Lake Michigan.
7 Population Equivalents
0 We would be remiss if in reporting on
o
9
10
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
this program at Indiana Harbor we did not suggest
that the conferees correct the misimpression held by
many after reading the HEW report that our discharges
had a pollution load equivalent to the untreated sewage
from 100,200 persons.
It is the Department!* standard practice
to convert data it obtains on industrial organic dis-
charges to what it calls population equivalents of
sewage discharge. While both sewage and industrial
organics have an oxygen demand on the river, it is
wholly untrue that the industrial organics have any
bacterial disease producing potential as does sewage.
We feel very strongly that by portraying effluent
data in this manner, representatives of the Department
of HEW misrepresent the facts and mislead the public.
We can only see confusion by this arbitrary conversion
and publication of misleading information.
-------
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1049
Waste Load Data Reporting
One of the HEW report recommendations
calls for permanent sampling of sewer discharges for
some 12 or more chacteristics, measurement of flows
and reporting monthly on both concentrations and
tonnages in the discharges to the state. The recom-
mendation further suggests that these records be kept
in open file.
We objected to releasing plant effluent
data to HEW prior to and at the Mahoning conference and
would like to provide for the record here our objection to
reporting of such information for open file records.
Our objections are twofold. The first is
that we regard the data as confidential both because
some of it is measuring wastes from company processes
which are not available to our competitors and because
it can easily be interpreted as to volume of production
in competitive lines. The second objection is
our concern over the misuse which the Department has
made of the data in the past.
As an example of the latter consider the
reporting of waste discharge data in a report without
making allowances for material in the water supply.
The report indicates one sewer has a flow of approximately
50 million gallons a day. The sulfate content in the
-------
1050
discharge is the same as in the water intake — about
50 parts per million. This is far below the Public Health
2
Service drinking water standard of 250 parts per million
considered as acceptable. The HEW report noted this
4
sewer as contributing 35,000 pounds a day of sulfate to
the Canal. Actually, it added none.
6
We are most willing to work with the
7
State and supply to them such data as the State deems
8
desirable and meaningful.
9
Recommendations
The HEW report has provided an excellent
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
summary of normal conditions of flow in the lake, the
areas of influence on the lake, types of wastes from
municipalities and industries and the difficulties ex-
perienced by the water companies.
In addition, the report discusses some of
the potential future problems which may be anticipated
by broader planning of controls on discharges or
changes in process operations in new Industrial
plant expansion to eliminate or minimize such wastes.
This planning, however, must be integrated with the
operation of the Chicago drainage system and its possible
enlargement to include the Grand Calumet area in Indiana.
In line with this, it has been suggested
that the diversion of the Grand Calumet to the Chicago
-------
1051
drainage system should be provided with a positive
continuous withdrawal from Lake Michigan via the
Indiana Harbor Ship Canal. This deserves evaluation,
3
for the potential of buildup in the Canal of residual
4
materials even after full treatment could affect Lake
O
quality. This proposal is not appraised in the HEW
6
report. Such a proposal would seem to require additional
7
diversion water.
8
Of immediate concern are the obvious slug
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
effects on the Lake Michigan water intakes. Since washout of
Indiana Harbor might be at times responsible for
some of this trouble, the State of Indiana and the
industries involved could develop with the water plants
a Joint monitoring program.
Of longer range is the necessity to decide
the programs, municipal and industrial, which would be
necessary to provide different quality standards or
permit different uses to have priority. Progress in
waste control by the Youngstown Sheet and Tube Company
has been accomplished in cooperation with the State of
Indiana by a planned program of approach. We pledge our
continued assistance in answering the remaining problems.
-------
1052
j CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Cochrane.
I wonder If you would wait for questions.
2
We do have a couple of housekeeping records
3
and announcements that I would like to make as early as
possible.
0
First, I would like to note Mr. H. W. -
6
Poston has replaced Mr. Snyder as the Federal conferee,
and I want to express thanks to Mr. Nicholas J. Melas,
a trustee in the Metropolitan Sanitary District of
9
Greater Chicago and Orville Anderson whom we have known
10
through the years for sitting in temporarily for Colonel
Frank Chesrow and Mr. George Lane who are here now.
12
I would like to give you the schedule,
13
as we see it now for the rest of the conference.
14
Remember, these are always subject to —
15
we expect to finish the Indiana presentations today.
16
As we have roughly computed it here,
17
there are about five hours of statements without questions.
18
Conferees, of course, can ask any questions or make any
19
comments they wish. But, gentlemen, I am afraid I am
20
going to have to keep your nose to the grindstone until
21
we finish tonight. So, the time is yours.
22
After this, we will recess for the; weekend
23
and Monday. We will reconvene again on Tuesday in Room
24
11 of McCormick Place at 9:30.
25
-------
1053
At that time, the Sanitary District will
make its presentation, the conferees will have their
2
discussion and consultation, and an announcement will be
3
made as to the conclusions and the summary.
In other words, we will recess today
O
after Indiana and on Tuesday we will reconvene in Room
6
11 of McCormlck Place at 9:30 a.m. The Sanitary
7
District will make its presentation, the conferees will
8
have discussion and arrive at conclusions. Announcements
9
will be made and the conference should be brought to a
conclusion on Tuesday.
n
Now, if we may call for comments or
12
questions to Mr. Cochrane — thank you for waiting.
13
I wanted to make these announcements as early as possible.
14
MR. KLASSEN: Yes, there are several questions I
15
wanted to ask of Mr. Cochrane, some purely Informational
16
and some to clear up a little confusion that exists in
17
my own mind.
18
About the philosophy — the way I interpret
19
it here, and I would like to Just comment on this — I
20
refer particularly to your statement on Page 4 when you talk
21
critically of the Report, and I have been in the posi-
22
tion at other times of criticizing Health, Education,
23
and Welfare Reports, but certainly not in the same vein
24
that you have commented hare.
25
-------
1054
"The Report offers no real guidance for
solution.1'
2
Do I interpret that correctly that you are
3
looking to Government to suggest solutions for your
industrial waste problems?
5
If it is, it is a little contrary to my
6
own concept of free enterprise on one hand for production
7
and then you look to someone else to solve your waste
8
treatment problems.
9
Is that what you are leaving with us?
10
MB. COCHRANE: You mean the —
11
MR. KLASSEN: You stated that the — "report offers
12
no guidance for the solutions to the more difficult problems."
13
In other words, you solve the easy ones and
14
when you get to the difficult ones you expect the Govern-
15
ment to give you the solution, is that correct?
16
MR. COCHRANE: No, I think we are trying to point
17
out here in the second to the last paragraph — I will
18
repeat it.
19
"The State of Indiana and much of
20
industry, certainly Youngstown Sheet and Tube, is to
21
determine what water uses are being affected and what
22
causes the adverse effect."
23
MR. KLASSEN: Where are you reading?
24
MR. COCHRANE: Second to the last paragraph on Page 4.
25
-------
4
5
6
7 MR. COCHRANE: We think this should be solved in
8 connection with both State and Federal cooperation.
9 MR. KLASSEN: That is in connection with —
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1055
That is in connection with the states, if you please.
MR. KLASSEN: In other words, I was incorrect in
the interpretation that you are looking to the Government
for the solution of your more difficult problems?
MR. COCHRANE: Correct.
MR. KLASSEN: This is what you inferred.
MR. COCHRANE: Primarily the State of Indiana,
our State, of course.
MR. KLASSEN: You are kind of evading my question here.
I am possibly not making myself clear.
You feel that —
MR. COCHRANE: Let me clear it up.
Insofar as, for instance, the Gary-Hobart
Waterworks, we certainly worked through Mr. Poole of
Indiana if it involved other state waters and probably Mr.
Poole would work in connection with you.
MR. KLASSEN: I am getting back to the basic
responsibility for solving your problem.
I personally feel that you create the
problem, therefore, it is your responsibility to find
the solution with whatever assistance you can get from
Government but basically, the responsibility is yours.
-------
1056
i Now, do you agree with this?
2 MR. COCHRANE: We think collectively we should
3 work. That is, industry should work with our State
4 officials in working out this cause and effect basis in
5 which to control this problem.
6 MR. KLASSEN: I agree with that, you should work with
7 the State agencies but I am coming back to where the prime
8 responsibility rests for solving the problem.
9 MR. COCHRANE: I think I made it quite crystal clear
10 that we will accept our role wherever it might be indicated.
n MR. POSTON: Do you mean to say that you will clean up
12 pollution when you find that it affects someone? Or you
13 would wait until it affects someone before you would clean
14 it up?
ls MR. COCHRANE: We are recommending that this approach
16 should go a little further than what you suggest in your
17 report.
18 We think this concept of determining what
19 water quality uses are being affected and what causes the
20 adverse affect is a proper approach.
21 MR. KLASSEN: In other word*, you will wait until it
22 is pointed out to you before you will do anything about it?
23 MR. COCHRANE: Not necessarily.
24 MR. KLASSEN: Well, then, what is your approach?
25 This is my understanding —
-------
8
g MR. KLASSEN: This is all right. You are a little
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1057
MR. COCHRANE: As I mentioned before, we're entering
in a program at the Oary-Hobart Waterworks to determine
the difficulties responsible for taste and odor and we
expect to monitor, in connection with them and the State
of Indiana officials here, the special ingredients that are
causing this difficulty and if we are concerned with them,
if they originate in our plant, we certainly will take the
usual effort to correct them.
ahead, you are on page 13 where I have some other notes,
I will comment on that now.
This is, and if you will pardon me,
I might be a little biased in my view on pollution but this
is — and you have used a couple of phrases here, "A
program is scheduled, a program is planned "
this is a part of a well-known Jargon that we
very often get.
What I am wondering is when is this program
going to be put into operation and why haven't you done this
before? Why are you Just planning this now?
Is it because someone called it to your
attention?
MR. COCHRANE: I made it quite clear that our program
at Youngstown Sheet and Tube has been a continuing program.
I outlined in the report what progress would be made prior to
-------
1058
l this time, what progress we are making now, and what
2 progress we are making in the future, particularly
„ under the guidance of our State officials in Indiana.
J
MR. KLASSEN: There are several places in here that
4
I have comments on.
O
One is on Page 8, talking about the 1964
6
Oil Recovery Facilities and on Page 9 on the breaking
up of your oil emulsion which we recognize and know from
8
our own experience is a very difficult problem. I
9
would be interested, in a technical standpoint, as I mentioned
10
yesterday, on the same comment and this would go for the
n
second paragraph on Page 9, it is one thing to have
12
facilities and I am not pointing my finger at you or the
13
State of Indiana because we have the same experiences in
14
the State of Illinois.
15
Recently, one of our industries, and this
16
is what is discouraging to state agencies, when industries
17
provide treatment facilities as you have here and then you
18
go there and find that they are not being operated or are
19
not being properly operated, and when asked why they are
20
honest enough to say, "Well, you haven't been back."
21
Well, I would like to know what has been
22
your experience in actual operation of the facilities you put
23
in, particularly on oil removal and oil emulsion separation
24
and removal?
25
-------
1059
! Are you keeping all of the oil out of the
2 water at the present time or is some of it getting away
3 from your facilities?
4 MR. COCHRANE: I would say we are making a very strong
5 attempt to remove the oil from the water both by — as I
6 have indicated here, by our program of, you might say,
7 continuing expansion of putting in facilities to control
8 this problem.
I think I outlined in one particular spot
9
where we were installing another piece of equipment and it
would take care of one-half of our present oil waste load
12 in the plant.
MR. KLASSEN: I had a comment on this.
13
What happens to the other half of the oil
1C waste load?
lo
,. MR. COCHRANE: The other half we are still working on.
16
MR. KLASSEN: When can we expect it to be corrected?
,0 MR. COCHRANE: We are working with our State officials
18
on that at the present time.
19
We will expect to work this problem out
zu
with them in the future.
21
MR. KLASSEN: In other words, that's the answer to
a
when?
23
To me, that isn't satisfactory. But,
if this is what you want in the record — I have stated this
25
-------
1060
i for 2 (Jays. I only state this to our own industry, .what I
2 hope to get out of this conference with anybody, even in Illi-
3 nois that Is contributing pollution, what they are going to do
4 which you haven't told us, and when, which you haven't.
K In other words, it is my understanding — I
0
6 Just want it to be on the record - - that your answer to this,
as far as I am concerned, is definitely not satisfactory be-
cause you haven't told us what you are going to do and when
O
you are going to do it. But, if this is what you want on the
9
record, this is up to you.
One other point — on Page 10, under "Spent
Acid", you leave the inference here, and it might be true,
and I am asking you this from a technical standpoint because
lo
our operations of these haven't been too satisfactory,
14
where you say the spent acid is dispersed over the slag
lw
and it is neutralized by the limestone in the slag, is
16
this actually your experience, that the limestone in the
slag will neutralize this acid?
18
We haven't been too successful in some of
jy
our operations because the limestone is soon coated and it
20
becomes ineffective.
21
This seems to be a kind of a pot and pan
***»
method to me.
23
MR. COCHRANE: The answer to that Is on Page 11, Mr.
24 or
Klassen, the second paragraph.
25
-------
1061
j MR. KLASSEN: Is this It?
2 You never Indicated any material reaching
3 the lake?
MR. COCHRANE: Correct.
. MR. KLASSEN: Well, I don't want to get into a technical
0
c discussion with you here. We always use dyes but some
b
dyes are — the colors are immediately removed and you are
not going to find them anyway.
8
You talk about and I — this I am quite
9
familiar with, having currently been the Chairman of the
Engineering Committee of Ohio River Compact about this
question of phenols, and I believe that it was your Company
12
that was one of the ones that made a real contribution to
13
the fact that phenols are not the sole indicators of taste
14
and odors.
15
But, let's accept that. But if phenols
16
are not the sole source of cdor, do you know what some of
the other sources of odor are?
18
Is your Company at the present time discharg«
19
ing any of these other materials into the water other than
20
phenols that you know that will cause odor?
21
MR. COCHRANE: Yes, at the present time we are
22
indicating in this program here that we are taking
23
corrective measures.
24
25
-------
1062
MR. KLASSEN: On the bottom of Page 12, "A Program
2 is scheduled."
3 This is a good word and it leaves the
4 inference that you got something down on paper.
5 Can you give us a time or a schedule?
6 This is all part of the schedule. Whenever you read schedule
7 you expect to find a time indicator.
What is the time that you are going to
eliminate the occasional releases from organlcs you mentioned
in connection with coke quenching?
MR. COCHRANE: I believe we mentioned the program will
be completed in 1966, the second paragraph, Page 13.
MR. KLASSEN: Also, Just a passing comment on — of
13
course, this is a phrase that we often get, too, so my
sympathies are with the State of Indiana, that there is a
15
tendency to set up a straw man by saying that the water, in th
16
canal, for example, Indiana Harbor Ship Canal shouldn't be
18
the same as it is in the middle of Lake Michigan.
lg Has this actually been proposed or is this
something that you set up for comparison?
20
21 Did anybody propose that the water in the
Indiana Harbor Ship Canal should be the same as the water in
**
Lake Michigan and if so, that this would require all of the
industries to close down in Lake County?
25 MR. COCHRANE: It would be inferred that if we were
-------
1063
to quit discharging pollutants in the canal, we infer that
is what you want.
ft
MR. KLASSEN: Has anybody ever indicated that the
water in the Harbor Ship Canal should be the same as we
4
find in the middle of Lake Michigan?
O
I am not pressing you, I Just want to —
6
MR. COCHRANE: Strictly drawn by inference.
7
MR. KLASSEN: I am looking for information.
8
MR. COCHRANE: I say, it is strictly drawn by
9
inferences.
MR. KLASSEN: This/sWhat I wanted you to bring out.
10 is
11
Because very often, inferences are pulled out of the report
12
and made to look like waste control agencies are against
13
Industrial expansion, and it is quite the opposite.
14
We are trying to get you better water in
15
industry and sometimes you make it a little difficult for us
16
to do this.
17
One thing that really interested me and this
18
is, I think, this might be the last question.
19
In the middle of page 16, I read this with
20
you rather hurriedly, but in the middle, in line with this,
21
are you suggesting in here that the waste from the Indiana
22
Harbor Ship Canal area be diverted into Illinois without
23
enough lake water to flush it into Illinois and dilute it?
24
I hope I am wrong, but is this what you are
25
inferring?
MR. COCHRANE: This is not necessarily our proposal.
-------
1
thought —
1064
This has been suggested In the past and we
2
MR. KLASSEN: By whom?
3
MR. COCHRANE: ~ (continuing) it should be mentioned.
4
MR. KLASSEN: By whom?
5
MR. COCHRANE: I really can't give you the reference
6
but it has been proposed.
MR. KLASSEN: This, obviously, is in your report here
8
in the record. Is this something that your Company is ad-
9
vocatlng?
10
MR. COCHRANE: No, not necessarily. We think that
this is Just an item that the conferees may want to discuss
12
among themselves and we thought it might be good to include
13
it for discussion..
14
MR. KLASSEN: We sure will, thank you.
15
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Are there any more questions or
16
comments?
17
MR. POSTON: I have a few comments I would like to
18
make. I would like to read on Page 4 of your report,
19
Mr. Cochrane.
20
"A concept of the State of Indiana and
21
much of industry, certainly Youngstown Sheet and Tube, is
22
to determine what water uses are being affected and what
23
causes the adverse effect."
24
And I would point out to you that both
25
-------
1065
i Congress and the President are very concerned about
2 pollution that is affecting our waters right now and
3 they have legislation and the President asked for stepped-up
4 enforcement authority for the Federal Government.
5 He says that Federal Government must be
e able to prevent pollution before it occurs and before it
7 happens right at the very source, rather than waiting until
8 this pollution gets in the stream. I think if you adhere
9 to your statement here we can expect greater Federal
10 activity into the enforcement area.
u I would like to adcyou, Mr. Cochrane,
12 whether or not you would give the Federal Government
13 information on your discharges, the effluent characteristics,
14 the pounds of material that you put into the waters?
15 MR. COCHRANE: I thought we answered that satisfactorily
16 and beginning on page —
17 CHAIRMAN STEIN: I think he answered that.
18 As a matter of fact, Mr. Cochrane, the point
is, one of the reasons to your objection is the misuse,
*y
. which the Department has made of the data in the past.
Presumably, this misuse that you indicate has
been the inclusion of data in official and public reports
22
which certainly can be subject to rebuttal,
23
Certainly, dealing in this area, what the Chicago water
24
people seem to think was fairly satisfactory and they expresse
-------
1066
1 their agreement with; certainly a report that the oil
2 industries, when they made their statement yesterday,
3 specific industries seemed to think it was satisfactory
4 and correct according to them, but the point is that you
5 feel that this, as I understand it, can be misuse.
6 I wonder what you would think of us if
7 we didn't want to give data to the newspapers because we
8 didn't like their editorials?
9 This is a rhetorical questions, I guess,
10 I don't know.
n MR. COCHRANE: I don't want to belabor this, I
12 think you understand our position pretty well.
13 CHAIRMAN STEIN: While I have the floor, may I
14 make one point?
15 You suggest that the diversion of the
16 Grand Calumet, of the Chicago drainage system, should be
17 provided with continuous withdrawl and that we should
18 look into this and evaluate this in terms of the time
19 schedule and in view of the experience that Chicago has
20 had, getting another thousand cubic feet of — I wonder
21 if we can alleviate Mr. Gerstein's or expect to alleviate
22 his problem within our lifetime if we employ this approach?
23 MR. KLASSEN: I took this as a compliment because
24 we have some of the best legal talent in Illinois and New
25 York on this and this hasn't been decided, so maybe we can.
-------
106?
MR. POSTON: I note further that you object to the
terminology, "Population Equivalent," and I think you
2
have misinterpreted our definition of "Population
3
Equivalent."
4
We define it on the very first page of
5
our report what we mean by "Population Equivalent" and
6
that is defined as the discharge of one sixth pound of
7
five day, 20 degree biochemical oxygen demand per day.
8
And I see that you have inferred that
9
we haven't given a proper definition here. I can't under-
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
stand your statement on Page 14.
MR. COCHRANE: Maybe this will help clarify it.
We very definitely think that the general
public misinterprets that statement.
I can point out to you that two days ago
one of the men standing on this podium made reference to
the raw sewage equivalent of 4£ billion people dumped
into Lake Michigan by industries and this probably is as
good an example as I can give you.
MR. POSTON: We have some figures on Youngstown
Sheet and Tube that were presented in our report, a
population equivalent of 100,000 PE.
We have some 4,000 pounds of ammonia
nitrogen and 6,000 total nitrogen pounds, phenol!cs
250, oil 18,900, 17,000 pounds of soluble iron from
-------
1068
pickling.
2 Do you disagree with these figures?
3 MR. COCHRANE: No, we don't
4 MR. POSTON: All right. I think this in part.is an
answer to Mr. Klassen's question. These are some of the
polluting substances that Youngstown is discharging
here.
These are some of the things that we have
concern for and things that we would like to eliminate
10 from the water so that we can have clean water.
li MR. COCHRANE: We recognize that concern, I should
12 say this, too, that some of these figures might have to
13 be corrected for — that is, taken into consideration the
14 receiving water in the Canal and that sort of thing which
15 we brought out in our report.
15 I think we went to great length to show
17 you we have recognized these problems. We have been working
18 with the State of Indiana in the past, now and we will
work with them in the future.
2o We take this thing very seriously and we
21 are lending every effort to alleviate the condition.
22 MR. POSTON: I hope in time to come and in a short
23 time, that we can revise these figures downward. I think
24 this is very necessary, and I certainly hope that we can
25 revise these figures down in time to come.
-------
1069
MR. COCHRANE: We can look forward to that. I
wanted to add, so you notice, from Mr. Miller's report
yesterday they show no increase in outflows of the Canal,
Dickey Road Bridge in the last five years, and the water
supply in Chicago is still safe and palatable according to Mr,
Qerstein. When you realize that the vast increase
in industrial output in the last 10 years or 13 years,
the great increase in population, and to think that this
9 situation has held at least stationary, I think it is
10 quite a tribute to the work of the people in our area
11 and to Mr. Poole for his extensive efforts in controlling
12 the situation.
13 MR. POSTON: I note that Mr. Gerstein made some so-
u called goals for his waterworks Intake, water that he
is wanted and I see in the papers this referred to the
16 "pie in the sky."
17 I wonder how you feel about Mr. Gersteln's
18 standards for his water intake?
19 MR. COCHRANE: I am really not in a position to answer
20 that. I am not qualified to, but I am sure that when
21 Mr. Poole and Mr. Miller get into this with Mr. Klassen and
22 get into the work of the setting of standards we will be
23 well represented.
24 MR. KLASSEN: I have one more question, Mr. Stein.
25 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Yes.
-------
1070
! MR. KLASSEN: I think it is kind of an important one
2 we kind of left dangling.
This Company is on record as not releasing
3
4 information on their waste loadings. I would like to have
Mr. Cochrane make a suggestion how the public then can
0
. know by what mechanism would we know how you are using or
b
? hopefully not misusing public waters?
0 Have you got any suggestions in that regard?
o
MR. COCHRANE: Well, as I said before, we work very
9
closely with our State officials and when it seems appro-
priate and desirable on their part and our part, then we
make information known.
12
You realize the general public, generally
13
speaking, doesn't recognize the technical aspects of
14
this problem.
15
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Mr. Cochrane, you mean to say
16
because you are afraid the general public doesn't understand
17
the technical aspects of a problem that you, as a Company
18
policy, want to keep that Information confidential?
is
MR. COCHRANE: If you wish to belabor this further,
20
I have a statement here that our General Counsel sent to
21
the Honorable George H. Fallen, Chairman of the Committee
22
of Public Works, and I will be glad to quote from this
23
if you like.
24
CHAIRMAN STEIN: I don't care.
25
-------
1
2
8
9
CHAIRMAN STEIN: I have heard this before.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1071
MR. COCHRANE: It refers to the Mahonlng Conference.
In the interest of saving time, I thought
it might be repetitious.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: You can put it into the record as a
quote.
MR. COCHRANE: All right, I shall do that and if you
wish, I would present the letter to be Included.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: If you wish.
MR. COCHRANE: "On behalf of my —"
MR. COCHRANE: You have? Then shall I not?
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Go right ahead.
MR. KLASSEN: I haven't heard it.
MR. COCHRANE: "On behalf of my Company, I
decline to make our effluent data available to the
Department. To avoid any misunderstanding of my reasons,
I would like to state them in this letter to you and to
the Public Works Committee.
"Lest we be charged with being uncooperative,
may I say that we have made available elaborate
effluent data, as well as stream quality data,
at frequent intervals to the Water Pollution Control Board
and the Department of Health in Ohio, which has Jurisdiction
over our Company under the Ohio Water Pollution Control
Law."
-------
1072
! You understand this refers to the
2 Mahoning Conference which has Jurisdiction over our
3 Company under the Ohio Pollution Control law.
4 Then, I will take the liberty of,
5 in the interest of time, going to Page 2.
6 He said, "We regard the data as
7 confidential both because of secret processes and
8 because it contains information as to our volume of
g production in competitive lines."
10 He said further, "We are also particularly
jj concerned over misuse what the Department has made of
12 effluent data it has obtained on a voluntary basis in the
13 past. It is the Department's standard practice to convert
.. data it obtains on industrial organic discharges to what
J5 it calls Population Equivalent of sewage discharge. While
J6 both sewage and industrial organics have an oxygen demand
on the river, it is wholly untrue that the industrial organics
10 have any bacterial disease producing potential
lo
as does sewage.
ID
2Q "We feel very strongly that by portraying
effluent data in this manner, representatives of the
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare grossly
misrepresent the facts and mislead the public."
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you very much.
25
-------
1073
! MR. KLASSEN: I Just want to comment on that.
2 Maybe this is a conflict between an
3 engineer not agreeing with the lawyer which very often
4 happens.
There is one more point from Mr. Cochrane
O
„ that I do want to mention here which strikes
6
me as a kind of philosophy.
You state that the water in this area
8
hasn't deteriorated in the last five years. This may be
9
true. But I think five years ago it was bad and that
10
the Chicago Water supply as Mr. Gerstein has mentioned
has been safe for drinking during this period.
1 *»
I want to point this out and emphasize this:
13
The reason that the Chicago water is safe is because of the
14
competency in the operation of the Chicago water supply,
15
not because of the contributions made by your Company.
16
I want to ask you, must we wait until the
17
Chicago water is unsafe before you do something?
18
Is this what you are waiting for?
19
MR. COCHRANE: I totally disagree with your statement
20
because as I indicated in my report, we have made substantial
21
programs and progress in waste control, as I have indicated
22
in the report. You can refer back to it.
23
MR. CHESROW: Mr. Stein.
24
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Yes?
25
-------
1074
MR. CHESROW: Mr. Cochrane, on Page 8, you state
that the discharge, referring to scale and trap oil —
2
"This discharge and the discharge from the larger terminal
settling basin Just described are the only two on the
4
lakefront."
O
What is the total amount of oil in
6
gallons per day that you are talking — that you are
referring to?
8
MR. COCHRANE: I really don't have the figures
9
handy. They are in the report.
MR. CHESROW: Are you referring to the 18,900?
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. COCHRANE: Whatever that figure was in the report.
It will be cut in half according to our report.
MR. CHESROW: I must concur with Mr. Klassen, Mr.
Poston, and Chairman Stein and thank you, Mr. Klassen, for
taking Chicago into consideration as you always do.
We are very, very much concerned with
the quality of safe drinking water and you say in your
report on Page 2 that the citizens of the area do have
safe drinking water.
Yes, Chicago does have safe drinking water,
but at a price and to a great extent the capabilities of
the men that are operating the water treatment plants.
Just one other question —
MR. COCHRANE: I quite agree with you on that point —
-------
1075
it is at a price, yes and a heavy price.
MR. CHESROW: It is at a price, yes, and a
heavy price.
MR. COCHRANE: Yes, I would say, too, that we
have — the conferees will evaluate this economic problem
considerably in their discussions which will lead to
7 some recommendations.
8 There are other economic considerations
which I am sure they will take into consideration.
10 MR. CHESROW: By the same token, you take the
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare to
12 task with reference to Population Equivalent and the
13 industrial waste, as it is now set up; the BOD demand
14 is a contributing factor and a factor that does have a
15 lot to do with reference to the quality of our water.
J6 Now, do you know of any other way we
17 could figure the population demand?
18 MR. COCHRANE: I am sure there's — I am not
19 a technician in this field and I am sure there are
20 enough people.
21 MR. CHESROW: I thought maybe you have another
22 formula for a population figure.
23 MR. POSTON: Mr. Cochrane, I would like to —
24 you mentioned that the economics of this pollution
25 problem.
-------
1076
1 I would like to think that the conferees
2 will think not only of the economics but the health of the
3 people and conservation of water. I think I brought this
4 out at first and I think it is more than Just the dollar.
5 It is the health of the people that we are talking about here
6 MR. CHESROW: Thank you, Mr. Boston, again because
7 those were the words of our Mayor Daley of Chicago in which
8 he stressed very strongly that it is a question of
9 economics also.
10 MR. COCHRANE: Well, I might remind you again that
n when we mentioned our concept and cetainly Youngstown
12 Sheet & Tube is to make certain that there is a safe and
13 palatable water supply.
14 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Are there any further comments or
15 questions? If not, thank you very much, Mr. Cochrane.
16 You have been a very forbearing witness.
17 I would suggest that that entire letter
18 that you have appear in the record so no one can say any-
19 thing was taken out of context.
20
21
22
23
24
25
-------
1077
THE YOUNGSTOWN SHEET AND TUBE COMPANY
, YOUNGSTOWN 1, OHIO
*
3 Robert F. Doolittle
Vice President and General Counsel
4 February 17, 1965
5 Hon. George H. Fallen
Chairman
Committee on Public Works
House of Representatives
Washington, D. C.
8 Dear Mr. Fallon:
I wish to urge your serious consi-
deration of the subpoena power proposed
11 to be given to the Secretary of Health,
12 Education, and Welfare under Section 5
13
(e) (i) of H. R. 3988.
14 I have Just come from the Conference
15 on the Mahoning River conducted February
16 16 and 17, 1965 in Youngstown, Ohio, by
17 the Secretary.
18 The HEW Conferee made repeated re-
19 quests of industry representatives for
20 submission to HEW of their effluent data.
21 He argued that such data from individual
22 companies and facilities in the reach of
23 the stream at Youngstown, Ohio, was
24 essential for an evaluation of water quality.
25
-------
1078
On behalf of my Company, I decline to
make our effluent data available to the
2
Department. To avoid any misunderstanding
3
of my reasons, I would like to state them
in this letter to you and to the Public
3
Works Committee.
6
Lest we be charged with being unco-
7
operative, may I say that we have made
8
available elaborate effluent data, as well
9
as stream quality data, at frequent intervals
10
to the Water Pollution Control Board and the
11
Department of Health in Ohio, which has
12
jurisdiction over our Company under the
13
Ohio Water Pollution Control Law.
14
We have done this in connection with
15
an elaborate water pollution abatement
16
program worked out with the state, which is
17
functioning under regulations of the Ohio
18
River Valley Water Sanitation Commission
19
under an 8-state compact, in this
20
connection we have developed and installed
21
over the past several years extensive pro-
22
cedures and facilities for elimination and
23
control of our discharges, at a cost to
24
us of many millions of dollars.
25
-------
1078-A
Under Ohio law state authorities are
2 prohibited from disclosing company data with-
3 out the company's consent. This preserves
4 a confidential relationship between the
, company and the state.
O
6 The Department of HEW, however, both
7 by its actions and statements of intention
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-------
1079
has made it very clear that it would
release the information to the public,
2
and even broadcast it through publicity
3
releases.
4
We regard the data as confidential
5
both because of secret processes involved
6
and because it contains information as to our
volume of production in competitive lines.
8
We are also particularly concerned over
\3
misuse which the Department has made of
effluent data it has obtained on a voluntary
basis in the past. It is the Department's
standard practice to convert data it obtains on
13
industrial organic discharges to what it calls
population quivalents of sewage discharge.
15
While both sewage and industrial organics
16
have an oxygen demand on the river, it is
wholly untrue that the industrial organics
18
have any bacterial disease producing potential
IO
as does sewage.
20
We feel very strongly that by portraying
effluent data in this manner, representatives
22
of the Department of HEW grossly misrepresent
23
the facts and mislead the public.
24
Arming an administrative agency with the
20
-------
io8o
drastic power of subpoena in this kind
of situation is both dangerous and un-
tt
necessary. Our people and our Congress
O
throughout our history have been loathe
4
to vest this inquisitorial power in
O
administrative bodies except as a part
6
of grand jury or court procedure.
Apart from these concerns, we feel
8
strongly that the Department of HEW has
9
no need for individual company data in
10
order to discharge any of its duties
under the Federal Water Pollution Control
12
Act. Certainly it does not need this
13
information for setting water quality
14
standards. Nor does it need it for the
15
conduct of Conferences.
16
The Secretary can call the Conference
17
if he has reason to believe there is
18
pollution occurring in a state other than
19
that where the discharge occurs. This Involves
20
determination of the water quality in the
21
receiving state, and not in the state of
22
origin.
23
H. R. 3988 would recognize the primary
24
responsibility of the states to prevent and
25
-------
1081
control water pollution. The enforcement
functioning of the Department of HEW is limited
2
to taking action where the state or inter-
O
state body having Jurisdiction is failing to
4
make effective progress toward pollution
O
abatement in the interstate water.
6
Once the Conference is called it is
7
concerned with (l) the degree of pollution,
8
if any, in the receiving state and its
9
effect on health or welfare there, (2)
10
whether there is in the originating state
a sound program of control and effective
12
progress being made thereunder toward abate -
13
ment, and (3) causes of delay.
14
Not only is individual company data in
lo
the state of origin not needed, but
16
even if obtained it would in no way determine
17
water quality in the receiving state, in
18
view of dilution and other self-purification
iy
occurring during passage downstream.
20
21 The Conference contemplated by the
22 statuteis one with the state agencies.
23 We submit that the nature of their programs
24 and the extent of progress being made under
25 them, or lack of it, can very clearly be
demonstrated by the states and industries
-------
1082
l involved. This can be done without any
2 necessity whatever for the disclosure of
3 any individual company data.
4 Effluent data is obviously designed
5 to assess responsibility when downstream
6 pollution is found, but responsibility is
7 not an issue at Conference level.
8 I urge strongly against the amendment
g which would vest this subpoena power in the
10 Department of HEW. I do so in the conviction
n that this extreme, Inquisitorial power is
12 susceptible to gross abuse. Further, it
13 is clear that the Department has no need
14 for individual company data in order to
15 discharge its Conference responsibilities
16 or to set water quality standards.
17 Of even greater concern, this power
18 would enable the Department to compel pro-
19 duct ion of highly competitive data on pro-
20 cessing operations, production, scheduling of
21 operations, and all manner of confidential
22 business data which it does not need for
00 stream analysis.
&«5
24 Respectfully submitted,
Robert F. Doolittle
25 RFD/mw
-------
1083
j CHAIRMAN STEIN: Off the record
(Discussion off the record.)
ft
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Back on the record.
3
Mr. Poole.
4
MR. POOLE: I have a man that I promised to
w
get on an airplane at Noon. So, I am going to call on
6
Dr. Allen D. Brandt, Manager of Industrial Health En-
gineering of the Bethlehem Steel Corporation.
8
DR. BRANDT: Mr. Chairman, Conferees, Ladies and
9
Gentlemen:
10
In the Interest of saving time, it appears
now that we are taking more time than we should for these
\ft
presentations.
13
I will read only a portion of mine if the
14
Chairman will permit, and wish that the copies as dis-
lo
tributed go into the record.
16
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Without objection, that will be
done.
18
DR. BRANDT: My name is Allen Brandt. I am employed
*y
by Bethlehem Steel Corporation as manager of Industrial
20
Health Engineering with headquarters in the home office
21
at Bethlehem, Pennsylvania.
22
At the invitation of B. A. Poole, Technical
23
Secretary of the Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board,
24
I am here to describe briefly the Water Pollution Control
-------
1084
! facilities and program at the Burns Harbor plant of
2 Bethlehem Steel Corporation.
The first phase of Bethlehem's Burns Harbor
3
plant went into operation less than three months ago when
last December the first plate was rolled on the 160 inch
O
plate mill. Only two years earlier, on December 3, 1962,
6
Mr. Arthur B. Homer, then Chairman of Bethlehem Steel Com-
pany, announced publicly Bethlehem's decision to build
8
a steel plant at Burns Harbor. The plant is located in
9
Porter County, Indiana on the southern shore of Lake
10
Michigan and about 10 miles east of Gary, Indiana.
The plant's production facilities will
be in the nature of rolling and finishing mills; specifically
13
first, a 160 inch plate mill, now operating, second, a
14
cold reduction and finishing mill scheduled for completion
later this year and then third, an 80 inch hot strip mill.
16
Raw material in the form of slabs and coils
17
will be supplied to the Burns Harbor plant from one or
18
more of Bethlehem's integrated steel plants located in
i y
the East.
20
Waste Disposal:
21 K
Bethlehem retained a consulting engineering
22
firm which was known to have had experience with steel mill
23
waste treatment to design the water supply and waste water
24
25
-------
1085
i disposal facilities for the new plant.
2 Their engineers are experienced and
3 especially competent in this area of engineering design,
4 and are familiar with the area around the southern shore
s of Lake Michigan and with the pertinent regulations of
6 the State of Indiana.
7 Bethlehem's engineers outlined the
g facilities to be installed at Burns Harbor and the
_ consulting firm investigated similar installations at
other steel plants to see how the wastes were being handled,
u what problems were being encountered and what changes that
12 might be made to improve the facilities. The best available
13 engineering knowledge and experience from all sources have
been used to develop the disposal system for the Burns
Harbor plant.
ID
16 All concerned in the development of the
17 system, and the type of equipment to be used and in the
lg final design and layout of the entire waste handling and
treatment system were closely working with the Indiana
iy
2Q Health Department Engineers and especially with Mr. Poole,
the Technical Secretary of the Indiana Stream Pollution
MI
Control Board.
££
23 All of the Health Department Engineers with
whom we had contact were very helpful and cooperative. The
25 Stream Pollution Control Board, in our opinion, was very
-------
1086
demanding at times. We found out early the Board was
2 pursuing diligently the objective set forth by its
3 Technical Secretary on September 3, 1963.
4 Possibly those objectives deserve repeating
5 at this time. They are:
_ 1. Unreasonable pollution be abated
b
as soon as possible.
0 2. New facilities to provide adequate
o
treatment.
3
3. Existing industrial plants must pro-
vide adequate treatment facilities
as part of the plant renovation
or expansion. Since ours is a
13
new plant, only objective No. 2 is perinent in this
discussion.
ID
,_ Bethlehem's Burns Harbor Plant waste
IB
handling and waste treatment system has been designed to
allow the utmost flexibility In handling wastes with
18
a view toward spotting and isolating as quickly as
possible any problems that might arise. In general, the
zu
different waste waters receive primary treatment where
Zl
they originate in the mill. They then are given secondary
treatment at the central waste treatment plant, following
23
which they flow to the terminal lagoon, then through a
24
drainage ditch to the Little Calumet River.
-------
108?
A separate sewer system is being
provided to handle the waste flows from each of the
2
following four sources:
1. The Plate Mill.
4
2. The Cold Mill.
5
3. Pickling Operations.
6
4. Sanitary Facilities.
7
When 80 inch hot strip mill goes
8
into operation, its waste waters will enter the plate
9
mill sewer. In addition, a network of ditches drains the
10
property and stormwater away.
All of the sewers drained to the west
12
treatment plant located on about 10 acres of ground in
13
the southwest corner of the property. Here the waste
14
waters remain separated until after they have received
10
secondary treatment, then they are combined and flow to
16
the terminal lagoon which occupy an additional 78 acres
17
the same general area of the plant property.
18
The lagoon is designed to handle all
19
waste water from the plate mill, hot strip mill, cold
20
strip mill, and sanitary sewage treatment plant, with a
21
detention time of more than 24 hours.
22
It will accomplish cooling and reaeration
23
and will serve as a double check against possible discharges
24
25
-------
1088
l of solids or oil into the Little Calumet River.
2 At this point, I would like to show
3 some slides, sir, which show some of the equipment
4 going in. Inasmuch as this is a new plant, much of
5 this is under construction or has not been tried.
6 Nevertheless, we will show you some of
7 the facilities.
8 Actually, this, I think, is not too
g necessary. It shows exactly where the Burns Plant is
10 located.
H This is an aerial view of the plant
12 site taken about six months ago overlooking northeast.
13 For the record, I might point out that
14 the area purchased by Bethlehem for the construction of
15 the plant is roughly 10 times the figure sited by Mr.
j6 Le Bosquet on Tuesday of this week.
17 Next slide, please.
18 This is an aerial view of the waste
lg treatment plant showing the general layout and control
20 buildings. It is in the foreground, not the background,
21 That is the operating plant.
22 Next slide, please.
23
24
25
-------
1089
j This Is an aerial view of the plate mill
2 flocculator-clarlfier at the pump station, the pump station
3 being on the right.
4 Next slide, please.
5 This is the close-up aerial view of the four
6 cold mill flocculators with again the control building on
7 the right.
8 This Is an aerial view of the 78 acre terminal
g lagoon.
10 Next, please.
This is a waste water pump station showing the
five hot mill waste water pumps.
.. Next slide, please.
Ao
Three hot mill flocculators, looking east at
15 the waste water pumping station which is in the background.
16 Next, please.
17 This is inside the control building showing
.- the three cold mill filters.
lo
19 Next slide, yiease.
20 Inside the control building again, but looking
21 south at the waste pickle liquor neutralization process
22 tanks at the left and the air compressors at the right.
23 Next, please.
The instrument panel board for both the hot
»4
25 and cold mill treatment units.
-------
1090
Next, please.
2 Instrumentation for waste pickle liquor
3 neutralization pickle process; and the next and last slide,
4 please.
5 The oil separation plant for the sheet and
6 tin mill wastes.
7 Now, we will turn, for the benefit of the
g conferees who have a copy of this, turn to page 8, the
g conclusions.
._ The waste handling and treatment system and
facilities at Bethlehem's Burns Harbor plant have been
developed and laid out with great care.
1 A
The engineering design work was done by
competent persons, there were consultations with State Health
Department personnel, and approval of the Indiana Stream
15
Pollution Control Board was obtained for each phase of
16
the system and facilities as the overall design program
10 progressed.
lo
Incidentally, Bethlehem is grateful for, and
*y
values, the advice and assistance given unstintlngly by
*W
the State Health Department engineers.
So far as I know, all changes in plans re-
quested by the Health Department were made.
Consequently, it is our opinion that the faci-
24
lities provided represent the latest know-how and
-------
1091
equipment.
We have reason to believe that the waste treat
raent being provided will be more than adequate.
Should we encounter trouble spots as this new
4
equipment, most of which still is untried, goes on stream,
O
we still do the best we can to rectify the shortcomings to
6
the end that, hopefully, we may meet all the requirements
of the pertinent laws, and of even greater importance, not
8
cause pollution of any of the waters of the States of
. Indiana or Illinois.
10
Thank you.
(Whereupon, the complete
12*
Statement by Allen D. Brandt
lo
was made a part of the record
14
as follows:)
lo
WATER POLLUTION CONTROL PROGRAM
16
BURNS HARBOR PLANT OF BETHLEHEM STEEL CORPORATION
Statement by Allen D. Brandt, Manager of
18
Industrial Health Engineering, the Bethlehem Steel
Corporation, Bethlehem, Pa.
Presented before: Grand Calumet Conference
&i
called by U. S. Department of Health, Education, and
4t&
Welfare, Chicago, Illinois, March 2-4, 1965
AW
24
25
-------
1092
My name is Allen Brandt. I am employed by
2 Bethlehem Steel Corporation as Manager of Industrial Health
3 Engineering with headquarters in the home office at
4 Bethlehem, Pennsylvania.
c At the invitation of B. A. Poole, Technical
0
6 Secretary of the Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board,
7 I am here to describe briefly the water pollution control
0 facilities and program at the Burns Harbor plant of
O
Bethlehem Steel Corporation.
General
The first phase of Bethlehem's Burns Harbor
plant went into operation less than three months ago when
1 £*
last December the first plate was rolled on the 160-inch
13
plate mill. Only two years earlier, on December 3, 1962,
Mr. Arthur B. Homer, then Chairman of Bethlehem Steel
lo
,. Company, announced publicly Bethlehem's decision to build
lo
a steel plant at Burns Harbor. The plant is located in
10 Porter County, Indiana, on the southern shore of Lake
lo
Michigan and about 10 miles east of Gary, Indiana.
The plant's production facilities will be in
20
the nature of rolling and finishing mills; specifically,
(l) a 160-inch plate mill, now operating, (2) a cold
reduction and finishing mill scheduled for completion
later this year and then (3) an 80-inch hot strip mill.
Raw material in the form of slabs and coils wil|l
25
-------
1093
i be supplied to the Burns Harbor plant from one or more of
2 Bethlehem's integrated steel plants located in the East.
3 Waste Disposal
4 Bethlehem retained a consulting engineering
5 firm which was known to have had experience with steel
6 mill waste treatment to design the water supply and waste
7 water disposal facilities for the new plant. Their
8 engineers are experienced and especially competent in this
g area of engineering design, and are familiar with the
10 area around the southern shore of Lake Michigan and with
n the pertinent regulations of the State of Indiana.
12 Bethlehem engineers outlined the facilities to be installed
13 at Burns Harbor and the consulting firm investigated
14 similar installations at other steel plants to see how
15 the wastes were being handled, what problems were being
J6 encountered and what changes might be made to improve the
17 facilities. The best available engineering knowledge and
18 experience from all sources has been used to develop the
19 disposal system for the Burns Harbor plant.
20 All concerned in the development of the system,]
21 in the type of equipment to be used and in the final design
22 and layout of the entire waste handling and treatment
23 system worked closely with the Indiana Health Department
24 engineers and especially with Mr. Poole, the Technical
25 Secretary of the Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board.
-------
1094
All of the Health Department engineers with whom we had
contact were very helpful and cooperative. The Stream
2
Pollution Control Board, in our opinion, was very demanding
3
at times. We found out early that the Board was pursuing
4
diligently the objectives set forth by its technical
5
secretary on September 3, 1963.
6
Possibly those objectives deserve repeating
7
at this time. They are:
8
1. Unreasonable pollution be abated as soon as
9
possible.
10
2. New facilities to provide adequate treatment.
11
3. Existing industrial plants must provide adequate
12
treatment facilities as part of the plant
13
renovation or expansion. (Since ours is a new
14
plant, only objective No. 2 is pertinent In this
15
discussion.)
16
Bethlehem's Burns Harbor plant waste
17
handling and treatment system has been designed to allow the
18
utmost flexibility in handling wastes with a view toward
19
spotting and isolating as quickly as possible any problems
20
that might arise, in general, the different waste waters
21
receive primary treatment where they originate in the mill.
22
They then are given secondary treatment at the central
23
waste treatment plant following which they flow to
24
the terminal lagoon, then through a drainage ditch to the
25
-------
1095
Little Calumet River.
A separate sewer system is being provided
to handle the waste flows from each of the following four
sources: (1) the plate mill, (2) the cold mill, (3)
pickling operations and (4) sanitary facilities. When
the 80-inch hot strip mill goes into operation, its waste
waters will enter the plate mill sewer. In addition, a
network of ditches drains the property and carries storm
water away. All of the sewers drain to the waste treat -
10 ment plant located on about ten acres of ground in the
southwest corner of the property. Here the waste waters
12 remain separated until after they have received secondary
13 treatment, then they are combined and flow to the terminal
14 lagoon which occupies an additional 78 acres in the same
general area of the plant property.
16 The lagoon is designed to handle all
17 waste water from the plate mill, hot strip mill, cold strip
ig mill and sanitary sewage treatment plant, with a detention
19 time of more than 24 hours. It will accomplish cooling and
20 reaeration and will serve as a double check against
21 possible discharges of solids or oil into the Little
22 Calumet River.
23 Plate Mill
24 As stated earlier, the plate mill is the
2S first facility to go into operation. It produces mill
-------
1096
! scale which is carried away by means of water from the
2 surfaces of the steel being rolled. In addition, a small
3 amount of the lubricating oils and grease finds its way
4 into the waste water from the mill. Consequently, the water
5 leaving the plate mill contains suspended solids in the
6 form of iron scale and a small amount of oil and grease.
7 The size of the particles varies from very large pieces of
8 scale knocked off the steel slabs as they leave the reheat
9 furnaces down to extremely small particles produced in the
10 finishing stands of the plate mill.
11 The waste water is collected in a scale pit
12 located at the plate mill. Here the large particles of
13 scale are removed before the water is pumped via the
14 plate mill sewer to the waste treatment plant. The
is scale pit is equipped with an oil skimmer to remove the
16 floating oil. The oil so collected is pumped to a heated
17 tank where some of the entrained water and other impurities
is are removed, following which it is hauled away by tank
19 truck.
20 Facilities at the main treatment plant Intended
21 to remove mill scale and certain other suspended solids
22 consist of three clarifier-flocculators. The influent flume
23 to the cJarifier-flocculators is equipped with an oil
24 skimmer. The waste water in the clarlfier-
25 flocculators will be treated chemically so as to effect
-------
1097
i good removal of the fine suspended solids that are not
2 removed in the scale pit. The sludge which collects in the
3 tanks is dewatered by vacuum filters and may be either used
4 as fill in the area or sold. The effluent flows to the
5 terminal lagoon.
6 Cold Reduction and Finishing Mill
7 The cold reduction and finishing mill is under
8 construction and is expected to go into operation later
9 this year. Production facilities at the mill will
10 include a continuous plckler, continuous cleaning and
n annealing lines, a tin line, cold reduction mills and
12 allied facilities.
13 The continuous pickler will produce waste
14 pickle liquor which will be handled separately from other
is mill wastes. A special pipeline will convey the spent
16 pickle liquor to the waste treatment plant where it will
17 be neutralized with lime using a hot oxidation process.
18 The neutralized slurry will be discharged to the plate mill
19 flocculator-clarifier for settling and removal of the
20 solids.
21 A deep-well has been drilled and it is
22 hoped that it may serve as a better disposal method for
23 the spent pickle liquor than the neutralization equipment,
24 Should that turn out to be the case, it is Bethlehem's
25 intention to use the deep-well for such waste.
-------
1096
j The waste from the continuous cleaning
2 and annealing operations and the tin plating operation
3 will contain a variety of materials, some alkaline and
4 some acid, in small amounts. Some of these wastes will
5 be given primary treatment close to their sources after
6 which they and the others not given such primary treatment
7 will be collected in a holding tank and discharged from it
8 at a slow and uniform rate into the cold mill sewer.
9 Rolling oils from the cold reduction mills
10 will be collected, separated and concentrated at an oil
n separation plant adjacent to the mill. The recovered oil
12 will be recycled to the mill or removed by tank truck.
13 The waste water will be discharged to the cold mill sewer.
14 All waste water discharged to the cold
15 mill sewer will flow to the secondary waste treatment
16 plant where it will be subjected to chemical coagulation,
17 flocculation and sedimentation. An oil skimmer is
13 provided at the treatment plant for the cold mill waste.
19 Sludge collected in the tanks will be dewatered by vacuum
20 filters and may be either used as fill in the area or
21 sold. The effluent flows to the terminal lagoon.
22 Hot Strip Mill
23 The waste water from the 8o-inch strip
24 mill, to be constructed as the third phase of the present
25 program, will have characteristics similar to that from
-------
1099
the 160-Inch plate mill. Therefore, It will be discharged
to the same sewer and will be given the same treatment in
the secondary plant as was described previously for the
plate mill.
5 Sanitary Sewage Treatment
6 All sanitary sewage throughout the plant
is collected in a separate sanitary sewer system and
conveyed to a new sewage treatment plant adjacent to the
9 industrial waste treatment facilities. It is a conventional
10 activated sludge plant. Its design capacity was based on
11 experience at the other steel plants both as to the volume
12 rate of flow (350 Gpm at present) and as the probable
13 loading. (For purposes of comparison, this sewage treat-
14 ment plant is about the same size as one capable of serving
15 a community of approximately 1200 homes.)
16 As and when the need arises, the sanitary
17 sewage treatment plant will be expanded to a capacity of
18 about 560 gpm. This can be done by adding another
19 aeration tank and secondary clarlfier. If further
20 expansion ever becomes necessary, the plant can be con-
21 verted to the contact stabilization process by the addi-
22 tion of one more aeration tank.
23 The existing sanitary sewage treatment
24 plant consists of a comminutor for grinding solids, a
25 primary settling tank, two aeration tanks, a secondary
-------
1100
clarifler and chlorine contact tank. Two aerobic digesters
are provided for handling excess sludge. The treated
effluent is discharged to the terminal lagoon and is expected
w
not to create a bacterial pollution problem anywhere.
4
Terminal Lagoon
0
The lagoon has a total volume capacity of
approximately 120 million gallons. It will result In a
detention time of 1.2 days. The surface area of the
8
lagoon Is about 78 acres. The lagoon will accomplish
y
cooling and reaeration and is equipped with scum baffles
and skimmers to prevent the discharge of any floating
materials.
Ltt
13 Conclusion
The waste handling and treatment system
1C and facilities at Bethlehem's Burns Harbor plant have
10
,_ been developed and laid out with great care. The
lb
17
engineering design work was done by competent persons,
,0 there were consultations with State Health Department
lo
ig personnel, and approval of the Indiana Stream Pollution
20 Control Board was obtained for each phase of the system
21 and facilities as the overall design program progressed.
22 Incidentally, Bethlehem is grateful for, and values, the
23 advice and assistance given unstintlngly by the State
24 Health Department engineers. So far as I know all changes
25 in plans requested by the Health Department were made.
-------
1101
Consequently, It Is our opinion that the facilities
provided will be more than adequate. Should we encounter
trouble spots as this new equipment, most of which still
is untried, goes on stream, we will do the best we can
to rectify the shortcomings to the end that, hopefully,
we may meet all the requirements of the pertinent laws,
and of even greater Importance, not cause pollution of any
of the waters of the states of Indiana and Illinois.
10 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you, Mr. Brandt, for a very
11 comprehensive statement.
12 (Applause.)
13 Are there any comments or questions?
14 MR. KLASSEN: I don't have a question, I Just wanted
15 to make a comment, that this gives those of us in the
16 water pollution control area encouragement, Mr. Brandt.
17 We know —
18 MR. BRANDT: Thank you.
19 MR. KLASSEN: — it is an indication the job can be
20 done and we appreciate this contribution.
21 MR. BRANDT: Thank you.
22 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you, Mr. Brandt.
23 I suggest you may have given some of them
24 the clue they lacked so much, not to mention the method of
25
-------
1102
1 dealing with the States and if they would put up plants like
2 you do with this type equipment.
3 MR. BRANDT: I would like to point out this is a new
4 plant.
s MR. KLASSEN: I think there was something significant
6 if you deal this way with the State, you don't have to
7 deal with the Federal Government.
8 MR. CHESROW: Congratulations.
9 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Mr. Poole.
10 MR. POOLE: If you indulge me one more, I will call
11 on Ken Jackson of Midwest Steel, because he has a plane
12 to catch.
13 Js Mr. Jackson in the room?
14 Mr. Jackson is general counsel for Midwest
15 Steel, I neglected to add that.
16 MR. JACKSON: Mr. Chairman, conferees, ladies and
17 gentlemen:
18 My name is Kenneth G. Jackson. I am an
13 attorney residing in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and represent
20 National Steel Corporation in matters involving
21 stream pollution, the treatment of industrial wastes and
22 related problems.
23 I have.for many years been associated with
24 the Steel Industry Action Committee, which, as you gentle-
25 I men know, is a voluntary committee of representatives of
-------
1103
the various steel producing and processing companies
organized in the formative days of the Ohio River Valley
Water Sanitation Commission to work with that Commission
on pollution abatement proHems.
5 I am here today to tell you about the
6 waste water control and treatment facilities of Midwest
7 Steel Division of National Steel Corporation, which is
located in the town of Portage, in Porter County, Indiana,
approximately eight miles east of Gary, Indiana.
10 Midwest is, in the parlance of the industry,
11 a new finishing mill which was built on the southern
12 shore of Lake Michigan. I will tell you more about this
13 plant in connection with a series of slides which have
14 been prepared for presentation in connection with this paper.
is Midwest Steel is fundamentally different
16 from an integrated steel plant in that the raw materials
17 with which the Midwest operations begin are coils of hot
18 rolled steel, whereas in an integrated plant, production
19 commences with the making of the steel which requires the
20 consumption of large quantities of coal, limestone, iron
21 ore and scrap. Consequently, the water requirements and
22 the subsequent water contaminants at Midwest are, substan-
23 tially less per ton of finished product than at an
24 integrated mill,
25 For example, the Midwest finishing plant
-------
1104
! consists of a pickler, a tandem mill, an electrolytic
2 tin line, a continuous galvanizing line, a continuous
3 annealing line and other necessary equipment. Midwest's
4 water requirements are approximately 5*000 gallons per
5 ton of finished product. At an integrated steel plant,
6 in addition to finishing operations, such as those found
7 at Midwest, there are coke ovens, sintering plants, open
8 hearths or basic oxygen plants, blooming mills and hot
9 strip mills. The water requirements in a basic steel
10 producing plant can amount to as much as 25*000 gallons
n per ton of finished steel. In either type plant the
12 water is spoken of as being used, but is actually not
13 consumed. For the most part, the water is used, treated
14 and returned to the stream or other source from which it
is is drawn; in this case, Lake Michigan.
16 Not only are the water requirements for
17 the finishing plant different from those of an integrated
18 plant, but so also are the water contaminants. In
19 addition to the contaminants and treatment processes at
20 the Midwest finishing plant which are hereinafter dis-
21 cussed, an Integrated steel plant is faced with many
22 other and probably more serious treatment problems. The
23 integrated plant must contend with phenols, chlorides,
24 flue dust, roll scale, and others, depending upon the raw
25 materials and the methods of processing at the particular
-------
1105
! plant. In many cases the concentration of these
2 contaminants In the process water Is small, but the quantl-
3 ties of water required to be handled In the manufacturing
4 process and therefore required to be treated are enormous.
5 For example, the large hot strip mill may require thirty to
6 forty million gallons of water per day for scale
7 removal alone.
8 The treatment problems faced by integrated
9 steel plants are complicated by at least two important
10 factors. First, most integrated plants in the United
n States were built before industry and government realized
12 the importance of stream pollution control, and, second,
13 most known methods of water treatment today are based on
14 retention time. Stated simply, retention time means that
15 the large quantities of water used in steel making must
16 be held or stored for varying periods of time during the
17 treatment process and therefore require large land areas
18 for treatment facilities. In many instances such land is
19 not available in the proximity of integrated steel plants,
20 regardless of price.
21 In the older integrated plants the problem
22 of economics is particularly difficult. By this I mean
23 not only the cost of acquisition, installation and opera-
24 tlon of the treatment equipment and facilities, but the
25 practicality of adapting new treatment facilities to
-------
1106
1 equipment in an old plant, the economic life of which is
2 highly uncertain in light of the presently increasing pace
3 of changes and improvements in the production and finishing
4 processes in the steel industry. Such changes sometimes
s beget new problems in the area of water treatment which
6 tax the ingenuity of our best engineers and scientists
7 in their effort to arrive at a workable solution consonant
8 with costs and construction and operating practicality if
9 not feasibility.
10 For example, subsequent to the completion
11 of the Midwest plant, one of the divisions of National
12 Steel Corporation installed a 7 stand 80" strip mill at
13 its plant in Michigan. In planning this strip mill the
14 Corporation secured the best engineering advice available
15 to the industry and drew upon its own extensive experience
16 in high speed steel strip production. Armed with this
17 advice and information it engineered and installed as a
18 part of this mill what is believed to be the last word
19 in mill scale recovery. Up to this time a 6 stand mill
20 was as far as the industry had gone in this phase of
21 steel production. However, an additional finishing stand
22 was incorporated in this mill. When the mill was put into
23 operation it was discovered that although the scale
24 recovery system worked well for the first five stands,
25 the iron oxide particles produced at the last two finishing
-------
1107
stands, some of which were submicron In size, would not
settle out in the conventional scale pits which had been
ft
installed and which were the most up to date in the
industry. Therefore, although the treated water from
4
this strip mill is free of mill scale as the industry
5
c has known that term up to the time of this new 80" strip
6
mill, these tiny iron oxide particles simply will not
0 settle out. They do not have any apparent adverse effect
o
on the waters, but seem to reflect light, thereby pro-
y
10
ducing a hitherto unknown and as yet unsolved problem in
n that they appear to color the water, yet actually do not
12 do so. Fortunately, this reflection disappears within a
13 short distance from the outfall. We are advised that one
14 of the other steel companies, which is now building a
15 new 80" strip mill, having from our experience been
16 alerted to this problem, is taking steps to avoid it by
17 separating, for separate handling, the water from the
18 last two stands which produce these submicron particles.
19 This we cannot do because the entire collection and
treatment system for this new mill is so incorporated
21 into the mill and its foundations that such separation
22 is almost impossible.
23 As will appear from the following
24 discussion of our treatment program at Midwest Steel, large
25 areas of land are required for a relatively small finishing
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
1108
plant, using today's treatment practices. Transfer these
same treatment practices, if you will, to an older,
crowded, integrated steel plant and the problems become
readily apparent. There appears today to be no ready
answer to the problem of complete treatment of industry
wastes at old integrated plants.
Now, the waste water control program at
Midwest Steel's new finishing mill.
As suggested above, Midwest is a finishing
mill. Hot rolled coils produced by another division of the
Corporation are shipped to Midwest for further processing.
This steel is first pickled at a continuous pickling line,
using a solution of sulfuric acid, and then reduced in
gauge by cold rolling on a 5-stand tandem mill. After
cold working, the steel may also be applied either by
continuous galvanizing or by electrolytic tinning, In
accordance with customer requirements. Some of the steel
is also worked in the tin temper mill to produce con-
ventional tin plate. This mill is also used to reduce
steel to very thin gauges.
National Steel Corporation, in constructing
the new plant of its Midwest Steel Division, has accepted
the financial and moral obligation of waste water control.
As soon as the decision to erect a new
25 mill was made, a sampling program was Initiated to
-------
1109
evaluate the quality and availability of the water from
Lake Michigan adjacent to the plant site.
Local, State and Federal authorities were
consulted eai$r in the program and were continuously
contacted and consulted as the program developed. Among
these agencies and authorities were the County Zoning
and Planning Board, the United States Corps of Engineers,
the Indiana Conservation Department, the Indiana Flood
Control and Water Resources Commission and the Indiana
10 Stream Pollution Control Board. As you know, the Stream
11 Pollution Control Board considers and deals with each
12 potential water discharge on the case-by-case basis.
13 This, of course, was done in the case of Midwest, and
14 meetings were held regularly with members of the Board.
15 Throughout the initial stages of planning and construction,
Midwest kept that Board informed of contemplated mill
17 operations, and secured advice and guidance from it in
18 establishing a proper waste water control program.
19 Fortunately, sufficient land was available
20 to permit the construction and operation of adequate
21 control and treatment facilities. A very generous portion
22 of the total acreage being used for the manufacturing
23 processes has been allocated to waste treatment. At the
24 present time at Midwest more than ten per cent of approxi-
25 mately 280 acres of land being utilized by the plant is
-------
1110
devoted exclusively to waste treatment and disposal
facilities.
In preparing the following parts of this
statement I have drawn largely from the paper entitled
"Waste Water Control at Midwest Steel's New Finishing
the
Mill" which was delivered atAl?th Industrial Waste
Conference at Purdue University on May 1, 1962, and to
supplement my paper I am furnishing the conferees a copy
of that document, marked Exhibit 1 — unfortunately, it
10 is not so marked — which explains in somewhat more
11 detail the story of the development and operation of the
12 Midwest mill, including preconstruction planning for
13 waste control and the various waste treatment facilities.
14 In the interest of everyone, I will therefore not go into
15 too much detail on these items.
16
17
18
19 (Text Continues on Page 1113)
20
21
22
23
24
25
-------
1111
WASTE WATER CONTROL
AT MIDWEST STEEL'S NEW FINISHING MILL
Presented at Purdue University
Seventeenth Industrial Waste Conference
May 1, 1962
C. D. Hartman
F. E. Tucker
P. D. Simmons
A. S. Toth
By:
Superintendent of Utilities, Midwest Steel Division,
National Steel Corporation
Supervisor Industrial Health Engineering, Research
and Development, National Steel Corporation
Industrial Health Engineer, Research and Development,
National Steel Corporation
Principal Engineer, Hydrotechnic Corporation
-------
1112
Figure 1
-------
1
2
3
4
INTRODUCTION
9
10
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Expansion in steel making and finishing
capacity elsewhere in the world has been outstripping
corresponding growth in the United States. While we are
still able to maintain leadership in this major industry,
the increasing number of new installations and the
availability of low cost labor in other lands are
threatening this position. Still other pressures are
being exerted by domestic metal, glass, and plastic
industries.
n I To fight back, steel is building new
modern facilities and retiring old Inefficient facilities.
By speeding up production, automating certain operations,
improving product quality and producing new marketable
items, new plant construction is required. In nearly
every such case, local authorities are requiring the
installation of adequate waste control facilities to
satisfy the Increasing need for the protection of the
water resources in the area. Steel plants, such as the
plant of Midwest Steel, a division of National Steel, on
the shore of Lake Michigan, are accepting the financial
and moral obligation of waste water control while most
foreign competitors do very little in their Installations
toward cleaning up Industrial wastes discharges.
-------
1
DEVELOPMENT AND OPERATION OF FINISHING MILL
2 The site of the new mill at the southern-
3 most tip of Lake Michigan is adjacent to Burns Ditch, an
4 artificial drainage channel, installed by court order in
5 1927. Figure 1 is a photograph of the unimproved site,
6 an area within the belt of the Indiana sand dunes, which
7 is now the object of special interest groups to conserve
8 its natural beauty.
9 National Steel Corporation first acquired
10 the land in 1929 and thirty years later, it was used for
11 the construction of the Midwest finishing mill. Figure
12 2 shows the completed mill which produced galvanized steel
13 as early as December 1960.
14 The finishing mill operations are identi-
15 fled in Figure 3 and may be referred to in tracing the
16 travel of steel in the Midwest plant. Hot rolled colls
17 produced by the new 80-inch hot strip mill at Great Lakes
18 Steel, a sister division, near Detroit are shipped to
19 Midwest. Steel is first pickled at the 80-inch continuous
20 pickling line using a solution of sulfuric acid and then
21 reduced in gage by cold rolling on the 5-stand tandem
22 mill. After cold working, annealing and tempering of the
23 strip may be required. For final finishing, a protective
24 coating may be applied by continuous galvanizing or by
25 electrolytic tinning. The tin temper mill normally used
-------
1115
i to toughen the surface of the steel, can also be used to
2 reduce tin plate to very thin gauges.
3 PLANNING FOR WASTE WATER CONTROL
4 As soon as a public announcement was
5 made of the new mill, a sampling program was initiated to
6 evaluate the quality of the water adjacent to the plant
7 site. The water survey was organized for examination of
8 samples of water collected periodically at various points
9 in Burns Ditch and in the lake. The survey information
10 provided valuable data for selecting the location of the
n lake water supply intake, as well as establishing a
12 reference for general water quality of the region before
13 starting any mill construction.
14 Local, state and Federal authorites were
is consulted as early as possible to learn what regulations,
16 or limitations, may have bearing upon the utilization of
17 water by the mill. Among the government groups frequently
18 consulted were the Porter County Zoning and Planning
19 Board, the U. S. Corps of Engineers, the State of Indiana
20 Conservation Department, Flood Control and Water Resources
21 Commission and the Water Pollution Control Board. Indiana
22 regulations and laws stipulate limits of permissible
23 discharge of certain waste substances, which are known to
24 be common to most domestic and industrial activities. In
25 addition, the Water Pollution Control Board considers each
-------
1116
! potential waste water discharge on an individual case
2 basis to determine what effect it may have on water
3 quality in the general area or how it may influence any
4 subsequent uses of the water. It was necessary to meet
5 regularly with members of the Water Pollution Control
6 Board, during the initial stages of planning to inform
7 them of contemplated operations in the mill and to have
8 guidance in establishing a proper waste water control
9 program.
10 The mill and its personnel would produce
11 many waste products eventually becoming waterbome which
12 would require treatment before disposal. Sanitary sewage
13 contributed by a mill population of 2,000 persons would
14 involve control measures for biochemical oxygen demand,
15 dissolved oxygen, suspended solids and floating material.
16 Waste Water from mill operations would convey additive
17 materials including pH depressants, suspended solids,
18 floating and soluble oils, color inducing substances, iron,
19 tin, zinc, chromium and fluoride. The concentrations of
20 all of these would have to be controlled to within
21 acceptable limits before releasing any water to Burns
22 Ditch and it soon became evident that such control could
23 I not be provided effectively by one central facility treat-
24 j ing all waste flows together no matter how appealing it
25 might be for initial cost and ease of operation.
-------
1117
i Each of the major contaminants had to be
2 studied to determine what waste flows at the mill could
3 be combined and conveyed together in an industrial waste
4 sewer system for treatment and which waste flows had to
5 be kept segregated for individual treatment. With this
6 analysis completed, overall planning could begin by con-
7 sidering equalization of flow rates and of varying concen-
8 tratlons, the proper staging of step treatment, design
9 criteria for treatment processes, the elimination of
10 pumping trunk sewer flows and concentrating the waste
n water control facilities in as few sites as possible.
12 At this point, a preliminary engineering
13 report and general plans outlining the waste water control
H facilities were prepared and submitted for consideration
is by the Water Pollution Control Board. The comments
16 and suggestions of the Board representatives, Messrs.
17 Blucher Poole, Robert Heider and Perry Miller, were
18 helpful in establishing certain objectives of the waste
13 water control program. Later, final designs were
20 reviewed and approved by the Board before construction of
21 anyfacllity was started.
22 The general plan included as the first
23 step, the separation of clean cooling water into the
24 storm drainage system for direct discharge. Then all
25 compatible flows collected in the Industrial wastes sewer
-------
1118
x could be treated Jointly at a chemical treatment plant.
2 Caustic cleaning rinse water and dumps, pickling acid
3 rinse water, most floor drain sump discharges, blowdowns
4 and certain chemical treatment flows are combined, and in
5 all, about twenty-five different streams are collected
6 in the industrial wastes sewer. The remaining wastes flow are
7 conveyed separately to the industrial wastes pre-
8 treatment area In three individual oily wastes streams,
g a chromium system, a fluoride system and a waste pickle
10 liquor collection system.
u Figure k shows the sites selected for
12 the treatment facilities. The pretreatment area is lo-
13 cated just east of the continuous annealing building.
14 After proper pretreatment, the flows are discharged to
15 the industrial wastes sewer, the oily wastes sewer or to
16 sludge disposal pipelines. The oily wastes sewer termin-
17 ates at the mixing tank of the chemical treatment plant
18 and its flow is given final treatment here. Sludges are
19 disposed of in holding lagoons. Sanitary sewage is
20 pumped over to the west side of Burns Ditch to the sewage
21 treatment plant. These facilities can be seen in
22 relation to the steel mill buildings in photograph,
23 Figure 5.
24 SEWAGE TREATMENT FACILITIES
25 Sewage is collected in a cement-lined cast
-------
1119
i iron pipe system and delivered to a pumping station at
2 the east bank of Burns Ditch. The sewage is pumped in a
3 force main over a utility bridge to the treatment plant
4 shown in photograph, Figure b.
5 The sewage treatment plant is designed to
6 treat a flow of 330*000 gallons per day and can be expanded
7 to handle 640,000 gpd. The treatment process incorporates
8 the latest developments in activated sludge treatment and
9 aerobic digestion of sludge. The final innocuous sludge
10 is disposed of in the sludge lagoon. Figure 6a is a
11 schematic representation of the sewage treatment process.
12 The process provides a reduction of 95
13 percent in BOD and 90 percent removal of suspended solids.
14 The effluent is returned to Burns Ditch in a 24-inch out-
15 fall sewer. All flow before leaving the sewage treatment
16 plant is disinfected by chlorination.
17 CHEMICAL TREATMENT PLANT
is The chemical treatment plant is located
19 along the east bank of Burns Ditch, approximately 1,000
20 feet from Lake Michigan. Figure 7 is a photograph showing
21 the location of this waste water control facility. The
22 chemical treatment plant provides final treatment by
23 coagulation, flocculation and sedimentation for the
24 various pretreatment plant effluents and the numerous
25 flows collected by the industrial wastes sewers.
-------
1120
Figure 2
iiJB A A.
- -,--^-
Figure 3
BURNS DITCH
r-
"3:
LOCATION OF WASTES TREATMENT FACILITIES
>
Figure 4
Figure 5
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
Figure 6
Figure 6a
-------
1121
i Figure ?a is a simplified diagram of the
2 collection system for discharges from mill operations and
3 from wastes pretreatment facilities and shows how these
4 flows are clarified in the chemical treatment plant.
5 The hydraulics of the collection system
6 and the flow through the treatment plant were carefully
7 worked out to avoid the Installation of a low-lift pumping
8 station. In order to convey the flow by gravity to out-
9 fall N0. 1 and Burns Ditch with sufficient head for
10 discharge during periods of extreme high water caused by
11 heavy runoff or by adverse lake conditions, it was
12 necessary to construct the chemical treatment plant in
13 a depression some ten to twelve feet below mill grade.
14 By depressing the flowline, most of the treatment units
15 had to be constructed below the water table and required
16 subdralns to control uplift pressures whenever a treatment
17 unit was being dewatered.
18 All flows, excepting the flow of the oily
19 wastes sewer, discharge into equalization basins.
20 Incoming flow is distributed in the basins and retained
21 to equalize flow variations and to blend the different
22 types of wastes. Since the dominant characteristic of
23 the combined waste is acidic, the concrete-lined basins
24 have a protective coating. Limestone backfill is also
25 used around the effluent distribution channel in the
-------
1122
i basin. Diffused air keeps the wastes agitated and also
2 helps to satisfy the oxygen demand exerted by the ferrous
3 sulfate In acid rinse water from the pickling operation.
4 Oil skimming is performed in a quiescent corner of the
5 basin.
6 The flow leaving the equalization basins
7 is mixed with the flow of the oily wastes sewer at the
8 mixing tanks where chemicals are added for coagulation,
9 and air, again is used to help agitate the flow. The two
10 mixing tanks can be used in series, or Individually.
n After mixing, the flow enters the final treatment units
12 and is distributed across the flocculation sections of
13 each tank.
14 Following a 20-minute minimum period of
is flocculation, the flow passes directly Into the sediraen-
16 tation area. Each sedimentation tank is equipped with a
i? longitudinal sludge collecting mechanism, a cross collector
is and a sludge drawoff pipe leading to the wet wells of the
is sludge pumping station at the control building. Oil and
20 scum are removed at the effluent end of the tank by a
21 transverse pipe skimmer drained by gravity into a sump
22 and then pumped to the oil separator tank for concentra-
23 tion. The treated plant effluent Is measured by a
24 Farshall flume before being discharged.
25 The average flow of the chemical treatment
-------
1123
i plant is approximately 4,000 gallons per minute and can
2 be Increased to 16,000 gpm as more mill facilities are
3 added. The effluent from the chemical treatment plant
4 is the main discharge from the finishing mill facilities.
s Acid Neutralization
6 Acid neutralization is the first to be
7 described of the different facilities shown in Figure 8,
8 a photograph of the industrial wastes pretreatment area.
9 The dominant acid to be neutralized is waste pickle liquor
10 overflow from the continuous strip pickler. In addition
n to this flow, pickling tank dumps and chromic acid dumps
12 from the electrolytic tinning line and from the continuous
13 galvanizing line are directed to the acid neutralization
14 plant.
15 The waste pickle liquor contains from 6
16 to 8 percent of sulfuric acid and approximately 16 per-
17 cent of ferrous sulfate. The pH of waste pickle liquor
is is less than 1.0 and its temperature may be as high as
19 190° P when discharged from the continuous strip pickler.
20 The dally volume of waste pickle liquor is approximately
21 45,000 gallons.
22 The waste pickle liquor from the continuous
23 strip pickler is pumped from the mill area in a
24 Saran-llned steel pipe to the Industrial wastes pr e treat-
25 ment area. It first passes through a heat exchanger, as
-------
1124
SCHEMATIC FLOW DIAGRAM
CHEMICAL TREATMENT PLANT
»«STC mrttt CONTROL *T MIDWEST STEEL
Figure 7
Figure 7a
Figure 8
Figure 8a
SCHEMATIC FLOW DIAGRAM
ACID NEUTRALIZATION
Figure 8b
Figure 8c
-------
1125
shown In Figure 8a, to lower its temperature before
undergoing neutralization in order to control the temper-
4i
ature rise from a subsequent heat of reaction. The cooled
O
liquor passes to the holding tank which has a storage
4
capacity of 100,000 gallons. Other waste acids from mill
5
c operations are pumped directly to the holding tank. The
b
chromium in the chromic acid dumps is reduced by the
0 waste pickle liquor in the holding tank and later precipl-
o
tated during neutralization. Waste pickle liquor is also
y
.. used for coagulating, chromium reduction, and demulslfying
H wastes in nearly every facility in the industrial wastes
12 pretreatment area as well as in the chemical treatment
13 plant.
14 Neutralization of waste pickle liquor is
15 carried out at a constant rate of flow by means of a
16 magnetic flow meter and a control valve. Byproduct lime
17 from acetylene production is used as the neutralizing
18 agent. Facilities are installed to feed lime either as
19 a fine dry hydroxide powder, or as a lime slurry to the
2o rapid mixing tanks. The rate of lime feed is adjusted
21 by pH measurement of the effluent from the neutralization
22 process. After the addition of lime, the liquor is held
23 for a period of 30 minutes, or more, in a reaction tank
24 before discharging to the wet well in the basement of the
25 general operations building where air operated sludge
-------
1126
l pumps pump the neutralized sludge to the holding lagoons,
2 The neutralization process may be followed on the flow
3 diagram presented in Figure 8b,
4 A bucket elevator and screw conveyor un-
5 load the lime supply from the railroad cars to an over
6 head lime storage bin having a capacity of 170 tons.
7 Below the bin, two lime slurry mixer tanks and feed pumps
8 are Installed in the general operations building to provide
9 lime slurry for other treatment processes in pretreatment
10 area. The neutralization facilities are shown in photo-
u graph, Figure 8c.
12 OILY WASTES CONTROL
13 In the Initial phase of steel finishing at
14 Midwest, the 5-stand tandem mill and the operation of
15 the tin temper mill for double-reduced tin plate, produce
16 as great a variety of oily wastes as will be discharged
17 by all mills ultimately installed. Therefore, some
18 nominal capacity for each type of oily wastes control
19 facility had to be built immediately. These facilities
20 are located in the industrial wastes pretreatment area
21 east of the continuous annealing building.
22 The 5-stand tandem mill is versatile and
23 produces tin plate, galvanize sheets and mill clean
24 back plate by cold working. When the mill is on tin
25 plate or light gages of galvanize, a recirculation
-------
1127
I system Is used to lubricate the strip and for cooling.
2 The system recirculates a rolling solution of 10,000
3 gallons made up with about 1,000 gallons of oils with
4 emulsifying and bactericidal agents added. By straining,
5 cooling, conditioning and adding makeup to the solution,
6 it may be reused for seven to ten days. When the solution
7 is considered spent, it is dumped in a few minutes and
8 a fresh solution of 10,000 gallons Is substituted.
9 Whenever the mill is on heavy gages of galvanize or mill
10 clean black plate, some of the stands use the direct
11 method of rolling. In this case, lubricant and water
12 applied to the stand Is used only once and discharged
13 directly to sewer. The flow entering the sewer contains
14 approximately 200 ppm of oils, and if all stands are on
15 the direct method, the rate of flow may reach 6,000 gpm.
16 The oils used may be of mineral, animal or vegetable
17 origin, soluble or insoluble, and may be found In the
is waste water in different degrees of being free or
19 emulsified and saponified or unsaponified.
20 The tin temper mill is operated In a
21 manner similar to the 5-stand tandem mill whenever double-
22 reduced tin plate is being produced. However, since only two
23 stands are doing the work and reductions are only
24 nominal, the rate and amount of oil and water use are
25 much lower. The average flow is from 100 to 150
-------
1126
1 gpm, but It may have an oil content in the range of a
2 thousand parts per million. The oils used for double-
3 reduced tin plate are emulsified when applied and must be
4 comparatively clean because of the thin gage metal.
5 In addition to the waste flows from mill
6 operations, other oily wastes are generated by washdowns,
7 fog eliminator sluicing and blowdowns. To cope with all
8 of these variables in volume, in oil content, and in
9 characteristics, it is necessary to provide control faci-
10 lities of at least three general types. The wastes can
11 be directed to the proper receiving unit as generated,
12 and then can be processed progressively to obtain a
13 lesser oil concentration in the larger volumes of water
14 and a greater oil concentration in the smaller volumes
15 of water. The three types of facilities are:
16 1. Oil Interception - for large water volumes
17 with low oil content.
18 2. Oil Separation - for moderate water volumes
19 or oil content.
20 3. Oil Concentration - for small volumes having
21 high oil content.
22 At each type of control facility, chemicals, air or heat,
23 are added to help separate the oils from the waste water.
24
how oily wastes are controlled.
Descriptions of these facilities and flow diagrams explain
25
-------
1129
Oil Interception
The waste discharge from the direct method
of rolling is pumped from a skimming tank to the basement
of the 5-stand tandem mill through a 24-inch steel force
main to an equalization tank at the industrial wastes
pretreatment area. Figure 9 shows the waste water control
facilities at the oil interception plant.
The incoming flow is mixed in the equali-
zation tank before passing to the mixing tank where it is
10 Joined with the treated water from the oil separation
11 plant. At the mixing tank, waste pickle liquor may be
12 added to lower the pH and assist in breaking oil emulsions
13 prior to discharge to the interceptor tanks. Each oil
14 interceptor tank has a volume of 66,000 gallons and provides
15 a detention period of 20 minutes at its design flow
16 of 3,300 gpm. Free oils, which float to the surface, are
skimmed off at the effluent end of the tank and then
18 pumped to the oil concentration plant. Solids settling
19 to the bottom are removed from the tank by a sludge
20 collector mechanism which deposits them into containers
21 at plant grade. The treated flow is gauged and is dis-
22 charged to the oily wastes sewer to be conveyed to the chemi-
23 cal treatment plant for a final step in treatment. The
24 treatment process can be followed on the flow diagram,
25 Figure 9a.
-------
1130
i Oil Separation
2 The chemical flocculation and dissolved
3 air flotation process for separating oils is suitable
4 for handling the moderate continuous flow from the fog
s eliminator and tunnel sluicing, the waste rolling solu-
6 tion from double-reduced tin plate and the water drawoff
7 from oil concentration. The treatment units housed at
8 the north end of the general operations building near
9 the oil interception facilities are shown in Figure 10.
10 All flows enter the primary holding tank
n where free oils and solids are separated. The oils are
12 pumped to the oil concentration facilities and the solids
13 to oil Interception. The effluent from the primary tank
14 contains emulsified oils which are treated with waste
15 pickle liquor, lime, and air and then pumped to a reten-
i6 tion tank to allow reactions and dissolution of air to be
17 completed. The treated flow is released in the flotation
18 tank where the coagulating chemicals form a floe and the
19 entrained air under reduced pressure forms tiny air
20 bubbles. The floe and bubbles sweep upward and carry
21 suspended oils to the surface. The flotation tank is
22 designed for an overflow rate of 2 gpm per square foot
23 at a flow of 250 gpm. The clarified water is discharged
24 to the oil interception tanks. Figure lOa presents the
25 schematic flow diagram for oil separation.
-------
1131
SCHEMATIC FLOW DIAGRAM
OIL INTERCEPTION PLANT
Figure 9
Figure 9a
SCHEMATIC FLOW DIAGRAM
OIL SEPARATION PLANT
WASTE WATE* COMTHOl AT MIDWEST STEEL
Figure 10
Figure lOa
SCHEMATIC FLOW DIAGRAM
OIL CONCENTRATION PLANT
Figure 11
Figure lla
-------
1132
i Oil Concentration
2 Spent rolling solution, blowdowns, and
3 similar wastes are pumped in a steam traced force main
4 to an oil concentration tank. Heat is added to the in-
5 sulated oil holding tank to separate water and concentrate
6 the oil. The water from the holding tank is pumped to
7 oil separation, the solids to oil interception and the
8 oil to the oil storage tank. Further oil concentration
9 occurs in the heated storage tank before final disposal
10 of collected oil by trucking.
n The oil concentration facilities are
12 adjacent to the oil interceptor tanks and a small pump
13 house as shown in Figure 11. Most of the oil, water
14 and sludge pumps used in oily wastes control are installed in
15 the small building. The transfer of these substances
16 is outlined in Figure lla for the oil concentra-
17 tion operation.
18 CHROMIUM WASTES CONTROL
19 The chromium wastes pretreatment facili-
20 ties are located in the industrial wastes pretreatraent
21 area just to the east of the tin temper mill as shown
22 in Figure 12. Chromium compounds, in the hexavalent form,
23 are used for chemically treating finished product in
24 the electrolytic tinning and galvanizing lines. After
25 the strip leaves the chemical treatment unit, rinse
-------
1133
waters are applied to clean the strip of excess material.
These chrome-bearing rinse waters are treated by using
waste pickle liquor to reduce chromium to the trivalent
form which can readily be precipitated by adding lime.
The rinse waters are pumped from the
operating lines to the two equalization tanks located
above plant grade where inflow rates and variations in
concentration are equalized. The flow leaving the
equalization tanks is metered and then enters a mixing
IQ tank where waste pickle liquor is added. Approximately 30
minutes detention is provided in reaction tanks where
12 mixing continues to permit the reduction process to be
13 completed. The ferrous sulfate content of the waste
14 pickle liquor acts as the reducing agent and the residual
15 sulfuric acid of the liquor maintains an adequate level
of pH to promote complete reduction. Complete reduction
17 of hexavalent chromium is obtained when the reduction
18 potential is held at 500 millivolts, as measured by an
lg oxidation reduction potential meter, with a 10 percent
excess of ferrous sulfate and a pH of about 2.5.
The treated flow enters an effluent sump
22 where a lime feed connection may be used to apply lime to
23 start neutralizing the waste and form insoluble precip-
24 itates, or simply for pH adjustment for sewer conditions.
25 Final application of lime at the chemical treatment plant
-------
neutralizes the waste and completes the precipitation of
chromium hydroxide and ferric hydroxide which are removed
from the sedimentation basins and pumped to the sludge
lagoons. The process is outlined in Figure 12a.
5 FLUORIDE WASTES CONTROL
6 The electrolytic tinning lines is the
source of fluoride-bearing waste flows in the mill. The
tin plating process used by Midwest is known as the
9 "Halogen Line" in which a plating solution comprised of
10 several reagents is used. Plating solution, which is a
relatively expensive solution, contains stannous tin,
12 fluorides, chlorides, and DuPont Agent No. 2.
13 The process involves several preparatory
14 steps before the strip enters the first level bank of
15 plater cells where its underside surface is tinned. The
,c strip travels vertically to a second level of cells where
ib
1? the other side is tinned. At a third level, the strip
enters a reclaim tank where plating solution is recovered
and the strip is rinsed before leaving the tank.
20 A final water spray is used to remove
21 small residual amounts of plating solution. The water
used at the spray tank is reused at the plater fume
exhauster washer which discharges a flow of 125 gpm to a
23
pretreatment reservoir in the basement of the mill. From
this point, the waste water is pumped to the fluoride
£O
-------
1135
SCHEMATIC FLOW DIAGRAM
CHROMIUM WASTES TREATMENT
WtSTE WTEM CONTROi »T HIDWCST STCCL
Figure 12
Figure 12a
SCHEMATIC FLOW DIAGRAM
FLUORIDE WASTES TREATMENT
mm mil* CMTMI »T HIMCST ITCCL
Figure 13
Figure 13a
-------
1136
wastes treatment plant.
The 125 gpni flow leaving the electrolytic
tinning line contains small representative amounts of the
o
4 plating solution, although the concentration of each
contaminant will vary from time to time.
. Since plating solution is valuable and
D
contains high concentrations of substances of a critical
nature to acceptable water quality, the mill was designed
8
so that no possible discharge of solution to sewer could
9
be made inadvertently. All plating solution sludges from
periodic cleaning operations are collected, stored and
processed in a sludge treating plant at the mill to extract
all readily precipitable compounds for recovery, or
la
disposal. Small quantities of centrifuge overflow are also
14
directed to the fluoride wastes treatment plant for
ID
further treatment.
16
Facilities for treating fluoride wastes
17
are shown in Figure 13. The flow is pumped from the sump
18
at the mill to an elevated equalization tank where surges
in flow and variations in chemical composition are
20
moderated. When the flow leaves the equalization tank, it
is metered before entering a mixing tank where measured
mttt
amounts of lime and waste pickle liquor are added in
23
proportion to the flow being delivered. The flow is
subject to mixing, sludge recirculation, flocculation,
25
-------
1137
settling and clarification in a circular reaction clarifier.
Lime is added in excess in the reaction
4t
clarifiers to drive the reaction between the lime and
O
4 sodium bifluorlde to completion within a reasonable period
The excess is also helpful in maintaining a ready supply
c of lime in contact with the waste to act as a buffer should
b
7 feeding equipment fail to operate properly and to
8 overcome any inaccuracies in feeding. Waste pickle
g liquor is added to form a gelatinous precipitate so as
10 to coagulate the colloidal suspension of calcium fluoride
formed in the treatment unit.
The reaction clarifier is an upflow
I /
unit which maintains a layer of sludge in the lower
10
section of the tank. Each unit is designed for a deten-
tion of two hours and 40 minutes and an overflow rate of
15
0.6 gpm per sq. ft. at a flow of 250 gpm. Clarified
lb
17 effluent is discharged to the oily wastes sewer. Sludge
18 accumulation is controlled automatically by desludging
measured volumes to the wet well in the acid neutralization
plant. The process is outlined in the flow diagram
presented on Figure 13a.
22 The small residual amounts of soluble
compounds will be discharged in the effluent from the
fluoride treatment plant. Among these are calcium
25 fluoride, only slightly soluble in water, chlorides and
-------
1138
! some tin. The small amounts discharged are not in
2 quantities which will develop concentrations in Burns
3 Ditch above acceptable limits.
4 CONCLUSIONS
5 Industrial wastes treatment facilities,
6 similar to those installed by Midwest Steel, are costly
7 even in the case of a new plant which can incorporate in
8 the original planning all necessary piping, pumping, and
g treating units. For an old established plant, equal
10 facilities would cost substantially more, and in some
n cases of overcrowded plant conditions, would be very
12 difficult to provide.
13 Of great assistance in planning new
14 facilities is the willing participation of stream
15 pollution control officials in providing guidance, review
lg and suggestions concerning a waste water control program.
17 Their helpful cooperation extends from the initial phases
lg of planning through the final consummation of approved
ig designs.
20 As for the industrial plant, the expendi-
ture of monies for waste control can be repaid only in the
form of good public relations which may engender greater
«M
sales of its products and in the satisfaction obtained
24 from doing a good Job in conserving an increasingly
25 important natural resource, water supply.
-------
1139
j And finally, only by proper monitoring of
the final effluents can management be assured that its
ft
. investment in facilities and good will is not being
3
dissipated and that its objectives are being met.
General Engineering Design by: Hydrotechnic
w
Corporation Consulting Engineers, New York, N.Y.
6
TREATMENT FACILITIES
7
The treatment of sanitary wastes at Midwest
8
involves a mill population of approximately 2,000 employees,
9
requiring measures for biochemical oxygen demand, dissolved
oxygen, suspended solids and floating material. Industrial
waste water from the mill operations includes pH depres-
L&
sants, suspended solids, floating and soluble oils, color
13
inducing substances, iron, tin, zinc, chromium and chloride.
14
The treated water is returned to Lake
15
Michigan through Burns Ditch, an artificial water course
16
which had previously been constructed by public authorities
to serve the drainage purposes of a large area to the south
18
of the Midwest properties, and of course including the
*y
Midwest property.
20
SEWAGE TREATMENT FACILITIES
21
Sanitary wastes are collected and treated
22
in a sewage system completely segregated from all other
23
wastes and treatment at Midwest. This waste is collected
and carried in a cement-lined cast iron pipe system and
-------
1140
delivered to a pumping station on the east bank of the Burns
2 Ditch. From here it is pumped in a force main across Burns
3 Ditch to the sewage treatment plant which is designed to
4 treat a flow of 330,000 gallons per day, which capacity
5 could be approximately doubled if necessary. The treatment
6 process incorporated the latest developments in activated
sludge treatment and aerobic digestion of sludge. The
0 treated sludge is disposed of in the sludge lagoon. The
o
9 effluent water after disinfection by chlorination is re-
1Q turned to Burns Ditch in a 24" outfall.
CHEMICAL TREATMENT PLANT
The chemical treatment plant is located on
the east bank of Burns Ditch. It provides final treatment
lo
by coagulation, flocculation and sedimentation for the
various pretreatment plant effluents and the various flows
15
collected by the Industrial wastes sewers. The wastes are
16
distributed in retaining basins to equalize flow variations
and to blend the different wastes. Diffused air agitates
is
the wastes and helps to satisfy the oxygen demand exerted
by the ferrous sulfate in acid rinse waters from the pickl-
ing operations. Oil skimming is performed in a quiescent
corner of the basin. After mixing, adding of chemicals
for coagulation and aeration, the flow is directed to the
23
final treatment units and distributed across the flocculation
sections of each tank from whence it passes directly into the
25
-------
1141
sedimentation area. The sedimentation tanks are equipped
with sludge collecting mechanism and a sludge drawoff pipe
it
3 leading to the wet wells of the sludge pumping station at
the control building. Oil and scum are removed at the
effluent end of the tank and drained by gravity into a sump,
O
thence to the oil separator tank for concentration.
6
The average flow of the chemical treatment
plant is approximately 4,000 gallons per minute, which can be
8
increased about four-fold to accommodate possible future
y
additional mill facilities.
OILY WASTES CONTROL
Due to the versatility of the 5-stand tandem
mill a variety of oily wastes is produced calling for dif-
1*5
ferent treatments for the different types of wastes.
When the mill is producing tin plate or light
10
gauges of galvanize the coolant oils are filtered, cooled
16
and otherwise reconditioned and recirculated. When the
I mill is producing heavy gauges of galvanized or mill-cleaned
18
black plate by the direct method of rolling, the lubricant
and water is not recirculated but discharged directly to the
collection sewer.
21
The operation of the tin mill is somewhat
22
similar to that of the 5-stand tandem mill except
23 K
that only two stands are doing the work and gauge reductions
are only nominal. Consequently, the rate of flow and the
-------
1142
amount of oil and water are smaller.
In addition to the waste flows from the
2
mill operations, other oily wastes are generated by wash-
3
downs, fog eliminator sluicing and blow-downs. Three types
4
of facilities are used in the treatment of these wastes:
O
1. Oil interception - for large water
6 volumes with low oil content.
7 2. Oil separation - for moderate water
volumes or oil content.
8
3. Oil concentration - for small volumes
9 having high oil content.
10 Each of these facilities and the operation
11 thereof is more fully described in Exhibit 1 hereinabove
12 referred to.
13 ACID NEUTRALIZATION
14 Most of the acid to be treated consists of
15 waste pickle liquor from the continuous strip pickler.
16 There is also acid from the pickling tank dumps and chromic
17 acid dumps from the electrolytic tinning line and from the
18 continuous galvanizing line.
19 Waste pickle liquor is pumped from the mill
20 area in a Saran-lined steel pipe to the pretreatment area.
21 On this Journey it is cooled and deposited in a holding
22 tank along with other waste acids from mill operations
23 pumped directly to the tank. The pickle liquor reduces
24 the chromium in the chromic acid which is later precipitated
25
-------
1143
l during neutralization. The waste pickle liquor is also
2 used for coagulating and deraulsifying wastes substantially
3 throughout the pretreatment area as well as in the chemical
4 treatment plant.
5 After addition of lime for neutralization
6 the pickle liquor is held in a reaction tank and the sludge
7 then discharged to the wet well pump from where it is deliver
8 ed to the holding lagoons.
9 CHROMIUM WASTES CONTROL
10 Chromium wastes are produced in the electro-
n lytlc tinning and galvanizing lines. These chrome-bearing
12 rinse waters are treated by the use of waste pickle liquor
13 to reduce the chromium to the trivalent form which is then
14 precipitated by the addition of lime. The rinse waters are
15 pumped to equalization tanks, the flow from which is metered
lg and directed to a mixing tank where waste pickle liquor is
17 added. The flow thus treated enters an effluent sump where
18 lime is fed in order to commence neutralization of the wastes
lg or for a pH adjustment for sewer conditions. Final
2Q treatment occurs at the chemical treatment plant where
21 chromium hydroxide and ferrous hydroxide are precipitated.
22 The precipitates are then pumped to the sludge lagoons.
0. CHLORIDE WASTES CONTROL
*G T "" - "-I-- •-•---• -.- ._ -T
24 The plating solutions at the electrolytic
2S tinning lines contains stannous tin, fluorides, chlorides
-------
1144
and DuPont Agent No. 2. Since this solution is relatively
2 expensive, the strip, at the end of the plating process, is
3 run through a reclaiming tank where as much of the solution
4 as possible is recovered for reuse. The small residual
5 amount of solution adhering to the plate is removed by final j
J i
6 water spray. This spray is reused at the blast fume exhauster
washer from where it is discharged into a pretreatment reser-
voir in a sublevel of the mill. From this reservoir
g
it is pumped to the fluoride waste treatment plant. The
fluoride effluent from the plant is discharged to the oily
waste sewer and the sludge is delivered by measured volumes
to the acid neutralization plant.
The wastes treatment processes which I have
1 0
briefly described hereinabove are as they existed until
the recent past.
15
Now, we have had some recent changes in
ID
disposal and controls at Midwest as new as that plant may
18
We have found it necessary to make modifica-
tions in our treatment process to improve operations and
performance of these facilities.
Consistent with its policy of keeping abreast
of developments in the industry, consonant with treatment
AW
requirements and other factors which must be considered,
24
Midwest has recently completed a deep well disposal facility
-------
1145
1 which is now being used for disposal of waste pickle acid
2 and chromate wastes.
3 Shortly after initial operation of the plant,
4 it became obvious that the land used for waste lagoons in
5 the neutralization of waste pickle acid was excessive. For
6 this reason we initiated a research program to develop an
7 improved method of waste acid disposal. We investigated
8 the newer methods of neutralization which produced a rela-
9 tively dry sludge. We also conducted an extensive program
10 of investigation of acid recovery processes in the hope
II that we might discover a usable process, although this
12 field of research has been thoroughly covered by the steel
13 industry over the past many years.
14 In 1964 we undertook a feasibility study
is of deep well disposal for waste pickle acid. It was
16 concluded from this study that the geology of the area
17 at the Midwest plant site was peculiarly suitable for
13 deep well disposal. The study indicated the presence of
19 the Mt. Simon sandstone formation, which is approximately
20 2,000 feet thick, covered by adequate cap rock to render
21 upward migration of the wastes improbable. There re-
22 mained, however, the problem posed by the incompatibility
23 of the connate water in the Mt. Simon formation with the
24 waste pickle acid. This formation water contains approxl-
25 mately 6,000 to 7*000 ppm. calcium as calcium chloride
-------
1146
which, as you know, when mixed with the waste pickle
2 acid, precipitates calcium sulphate which would render the
3 Mt. Simon formation much less desirable for further
4 disposal. To overcome this we have injected a large pre-
5 determined quantity of fresh water into the disposal area
6 around the well bore to serve as a buffer wall between
7 the waste pickle acid and the connate water.
8 The feasibility study was furnished to the
Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board with our request
1Q for a permit to complete the well and use it for the in-
.. dicated purpose. This permit has been granted.
12 In delivering the acid waste to the disposal
13
horizon it is delivered from the pickle line to a holding
tank, filtered to remove all suspended solids above
microns in size, and then pumped by centrifugal pumps
lo
,c down to the horizon. The well was bottomed out at ap-
16
proximately 4,200 feet. The well diameter is 7" to the
bottom and the injection tubing is introduced through
IB
the well bore into the disposal horizon for a distance
19
of approximately 100 feet below the cap rock.
Zu
Notwithstanding the construction and opera-
21
tion of this deep well, the Indiana stream Pollution
22
Control Board has, as a condition to the grant of the
23
permit for the well, required Midwest to maintain in
25 stand-by readiness our complete acid neutralization
-------
1147
facility referred to hereinabove.
2 Although we anticipate that the deep well
3 will resolve land use problems associated with neutraliza-
tion of waste acid, it has posed a new problem for Midwest
, in its chromate treatment facilities. We formerly used
O
6 waste pickle acid for the treatment of chromates. The
7 disposal of acid in the deep well necessitated the develop-
0 ment of new treatment practices for chromates. After a
o
9
11
thorough study of the problem we concluded that it would
10 be possible to include the chromate wastes with the waste
acid being disposed of through the deep well. These two
12 solutions are chemically compatible and we think will not
13 give rise to any additional problems in the disposal horizon.
The deep well permit has been modified to include disposal of
chromate wastes.
OIL RECOVERY - DOUBLE REDUCED TIN PLATE
lb
17 A new development in the steel industry which
18 occurred after the construction of our Midwest plant is the
production of double reduced or thin reduced tin plate. In
2Q order to produce this product at Midwest Steel it was neces-
21 sary to convert the tin temper mill which is a dry rolling
22 mill to a solution rolling mill for the rolling of double
23 reduced tin plate. A solution rolling mill uses a soluble
oil. These emulsions are very difficult to break down and
25 recover from waste effluents. For this reason Midwest
-------
1148
l installed a total reclrculating system. When double reduced
2 tin plate Is reduced on the tin temper mill, all of the
3 rolling solutions are recirculated through a system of
4 filters for scale removal and reapplied to the rolling
5 mill. When it becomes necessary to dump these solutions,
6 they are removed for offsite disposal.
7 Now, I would like you to bear with me for
8 a few moments while I show you a series of slides which I
g think are quite interesting and informative and will serve
10 to clarify the foregoing part of this presentation.
H This is Slide No. 1, which I have been ad-
12 vised that the time is short and I will therefore not go
13 into any lengthy description of the slides.
14 Slide No. 1 is a picture that was taken
15 approximately in July 1959> and is the unimproved plant
16 site we referred to. As you look at this slide, east is to
1? the right. The property fronts on the southerly side of
._ Lake Michigan, looking north in viewing the slide. We see
lo
to the left what we have been discussing in this conference
iy
2Q as Burns Ditch, which we all know is a drainage ditch serv-
21 ing the drainage purposes of a large area south of this
22 tract, which we view in this slide. Treated water from the
Midwest operations is emptied into Burns Ditch, which, as
23
can be seen here, empties into Lake Michigan.
«TI
25 Adjoining Burns Ditch on the westerly side,
-------
1149
i the company has additional property which extends to the
2 limits of the City of Ogden Dunes. The sanitary waste
3 treatment plant which treats all of the sanitary waste
4 from Midwest Steel is located on this property.
5 No. 2, this picture was taken approximately
6 August 1961. It is a general view of Midwest Steel plant,
7 showing Burns Ditch and the northeasterly part of the lagoon
8 area. Beginning at the lower right hand corner of this
9 picture we see parts of two of the four waste lagoons.
10 The structure across Burns Ditch is a foot bridge which
11 also supports pipes leading to the lagoons and the waste
12 sewage treatment plant. The small green building between
13 Burns Ditch and the lagoons is the waste sewage treatment
14 plant. The small square structure at the end of the bridge
15 on the left side of the ditch is the sewage lift station.
16 The excavated area in the center of this picture and
17 parallel to the ditch is the uncompleted industrial waste
19 water treatment plant which was then under construction,
19 but which has since been completed. Approximately at the
20 lake end of that excavation and at the edge of Burns Ditch
21 is the outfall leading from the treatment plant where the
22 treated water is discharged to the ditch and thence to the
23 lake. At the extreme left of the main plant building is
24 located the industrial waste primary treatment plant, which
25 treats wastes such as oils, chromates, fluorides, waste
-------
1150
1 pickle liquor and tin solutions. This part of the treat-
2 ment facilities extends for some distance back of this
3 building out of view and may be seen more clearly in a
4 later slide.
5 Slide No. 3» this is an aerial view taken
6 in the summer of 1963 approximately one year after opera-
7 tions commenced. The view is looking from north to south.
8 Incidentally, this is a picture which was published in
9 Factory Magazine for the "Factory of the Year Award" made
10 to Midwest Steel in 1963.
li Slide No. 4, this is a reproduction of a
12 schematic drawing which shows the plant layout and the
13 area of waste treatment facilities including a new deep
14 well for acid disposal and the building housing the new
15 tin sludge recovery and the new tin recovery processes.
16 Slide No. 5, the primary treatment plant
17 may be seen at the left center of this slide.
18 Slide No. 6, in the center foreground is
19 shown a more detailed picture of a portion of the treat -
20 ment plant. As you may guess, this picture was taken from
21 the top of the plant buildings. In somewhat better detail
22 can be seen, beginning at the lower foreground, the
23 chromium treatment plant. The waste is first pumped into
24 the equalization tanks in the lower center portion of the
25 picture. From these tanks there is a controlled flow into
-------
1151
1 the retention basins where the chrome is mixed with waste
2 pickle acid in the proper proportion to recipitate the
3 chromates and then pumped to the waste lagoons for storage.
The two tank-like structures in the center of the picture
4
r are fluoride treatment facilities. The structures to the
0
,. left of that are the acid neutralization facilities.
b
Slide No. 7, this slide shows the secondary
0 treatment plant. Equalization basins are at the lower left
o
The buildings in the center provide oil separation and
9
chemical treatment. This is followed by the flocculation
basin and final sedimentation basin. The fully treated
effluent leaves the plant at the upper center of the slide
and empties into Burns Ditch.
Slide No. 8, this shows the sewage treat-
ment plant previously located. Since there was no munci-
io
pal sewage treatment plant available we were required by
the Stream Pollution Control Board to construct this
facility for treating sanitary waste.
io
ig Slide No. 9, shows the equalization tank
and two flocculation tanks which are used for the chemical
treatment of fluorides in plating solution waste.
22 Slide No. 10 shows the equalization tanks
and the above-ground portion of the chrome treatment
23
facilities. The greatest part is below ground. The
25
reaction tanks which are a part of this treatment process
-------
1152
i are underground beneath the agitators.
2 Slide No. 11 shows the acid neutralization
3 facility. In the center of the slide can be seen a lime
4 storage silo and a lime slurry building. To the left of
5 the lime slurry building, located underground, are the
6 acid neutralization reaction basins. The tank located on the
7 right is a waste pickle liquor storage tank.
9 Slide No. 12 shows an interior view of the
9 acid pumping and control building.
10 Slide No. 13 shows a portion of the oil
11 separation facility, comprising the oil equalization tank
12 ' on the left, the two vertical tanks or oil concentrators,
13 and the reclaimed oil storage tank. The building located
14 in the lower righthand corner contains the oil pumping
15 and control facilities.
16 Slide No. 14, shows the oil interceptors
17 and sludge draw-off equipment particularly necessary in the
18 primary treatment of wastes containing relatively low oil
19 concentration.
20 Slide No. 15 shows three of the concentrating
21 tanks which are a part of the oil separation plant.
22 Slide No. 16. This is an exterior view of
23 the Centrifuge Building. The centrifuge is used to recover
24 the sludge from the Fluoride Treatment Plant. This sludge
25 would otherwise be pumped to the lagoons.
-------
1153
Slide No. 17 shows our Deep Well Disposal
2 building. This well, 4,308 feet deep, will be used to
3 dispose of our waste pickle acid and a portion of our
4 chromic wastes.
#####**#
O
6 CONCLUSION
7
Consistent with its policy, Midwest Steel
o will continue to look to the future to keep abreast of
O
developments in the area of wastes treatment and controls.
9
When we planned and constructed our present plant with its
treatment facilities, as was noted hereinabove, we attempted
to make provision for future increase In capacity and pro-
duction. We must, of course, also bear in mind the over-
10
riding necessity for keeping abreast of steel production
and processing developments in the industry. We have done
g the best we know how to anticipate all of these possible
17 future problems but have no way of knowing whether our
._ guesses have been good or bad. So far, they appear to
Id
have been good but in either event we have done our best.
20 We would like to take advantage of this
21 opportunity particularly to thank the Indiana Stream
, Pollution Control Board and its Technical Secretary, Mr.
AA
Poole, for the continuous help and cooperation which they
have rendered to us in coping with the many problems which
so far we have, with their help, been able to solve. At
-------
1154
times we have recoiled somewhat at their strict require-
ments but we realize that all of their efforts, and we
hope they realize that all of our efforts, are in the
O
interest of achieving a mutually desirous end.
4
Thank you, gentlemen.
5
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you, Mr. Jackson.
6
This Just isn't professional courtesy, I
want to thank you for a very thorough and comprehensive
8
and interesting statement of the work that is done at
9
Midwest.
10
Are there any comments or questions?
MR. CHESROW: I want to point out that Mr. Jackson
12
Just illustrated the high degree of waste control and
13
disposal that can be achieved by industry.
14
Congratulations.
15
MR. JACKSON: Thank you.
16
MR. POSTON: I would like to comment on or ask a
17
question about page 16, the next to the last paragraph.
18
It says, "When it becomes necessary to dump these solu-
iy
tions, they are removed for offsite disposal."
20
I wondered whether there was any super-
2*1
vision on this disposal, site or what is it?
22
MR. JACKSON: This is done through an independent
Zo
contractor and we have his assurances that it is disposed
of in such a manner as not possibly to interfere with the
«W
-------
1155
waters.
MR. POSTON: The reason I ask this is I know in the
A
past there have been itinerant septic tank cleaners who
3 K
pump out a septic tank and rush it to the nearest stream
4
and dump this material in the stream.
MR. JACKSON: That, of course, we have guarded against.
6
No question about that.
MR. POSTON: I am glad to hear that.
8
MR. POOLE: For Mr. Poston's information, we license
9
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
septic tank cleaners in Indiana because of that. That is
one of the most momentous endeavors.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Glad to hear that. I know Jackson
and Fred Tucker wouldn't deal with an itinerant, either.
Thank you.
MR. JACKSON: Thank you.
MR. POOLE: Next, I am going to call on Inland Steel
who will be represented by Mr. Ross Harbaugh, Assistant to
the Operating Vice -President .
Mr. Harbaugh.
MR. HARBAUGH: Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the
Conference:
I am Ross Harbaugh, Assistant to the Vice-
President, Manufacturing and Research, Inland Steel Company.
I represent my company in response to a letter dated
December 29, 1964 from Mr. Poole of the Indiana Stream
-------
1156
l Pollution Control Board, in which Inland was designated as
2 one of the industrial participants in this conference. We
3 appreciate this opportunity to state Inland's policy and
4 to present our views on this important matter.
5 Inland personnel have been interested and
6 active in water and waste treatment for many years and for
7 many reasons. For the past twelve years, I have been Inland's
9 representative on the Steel Industry Action Committee,
9 advisory to the Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commis-
10 sion. In 1961, at the start of the Great Lakes-Illinois
n River Basins Project, I was designated the industry repre-
12 sentative for steel on the Technical Committee to that
13 Project. As you know, both of these committees are still
14 active.
15 Inland Steel Company was named a participant
16 in this conference because of the location of its Indiana
17 Harbor Works. This plant, which is the third largest steel
18 plant in the United States, is situated adjacent
19 to the Indiana Harbor Ship Canal, and occupies a man-made
20 peninsula jutting into the lake to the east of the mouth
21 of the canal.
22 INLAND'S STAKE IN CLEAN WATER
23 Immediately to the east of the Harbor Works is
24 the East Chicago Water Department treatment plant and pumping
25
-------
1157
l station, with a water intake located in close proximity
2 to the end of the peninsula. Also adjacent to the eastern
3 boundary of Inland's plant is the East Chicago city park,
4 marina and beach. The 57,000 residents of East Chicago
s depend on this water supply for domestic use and for rec-
6 reation. Our 21,500 employees drink and bathe in this
7 water, inland, therefore, has a vital interest in protect-
8 ing the quality of this water and, as I will recount, has a
9 record of accomplishment in doing so.
10 The Indiana Harbor Works is a fully integrated
11 steel plant. Its operations include coke plants, sintering
12 plants, blast furnaces, open hearths, hot and cold rolling
13 mills, and tinning and galvanizing plants. Supporting these
14 manufacturing operations are three major power plants gener-
is ating most of the needed electrical energy, shops of various
16 kinds, storage facilities for millions of tons of raw
17 materials, some 200 miles of railroad trackage, lake ship-
18 ing docks, and other facilities which are vital to such a
19 large operation. Ingot steel production last year was
20 approximately 6,500,000 tons.
21 Inland's plant is one of seven large steel
22 plants in the Chicago Steelmaking district, which pours
23 more steel than any other district in the United States.
24 Steel production in the geographical area covered by this
25 conference is about 20^ of the national total, or about 24
-------
1156
l million tons a year. Only four nations of the world produce
2 more steel than the Chicago steelmaking District.
3 The uses for water in this plant are many and
4 varied. Water for drinking is piped throughout the plant
5 from the East Chicago municipal system. For the largest
6 use, cooling water, simple screening to keep fish out of
7 the system is sufficient treatment. For other uses, as
8 for example in the final processing of tin plate, de-
9 ionized or distilled water is required.
10 When the present plant expansion program is
11 completed in 1966, the total amount of water used will
12 approximate that of the City of Chicago, or about one
13 billion gallons a day.
14 Almost all water discharged from the Inland
15 Steel plant enters the Indiana Harbor Ship canal and ship-
ie turning basin, which is part of the Grand Calumet River-
17 Indiana Harbor Ship canal drainage system, extending from
18 about Columbia Avenue in Hammond to the northeast section of
19 Gary.
20 Virtually all land along the ship canal is
21 industrial property, and the land bordering this portion of
22 the Grand Calumet is also given over mainly to industrial
23 use or to municipal sewage plants. The dry weather flow in
24 this system is comprised largely of municipal sewage plant
25 effluents and industrial waste water discharge. Ship and
-------
1159
barge transportation is virtually the only other water use.
SANITARY SEWAGE DISPOSAL
2 ' ~~~~ '
The February 1965 report on Illinois-Indiana
3
pollution prepared by the U. S. Public Health Service reviews
4
in considerable detail the problem of bacterial pollution.
5
The press has carried a number of stories in which sewage
6
was mentioned prominently. It is appropriate that this
7
discussion of Inland's effort in the protection of water
8
quality start with a review of the treatment given sanitary
9
sewage.
10
In the late 1940's, Inland elected to treat
11
such wastes generated in the Indiana Harbor Works rather than
12
discharge all wastes into the city sewer system. The first
13
part of what is now a 22-mile system of separate sanitary
14
sewers was installed at that time, along with a treatment
15
plant. In an expansion program ten years later, a second
16
sewage plant was built, and is now being enlarged. In
17
anticipation of future plant expansion, a third sanitary
18
treatment plant has been approved by the Indiana Stream
19
Pollution Control Board and is now under construction.
20
The design, construction and operation of thes4
21
three sewage treatment plants has been approved by Indiana
22
authorities, who receive periodic laboratory reports of
23
their operation. The final effluent from each of these
24
25
-------
H6o
plants is chlorinated. As an additional safeguard, alj
industrial sewer outfalls are checked regularly for B.
2
Coli count, in order to detect any accidental cross con-
3
nections between the sanitary and industrial sewer systems.
4
We are confident that this phase of the pollu-
5
tion problem is under control at Inland, and that it will
6
remain so.
7
INDUSTRIAL WASTE TREATMENT
8
Our approach to sanitary sewage disposal may
9
be used as an example of what can be accomplished: (l) when
10
the problem is recognized; (2) when goals are clearly defined
11
and (3) when knowledge of treatment method is available.
12
In the field of industrial waste treatment,
13
however, the situation is considerably different, and one or
14
more of these three requisites is missing in many cases.
15
The industrial water treatment problem as out-
16
lined in the February PHS report presents several examples
17
where these three conditions are not present.
18
For example, the concept of damage to Lake
19
Michigan waters by discharge of nutrients is new, and has
20
not heretofore been recognized as a problem. This general
21
term, as we understand it, refers to nitrogen compounds,
22
phosphorus compounds, and perhaps to undefined organic
23
matter which would be included in Population Equivalent.
24
j
25
-------
1161
l In another example, although phenols hare been
2 recognized as a problem in a general way, goals have not
3 been estblished, and effects upon water quality at the
4 point of use are only now being correlated with amounts
5 at the point of discharge.
6 The discharge of cyanide falls into a similar
7 category. In the more than half century that blast furn-
3 aces and coke plants have been operated in the Calumet
9 area, I can recall no mention of a resulting cyanide
10 problem. If this is a problem which should be recognized,
n obviously we must establish a goal, and take steps to reach
12 i^
13 Much more work remains to be done in this
14 area, and the Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board and the
15 Public Health Service are to be complimented for the excel-
16 lent start they have made. I emphasize that it is only
17 a start. It is not enough to say only that our waters
18 must be kept clean or pure or unchanged. Mankind uses
lg water for a purpose. That use, whether by man individu-
20 ally or by man in industry, almost always changes the
21 water. Whether or not that change constitutes pollution
22 requires thought and study, and a weighing of the many
23 factors that must be considered in deciding upon a reason-
24 able solution.
25 Referring again to the February report by the
-------
1162
PHS, the Inland data in the table on page 20, is at least
in part, based on information freely given by Inland to
representatives of the Indiana Stream Pollution Control
Board and U.S. Public Health Service on August 8, 1962.
Since that time, certain improvements have
been made. We are happy to say that BOD values from which
the Population Equivalent of 200,000 was calculated have
been reduced from 8.4 ppm to an average of 5.4 ppm for 1963
and 4.2 ppm for 1964. The dissolved oxygen for 1964 was
10 8 ppm,
If I may digress for a moment, I would like
12 to comment on the use of the term Population Equivalent —
13 or PE. I recognize that this is a useful tool for the
14 sanitary engineer, who must design his disposal plant to
meet the oxygen demand coming to it, from whatever the
16 source. I question the use of this term in the present
17 case. The press and the public, naturally, are led to
18 equate PE to human sewage, which, in this case, is clearly
19 erroneous.
A reduction has also been made in the ammonia
21 nitrogen loading. Recovery practices at our Plant 3 Coke
22 Plant have been improved to capture some 2,600 pounds per
23 dav previously discharged. A detailed review of operating,
24 maintenance and other procedures is now in progress, and,
25 hopefully will make possible a further reduction.
-------
1163
Phenols and other coke plant wastes, such as
naphthalene, are the subject of other investigations.
Although Inland operates two phenol and three naphthalene
recovery systems, it is recognized that some of these
reputed odor and taste producing materials escape. In
this connection, we have under way an experimental program
to determine whether the residual phenol in dephenolized
waste can be further reduced by biochemical treatment.
Suggestions and help in this project have been received
10 from the Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board.
n The report cites values of oil discharge
12 which figure out to a concentration of 6.2 parts per million.
13 Further reduction poses an extremely difficult engineering
14 problem when these discharges are mixed with a half billion
15 gallons of water. We know of no way to eliminate oil
16 completely, but as a step to use one of the water treatment
17 means available to us, plans are currently in progress to
18 more than double the size of an existing oil separation
19 lagoon.
20 Mav I point out here that it is common
21 practice for regulatory agencies to approve discharges carry-
22 ing oil in much higher concentrations than the 6.2 ppm which
23 formed the basis for the PHS report.
24 Inland also received attention In the report
25 for discharging waste pickle liquor. The Indiana Stream
-------
1164
Pollution Control Board has been asked for approval for
deep well disposal into the Mount Simon formation at a
depth of over 4,000 feet. It is only recently that any
practical method has been developed and to date, we know
of only one successful installation. As a possible al-
ternative, we are studying a plan for substituting the use
of hydrochbric acid for sulfuric, with inclusion of a
8 complete recovery system. Extensive studies providing
9 a basis for initiating such a program have already been
10 carried out.
n Blast furnace flue dust has been cited as
12 another pollutant causing difficulty. All Inland blast
13 furnaces are served by thickeners and filters. Routine
14 sampling and analysis indicates consistent recoveries of 97$
15 to 99$. This high efficiency results from installation of
18 low volume, high energy, scrubbers which were Installed
17 recently to reduce the flow to the thickeners, and thus
18 Increase the recovery of flue dust.
19 A listing of water treatment facilities at
the Indiana Harbor Works follows:
21 Existing Facilities
22 13 scale pits at:
23 19" Mill and #1 Billet Mill
100" Plate Mill
24 24" Bar Mill
#1 Blooming Mill
25
-------
1165
i
Spike Shop
76" Mill
44" Mill
2 #2 Blooming Mill
#3 Blooming Mill
3 #4 Slabber
10" Mill
4 14" Mill
28" and 32" Mills
5
2 Ammonia recovery stills
6
2 Settling pits - ammonia still waste liquor
7
2 Phenol recovery plants
8
3 Naphthalene recovery units
9
4 Settling basins - quench water
10
2 Thickeners - l40' diameter each
11
1 Thickener - double tray, 80' diameter
12
5 Sludge Filters
13
2 Sanitary Sewage Treatment Plants
14
2 Waste Lagoons
is
2 Oil Recovery Plants
16
1 Flotator - Clarifier and Oil Recirculat-
17 ing System
18 5 Roll Collant Tanks and Separators,
and I think Perry Miller had 2 settling
19 basins in his report that I forgot when
I wrote this.
20
New Facilities Under Construction
21
Expansion of #2 Sewage Plant
22
#3 Sewage Plant
23
Scale Pits and Oil Separator - #2-A
24 Bloomer and Billet Mill
25
-------
1166
! No. 4 B. 0. P. - Isolated
Recirculatlon System - No
2 Discharge
3 Complete waste water treatment
plant - 80" Mill
The No. 4 B. 0. F. (Basic Oxygen Furnace
5
Steelmaking plant) scheduled for completion this year is
6
designed for an Isolated water recirculation system. All
7
waste water will be treated, settled and reused, with no
8
discharge.
9
The waste water handling and treatment plant
10
at the 80" Hot Strip Mill is worthy also of more detailed
11
discussion, since this installation is an outstanding
12
example of modern industry's effort to maintain water quality
13
It is the result of the combined efforts of our own Engineer-
14
ing Department, outside engineering consultants, and the
15
Indiana State Board of Health, it combines three multi-cell
16
scale pits equipped for continuous solids removal, oil
17
separators, and four 115-foot diameter clarifiers. There is
18
also a control building with laboratory space, provision for
19
adding coagulent chemicals and other auxiliary equipment.
20
Under construction for the past two years, this waste water
21
treamtmert plant is now near ing completion at a total cost of
22
more than 9-1/2 million dollars.
23
Cost of waste water treatment facilities at
24
the Harbor Works, built and under construction, is about
25
-------
116?
l 26 million dollars. This does not include many of the
2 early installations, where it has been impossible to
3 identify separately costs for pollution control.
4 CORRECTIVE ACTION
5 We would now comment briefly on the corrective
B action recommended in the PHS report. I will direct my
7 remarks to the first two recommendations, which affect
8 Inland directly.
9 RECOMMENDATION NO. 1:
10 "industrial plants in both Indiana and Illinoi^
il take immediate steps to improve practices for exclusion
12 or treatment of wastes, especially the following con-
13 stitutents:
14 Oil and tarry substances;
is Phenolic compounds or other persistent organic
chemicals that contribute to taste and odor
16 problems;
17 Ammonia and other nitrogenous material;
18 Phosphorus;
19 Suspended matter; and
20 Highly acidic or alkaline materials."
21 Inland is in agreement with the objectives of
22 this recommendation. This requires, of course, that we
23 continue our efforts. Our program, which involves ex-
24 panded laboratory facilities, an enlarged technical force
25
-------
1168
i an in-plant housekeeping and reporting system, as well
2 as our new and improved treatment facilities, is such a
3 continuing effort. We believe the Indiana Stream Pollu-
4 tion Control Board can attest to our increased activity
5 in this area.
6 RECOMMENDATION NUMBER 2:
7 "Major industrial plants institute permanent
8 programs of sampling their effluents to provide more
9 complete information about waste outputs. Location and
10 frequency of sample collection should be sufficient to
n yield statistically reliable values of waste output and
12 its variations. Analysis should include the following:
13 pH, oil, tarry residues, phenolics, ammonia, organic
14 nitrogen, total nitrogen, cyanide, toxic metals, phosphorus,
15 suspended solids and biochemical oxygen demand. Waste water
16 flows should be measured, and results should be reported in
17 terms of both concentrations and tonnage rates. Monthly
18 reports of results, which, by the way, the Blue Book didn't
19 do, should be submitted to the appropriate State water pol-
2o lution control agencies, where they will be available in
21 open files. Unusual increase in waste output and accidental
22 spills should be reported immediately to the State agency."
23 We agree that some routine surveillance is
24 desirable but firmly believe that frequency and type of analysjis
25
-------
1169
1 required on individual outfalls must be limited to the
2 significant pollutants in each case. We would object
3 strenuously to a requirement for expensive and time-con-
4 suming sampling and analysis unless the results are
5 necessary and pertinent to the problem. Incidentally, all
6 approvals received for waste treatment facilities from the
7 Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board are contingent upon
8 establishment of a technical control and reporting program.
9 We do object to the open file provision
10 because we believe the files should be open only to those
n with a legitimate interest. We also feel that administration
12 of the open file provision should be left to the state agency
13 involved.
14 I would like to make one personal recommenda-
15 tion which is prompted by my experience as one of the origina
16 members of the Technical Committee to the Great Lakes-
17 Illinois River Basins Project. I have been impressed by
18 the technical competence of those who have been involved
19 in the direction of this project. I have subscribed to
20 their logical approach to a difficult problem.
21 The GLIRB staff, in the course of many meet-
22 ings with the Technical Committee, has stressed the need for
23 developing cause and effect relationships, the necessity
24 for determining the water uses to be served and the re-
25 quirements for serving those uses.
-------
1170
l The Technical Committee formed several work
2 groups, composed of specialists from municipal water
3 departments, representatives of the States of Michigan,
4 Wisconsin, Indiana and Illinois, and from a number of
5 industries bordering Lake Michigan.
6 These work groups, in cooperation with the
7 GLIRB staff, are even now formulating guides for water
8 quality in Lake Michigan. It is my understanding that the
9 final report on the Lake Michigan portion of the GLIRB
10 project may be a year away. Guides and goals now being de-
n veloped would be of great value to this conference, particu-
12 larly in reference to the question of definition of pollution
13 The solution to problems discussed in this conference
14 must in the final analysis be based on scientific fact
15 and engineering knowledge. A major contribution to this
16 background of fact and knowledge will be the final report
17 covering the Lake Michigan portion of the GLIRB Project.
18 The work of the GLIRB staff is not completed,
19 nor is the work of the Technical Committee. Because these
20 "two important groups have not yet finished their studies,
21 It raises some concern that the importance of the sound
22 and painstaking effort put forth in the GLIRB Project
23 may be overlooked. I recommend that the conferees give
24 careful consideration to this work which is now in pro-
25 gress, and to incorporation of the results in the conclusions
-------
1171
1 of this conference.
2 On the basis of long personal experience and
3 knowledge of water use in this area, I do not and cannot
4 believe that the quality of Lake Michigan water has deterior-
5 ated to a stage of crisis. In some respects, at least, it
6 is better now than it was some years ago because of the
7 installation of new facilities with modern water treatment
8 devices, the renovation of old facilities, and the improve-
9 ment in industrial waste and sewage treatment practice.
10 INLAND POLICY ON WATER QUALITY
11
Any criticism expressed or Implied in this
12
presentation has been offered in the Interest of developing
13
a reasoned and sound approach to the solution of a mutual
14
problem. Inland Steel derives as much benefit from maint-
15
enance of water quality as any who have, or who will appear
16
at this Conference; more in fact than most, because of our
17
many uses of water.
18
Inland's policy, in respect to maintenance of
19
water quality, is based on the same principles which under-
20
lie its policy in other areas. Inland management recognizes
21
its responsibility to its employees, to the immediate com-
22
munity surrounding its plants and to the public generally.
23
We are committed to the installation of ade-
24
quate control equipment for each new or modernized productive
25
-------
1172
! facility we build, and to continue maintenance and opera-
2 tion of such control equipment.
3 This policy results in constantly improved
4 water quality. In this present period of tremendous techno-
logical change in the steel industry, this improvement is
O
6 more rapid than heretofore.
To insure that each control installation is
truly adequate, we maintain wide Industry contacts, employ
O
outside consultants, support activity in many professional
9
and scientific organizations, and are in frequent touch with
State and Federal agencies.
Inland stands ready to cooperate in the future
as in the past, in the orderly development of control program^
13
Thank you.
14
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you, Mr. Harbaugh. I would
15
like to take this opportunity to commend Inland. This is a
16
company that has an old plant and while the conferees
may not agree with all the plans stated by Mr. Harbaugh,
18
I think the philosophy expressed — fair exchange of
iy
information and the working out of the problem with
20
State, Local and Federal authorities — has, in the past,
proved successful and I am sure will prove successful again.
c*«
I am sure any industry that has done that will
23
continue to do it. I would also like to point out, at least
24
for your industry, this seems to be the first statement at
25
-------
1173
l this conference where anyone in industry recognizes that the
2 Federal law exists.
3 Thank you.
4 Are there any comments or questions from the
5 conferees?
6 MR. KLASSEN: I didn't have any particular question.
7 Those of us that know Mr. Harbaugh recognize
8 him as one of the real, technically competent people in his
9 field.
10 I Just wondered if he would — this is princi-
H pally for our own use, not necessarily as applies to this
12 conference — in the flue dust thickeners for the blast
13 furnace system, you consider this any appreciable source of
14 cyanide?
15 We ran into this in another steel plant in
16 another part of Illinois and frankly, trying to determine
17 whether this is an appreciable source or not, would you want
18 to venture an opinion on this?
19 MR. HARBAUGH: There are two questions. It is a source
2Q of cyanide. I think the amount of cyanide developed in any
21 one furnace depends on a great many things, which, I am
22 hardly competent to go into and can't go into without knowing
.- more about it.
24 Whether it is an appreciable source depends on
25 the definition of "appreciable".
-------
1 MR. KLASSEN: Would you say there is any practical
2 means of treating or reducing this if it would be ap-
3 preciable?
4 MR. HARBAUGH: Well, I should think so.
5 There are recirculation systems now and means
6 for recovery — removing cyanide as it builds up to some
7 predetermined point.
8 This is one thing that I think now that the
9 question has been raised, we will have to look into a little
10 more thoroughly than we have in the past.
n CHAIRMAN STEIN: Are there any other further comments
12 or questions?
13 Mr. Poston?
14 MR. POSTON: I would like to comment that I am glad
15 to see that Inland has recognized the figures of the Public
16 Health Service and then moved ahead to make reductions
17 prior to being asked to do this by the Federal Government.
13 I think this shows that some of the other
19 tools that the Federal Government has for aid in this pol-
20 lution abatement overall program can be of use. That is,
21 planning for the future and seeing the needs, laying them out
22 ahead of time, and doing this in a cooperative manner
23 with industry, the states and other agencies.
24 I, too, appreciate Mr. Harbaugh's forthright
25 statement in acknowledging needs, but — in expressing
-------
1175
1 this desire to cooperate.
2 MR. KLASSEN: Also, Mr. Boston, I thought you were
3 going to mention it, this open file provision be left to
4 the State agency.
5 I appreciate this and I would say that it is
6 one — as one State agency we are willing to accept that
7 responsibility, Mr. Harbaugh, and thanks for suggesting it.
8 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Are there any further comments?
9 (No response.)
10 If not, thank you very much, Mr. Harbaugh, for
n a very constructive statement.
12 Mr. Poole.
13 MR. POOLE: I am going to pass United States Steel
14 once more because we allotted them 45 minutes and I under-
i$ stand they will take most of it.
16 We offered Union Carbide 20 minutes and this
17 will allow us to finish for lunch about 12:30 if there aren't
18 too many questions.
19 Union Carbide, I am going to call on — who
20 is going to present that?
21 Mr. Leavitt.
22 MR. LEAVITTr Mr. Chairman and Conferees:
23 My name is M. C. Leavitt, j am Assistant
24 Plant Manager of the Chemicals Division's plant of Union
25 Carbide Corporation, located in Whiting, Indiana. I am
-------
1176
appearing here at the invitation of the Indiana Stream
Pollution Control Board. They have designated our plant as
a participant in this conference.
Our Whiting plant is one of the Chemicals
Division's smaller plants, employing 515 people, about
ten percent of whom are college-trained engineers. We
manufacture chemicals and plastics. For raw material,
we use liquified petroleum gases, known to the trade as
LPG; and by the application of heat, and the removal of
10 hydrogen, we convert these gases to a more reactive form,
H known as olefins. In turn, we react these olefins with
12 air and/or water, and with each other, to form such com-
13 pounds as isopropanol, acetone, ethylene glycol, and the
14 plastic polyethylene. The consuming public is probably
15 familiar with isopropanol as rubbing alcohol; acetone
16 as nail polish remover; and ethylene glycol as antifreeze
17 for the automobile. Polyethylene appears in many forms,
18 but is commonly seen as protective sheeting, squeeze
ig bottles, and as flexible pipe for underground water systems,
20 I will have more to say about polyethylene later in this
21 statement.
22 We have read the "Report on Pollution of the
23 Waters of the Grand Calumet River, Little Calumet River,
24 Lake Michigan, Wolf Lake, and their tributaries — Illinois
25 Indiana," issued by the United States Department of Health,
-------
1177
i Education, and Welfare, dated February 1965, a°d to which
2 I will refer to as the HEW report.
3 Our plant receives water from the City of
4 Whiting for drinking and sanitary purposes, and this water is
5 returned to the City's sanitary treatment facilities. We
6 have not put sanitary sewage to the lake since 19^7.
7 Lake water is pumped to our plant by four
8 10,000 gallon per minute pumps which limits our maximum tn-
9 put to 58 million gallons per day. The 43 MOD figure given
10 in the HEW report represents our average usage.
u Lake water is used for feed to our steam
12 boilers, to condense the vapors from our still columns, to
13 cool the product from our still kettles, as a reserve for the
14 fighting of fires, and similar industrial uses.
15 Our operation requires the use of inorganic
16 compounds such as lime and soda ash for water treating,
17 sulfuric acid as a catalyst, and sodium hydroxide for
18 neutralization of the acid. We must remove the hardness from
lg the water before it is fed to the boilers, and these solids
2Q are returned to the lake from whence they came. As far as
21 the acids and bases are concerned, all of our water is return!
22 ed to the lake within a few tenths of the original pH value.
23 Our products are expensive. They sell for
24 fifty cents to a dollar a gallon in tank car quantities and itj
25 is an economic necessity that we hold losses to a minimum.
-------
1178
i Despite this, we do lose some product due to equipment
2 leakage, distillation procedures, washing of equipment,
3 operating upsets, and similar occurrences. These losses,
4 being organic in nature,consume oxygen and are responsible
5 for the BOD analysis of our outfall. As I mentioned before,
6 we do not discharge sanitary sewage to the lake.
7 The HEW report refers to our plant in the
8 Industrial Wastes section on page 21. We are In general
9 agreement that the figures shown here are representative
10 of our outfall. On this same page, the statement is made:
n "Recently large amounts of pellets of material similar to
12 polyethylene have been found washed ashore on the beaches
13 In Chicago. It is believed that Union Carbide is a pos-
14 sible source of this material." Insofar as we know, we are
15 the only producer of polyethylene in the area, but we
16 supply only one-third of that used in pellet form by pro-
17 cessors in this immediate vicinity. Some of these pellets
18 probably originated in our plant and, if so, they represent
ig an economic loss to us. They are extremely inert, have no
20 odor or taste, and do not contribute to BOD. These pellets,
21 while harmless, do detract from the esthetic value of a
22 beach. Our polyethylene plant started operation in 1959,
23 and we have continuously made improvements as we gained
24 experience. One addition was the installation of screens
25 to prevent polyethylene pellets from entering the sewer.
-------
1179
i We are currently spending an additional $61,000 to improve
2 this screen system and insure its reliability.
3 In the operation of a chemical plant, it is
4 sometimes difficult to differentiate between money spent for
5 improving product recovery and that spent to minimize pol-
Q lution. Since our plant started operation In 1935» we
7 estimate that we have spent almost a million dollars solely
s in pollution control. Some of the items provided by this
9 expenditure are equipment and piping to remove sanitary
10 wastes from our sewer and transfer this sewage to the treat-
11 ment facilities of the City of Whiting; the installation of
12 a closed system for that part of our process in which cool-
13 Ing water comes into direct contact with hot gases; a cool-
14 Ing tower, retention basin, screens to remove polyethylene
15 pellets from waste water, sampling devices, outside labora-
16 tory analyses, and so forth.
17 Work on the elimination of products entering
18 the sewer continues to have a high priority at our plant. In
19 addition to refinements in the polyethylene process, we are
20 installing drain lines to collect oil leakage from com-
21 pressors, relocating storage tanks to collect waste materialSj
22 which will be used as fuel for our boilers, and reviewing
23 our distillation procedures to minimize losses and upsets.
24 One engineer is spending full time on these projects and we
25 have emphasized to all of our operating personnel that control
-------
1180
! of pollution is as Important as the manufacture of products.
2 At our plant, primary emphasis will continue tt>
3 be given to elimination of pollutants. We are aware of
4 the problem, and it has been brought even more forcefully
5 to our attention by the recent Jones Committee Hearing in
6 Chicago, the GLIRB Survey, and this HEW conference. As
7 brought out in the HEW report, a knowledge of all contamln-
8 ants present in the outfall is essential to the understand-
9 ing of the problem. We are using an independent laboratory
10 for these determinations, and equipment is being installed
u in our own laboratory so that we can make a more coraprehen-
12 sive water analysis. We will continue to keep the Indiana
13 Stream Pollution Control Board informed as to our actions,
14 and furnish them all the information necessary for their
15 studies.
16 To summarize, we have already spent almost a
17 million dollars toward the elimination and control of
18 pollution. This is a continuing effort on our part and
ig we have many projects being implemented or in planning
20 for the further reduction of chemicals discharged to Lake
21 Michigan. These projects include refinement of existing
22 pollution control facilities, collection of wastes for
23 disposal by burning, treatment of certain wastes from
24 equipment washing and maintenance, and improvement of
25 operating procedures and techniques. Sampling and analysis
-------
1181
! of our effluent will yield statistically reliable values
2 of our waste and its variation. We will continue to co-
3 operate fully with the Indiana Stream Pollution Control
. Board and make available to them any information they
4
5 desire. Finally, we wish to commend the authors of the
6 HEW report for their excellent presentation of the problem.
7 Thank you for your attention.
8 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you, Mr. Leavitt, for an excel-
g lent presentation.
10 Are there any comments or questions?
n MR. KLASSEN: Mr. Chairman, I certainly don't want to
12 get into the position of defending pellets, but, I do think
13 that they have served a very useful purpose.
14 To me, they are in the same category as
15 detergents. They call public attention like no other gimmick
J6 that the sanitary engineers could have developed to bring
17 about the awareness of the people.
18 We have seen here in this audience — people
19 can't understand BOD or PE, but when they see detergents, the;
20 are suddently conscious that somebody used this water before
21 they did, and I think this serves a very useful educational
22 purpose because we are going to have to become accustomed
23 in this country to use water that somebody else has used
24 before, because we can't all continue to live up-stream.
25 So, while I am glad that you, of course, are
-------
1182
l going to remove the pellets, I think in this respect they
2 have done a Job which I say is parallel with our fine press
3 coverage, making the public aware there was something in
4 their water.
5 MR. POSTON: I think what Mr. Klassen is saying, the
6 Board of Directors will be on the lookout to find the source
? of a little extra dividend for the shareholders.
0 I would like to comment on the effect that I
o
think you brought out a very important point when you
9
emphasized to all of your operating personnel that control
of pollution is as important a manufacturer of the product.
I think many of our cases that have been brought to the
12
public's attention occurred because of a spill because of som
io
employees' failure to recognize a hazard and have either dump
14
ed or carried out some operation where a spill has occurred,
lo
and as an example, recently with an aluminum tank which was
16
to carry alkaline solution and they put in an aluminum tank.
It wasn't very long before the whole contents of this
18
aluminum tank, alkaline material, had gone on the ground
19
because aluminum will not hold strong alkali solutions.
20
Many examples that we here have and see
A!
where there's been pollution because of poor housekeeping,
22
Just nobody being concerned about what is happening to some
23
of the waste products.
MR. KLASSEN: I had one more question that I had here
2o
-------
1183
that I neglected to ask Mr. Leavitt.
2 I say this with a background of considerable
3 experience that we have had with the Petro Chemical
4 Company in Illinois—National Petro Chemical Company and
5 their waste problem involving a question of toxicity of
6 their waste products either individually or in combination
7 that might be discharged. So far as I know, that Company
8 was the first and the only industry to employ, and they did
9 this—this was done at the Ketterling Laboratory, University
10 of Cincinnati—to conduct toxicity studies, including even
n small areas on their waste because this was an important
12 question.
13
Has your company done any of this or have you
14 any assurance that the materials or combination of materials
15 that you are discharging are not toxic?
16 MR. LEAVITT: In all due respect to National Petro
17 Chemicals, Mr. Klassen, who are one of our valued cora-
18 petitors, I think you will find in the record that Union
ig Carbide had done this work much before them. This was
2Q done at the Mellon Institute and we have been in the
21 chemical business since 1925.
22 We are the first, really, in the synthetic
23 business and we have complete records on all of this
24 which was obtained at the Mellon Laboratory in Pittsburgh.
25 MR. KLASSEN: Thank you. I wish I would have talked
-------
1184
i to you years ago.
2 MR. CHESROW: You added that you are the only producer
3 of polyethylene in the area. Well, I want to point out,
4 the pellets that have been found on the Chicago beaches
5 portray the flow of current to our area.
6 Now, this is a good example of pollutants
7 coming to the Chicago beaches from the Indiana area.
8 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Mr. Leavltt, you want to comment?
9 MR. LEAVITT: I have no comments on the lake currents,
10 sir.
11 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Are there any further comments or
12 questions?
13 (No response.)
14 If not, thank you very much, Mr. Leavitt.
15 MR. LEAVITT: Mr. Le Bosquet gave you gentlemen a
ie sample of plastics. Here is how the pellets leave us.
17 MR. CHESROW: They are uncomfortable underfoot.
18 CHAIRMAN STEIN: They look cleaner from the plant
19 than when they are found on the beach.
20 MR. LEAVITT: You may be interested, I have used this
21 as mulch in ray garden and my wife objects to it. She con-
22 tinually refers to it as tapioca in the ground. They are
23 still the same color as when they were put In three or
24 four years ago.
25 I don't know what that has picked up (indicat-
ing).
-------
1185
That is the way they look when they make them.
, CHAIRMAN STEIN: Maybe Colonel Chesrow wants to in-
ft
3 dicate this, or Mr. Klassen, what is in the water. If
4 they pick it up in the water like this — off the record.
(Discussion off the record.)
v)
MR. LEAVITT: They happen to be a little expensive
b
if you don't happen to be an employee of Union Carbide.
8 (Laughter.)
MR. POSTON: Do these come in various colors?
y
10 MR. LEAVITT: Normally, a processing plant makes them
n this way and the color is added. I mean, a manufacturing
12 plant produces them this way, although we are now making
some black pellets.
lo
14 MR. FOSTON: The reason I asked that, I understood
the pellets found over on the Michigan beaches were colored,
Is)
some of them were red.
16
MR. LEAVITT: We do not make any colors other than
this in black, and very little black in proportion to
18
this type.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Just a few black in these that they
found on the beach (indicating).
22
MR. POOLE: Maybe they didn't come from Union Carbide.
„ CHAIRMAN STEIN: Are there any further questions or
*O
comments?
24
25
(No response.)
-------
1186
i Thank you very much, sir.
2 Mr. Poole, do you have an announcement to make
3 MR. POOLE: We have as a must remaining for this
4 afternoon, the United States Steel Corporation, American
5 Oil, American Maize Products, the City of Hammond and
6 Lever Brothers.
7 I can assure you those five are going to give
8 us a full afternoon.
9 I hope all the rest of you who are on the
10 Indiana list, and I am sure you have seen the program or
11 the agenda, will cooperate with the head table, and some
12 time during the noon intermission will turn in to Mr.
13 Miller or me your statement which I can pass on to the
14 other conferees and particularly important, one for the
15 record.
16 If anybody feels, other than those that I have
17 mentioned, that he or she is absolutely compelled to talk,
18 we will work you in after the five important ones, and it
19 may be pretty late in the afternoon.
20 CHAIRMAN STEIN: That is right. Mr. Poole has indicated
21 what his preference is on the time and Mr. Poole is in full
22 charge of Indiana time.
23 What we intend to do this afternoon is go to
24 approximately 4:30, have a short recess and if anyone wants
25 to do this, we will be available.
-------
1187
i Now, anyone who puts his statement in the
2 record is assured he will have it appear in the record
3 as if read. This will be given,, I can assure you, full
4 consideration by the conferees. Because when the conferees
5 discuss this, the statements will be as fully considered
6 as if they were read.
7 With that, we will recess for lunch and
8 reconvene at 2:00. Thank you.
9 (Whereupon, the proceedings in the above-
10 entitled matter were continued to 2:00 P.M., the same
11 date.)
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-------
1188
l AFTERNOON SESSION
2 CHAIRMAN STEIN: May we reconvene.
3 Mr. Poole.
4 MR. POOLE: Next on my list is the United States
5 Steel Corporation which is represented here by Granville
6 A. Howell, Assistant to Administrative Vice President of
7 United States Steel Corporation.
Q Mr. Howell.
o
MR. HOWELL: Mr. Chairman, Conferees, ladies and
1Q gentlemen:
I am Granville A. Howell, Assistant to the
12 Administrative Vice President, United States Steel Corpora-
13 tion. I have been delegated to report to this Conference
14 the water conservation progress of U. S. Steel's Northern
15 Indiana facilities.
16 If you will permit a personal word, this
17 occasion marks the beginning of my 47th year of water con-
._ servation stewardship for the U. S. Steel's Gary facilities.
lo
U. S. Steel has a direct and vital interest
iy
20
in water conservation. Water is vital to our processes.
Our thousands of employees in the Chicago area drink
22 Lake Michigan water. They and their families use the lake
for recreational purposes. As a Corporation, we have been
24 committed for years to research and installation of facilities
25 to control industrial waste. We want to be a good neighbor
to the communities in which our employees live. Our plans
-------
1189
for the future include the installation of the most modern
control equipment on all our new facilities, improvement
2
of control equipment on older facilities and continuing
research in all phases of the problem. We have cooperated
4
through the years with local control authorites in Indiana
O
and Illinois, and we feel that progress is being made.
6
Every time the subject of water temperature
7
comes up — and it does rather frequently these days — I
8
recall my baptism by immersion in the Grand Calumet.
9
Checking level and flow one icy February
morning, I fell in up to my neck. My fellow workers
pulled me out, a solid cake of ice, and I resolved that
day never again to swim in the Grand Cal.
I started at Gary in 1917 and one of my
first assignments was laying out the sedimentation basins
you will see in this presentation. The Grand Calumet
flowed by No. 4 Blast Furnace, and we were forced to move
it — the river, I mean — south to its present location, to
make room for three new blast furnaces which would help
meet the Nation's needs for armor and ammunition in the
First World War.
It sounds odd to pick up a river and move
it, but then everything about this wandering stream has
been unusual.
Prior to the industrial development of Gary
10
12
13
14
10
16
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Zo
-------
1190
1 the character of the Grand Calumet was such as hardly to
2 merit the use of the name"river" and it was described as
3 more of a bayou than a river. Generally, and especially
4 in the eastern six or seven miles, it was a winding, twist-
5 ing, tortuous, boggy stream usually no more than one or
6 two feet deep with an occasional pool of from eight to
7 ten feet. Prom time to time it turned into a marsh or bog
8 with no discernible channel at all. A fair idea of its
9 nature may be obtained by the fact that in this area, a
10 person desiring to travel the stream in a boat would
n use a punt and a pole, since at places, a rowboat could
12 not pass.
13 Much of this eastern stretch of the stream
14 was on the large tract of shorelands which were acquired
15 in the early 1900's by U. S. Steel Corporation. After
16 commencing construction of the st^el mills on these lands
17 in the area which became the City of Gary, U. S. Steel,
18 at its own expense, straightened the channel of the Grand
19 Calumet for about two miles east of the street which is
20 now Broadway. This work was done for drainage and sanitation
21 purposes and provided the stream in this area with a straight
22 well-engineered, banked channel.
23 The Grand Calumet and the Little Calumet
24 Rivers were, until some 170 years ago, parts of the same
25 stream. Its origin was the eastern part of Porter County,
-------
1191
1 Indiana, several miles south of Lake Michigan. It flowed
2 westwardly into Illinois, along the channel now known as
3 the Little Calumet River, turned Northwestwardly until
4 it reached the Blue Island Bluffs and then turned east-
5 ward and flowed roughly parallel to and north of its ori-
6 ginal course, along the channel now known as the Grand
7 Calumet River, entering Lake Michigan in the vicinity of
8 what is now Marquette Park, in Gary.
Q According to Indiana historical sources,
10 changes occurred 170 years ago which altered the character
n and flow of the river. These authorities indicate that in
12 the area between Calumet Lake and Wolf Lake, which mainly
13 consisted of swamps and marshy lands, Indians built a
14 canoe portage which diverted Calumet waters north from
15 that point into Lake Michigan. This rendered negligible
16 the eastward flow in what is now called the Grand Calu-
17 met. As a result, sometime before 1845 and probably as
18 early as the 1820's the "mouth" of the Grand Calumet at
19 Lake Michigan was closed by winds and shifting sands.
20 The current of the stream, such as there was, shifted
21 thereafter from east to west.
22 Lake Michigan caused the second flow
23 diversion. When I first met the Grand Calumet, its waters
24 flowed westerly into the Calumet Sag channel at Blue Island
25 and ultimately reached the Mississippi through the Des Plaines
-------
1192
and Illinois Rivers. Lower Lake Michigan levels then
2 diverted the Grand Calumet flow into the Lake through
3 the Indiana Harbor Ship Canal.
4 Since we are now in the low dip of the water
5
cycle, there is every probability that we will encounter
c another flow reversal in the Ship Canal as Lake Michigan
b
7 rises.
Q This river, legend tells us, was named
O
for the reeds growing along its marshy shores which the
y
Indians used as stems in their calumets, or peace pipes.
Evidence shows, however, that the habitants
of the Grand Calumet didn't enjoy uninterrupted peace.
In excavating for a powerhouse in the old Calumet marsh
13
area during the 20fs we unearthed an ancient military
musket.
lo
The Grand Calumet, in turn peaceful and
ID
embattled, sending its waters first east, then west, then
north, finally emerged from a bayou into a river when man
lo
saw the industrial possibilities of the Calumet Region.
. If ever he shaped a river's destiny, man
did the Grand Calumet's, guiding its very course to serve
the needs of this mushrooming Industrial community in
t*it
Lake County, Indiana.
And if ever a river merited the term
24
"workhorse of industry" that title has been earned by the
-------
1193
1 Grand Calumet.
2 How well, then, have we taken care of this
3 workhorse of a river that serves so many people? This
4 part of my report will cover U. S. Steel's performance
5 in fulfilling that part of the responsibility within
6 its province for safeguarding the interstate waters.
7 Our report of water pollution control progress
8 at U. S. Steel's Northwestern Indiana facilities will cover,
9 primarily, the three adjacent steelmaking plants: Gary
10 Steel Works, Gary Sheet and Tin and the Gary Tube Works.
11 The Gary Tube Works utilizes Gary Steel Works sewers.
12 U. S. Steel has two other Gary plants.
13 The American Bridge Division's Gary Plant
14 has constructed separate sewers which deliver all sanitary
15 wastes to the City of Gary Treatment Plant and stormwater
16 to the Grand Calumet. A well supplies what little process
17 water they need and, all of it is recirculated.
18 The Universal Atlas Cement Plant at Bufflng-
19 ton pumps water from Lake Michigan for cooling, and boiler
20 feed water supply. The cooling water returns to the Lake
21 with Its quality unimpaired. Universal's sanitary treat-
22 ment plant has been officially declared adequate to
23 serve 1,000 persons—more than ample for Universal's
24 Buffington employees. The plant Engineer at Universal
25 Atlas recalls with considerable satisfaction that on his
-------
1 last visit to the plant, Mr. Woodley of the Indiana State
2 Board of Health noticed fish swimming at the point of
3 discharge into Lake Michigan.
4 United States Steel's Gary facilities have
5 aligned their control efforts with the three objectives
6 of Indiana's Stream Pollution Control Board as set forth
7 on September 6, 1963, by Blucher Poole, the Board's
8 Executive Secretary: Unreasonable pollution be abated
9 as soon as possible; new facilities to provide adequate
10 treatment; existing industrial plants must provide adequate
n treatment facilities as part of all plant renovation or
12 expansion.
13 We not only accept them as the embodiment
14 of the law of the land; we embrace them as a sound, real-
is istic approach to our water problems.
16 On this note, then, may I begin the examina-
17 tion of U. S. Steel's water conservation progress at
18 Gary with our newest facilities.
19 The new 84-inch mill: Sketched into the
20 left foreground of this (slide 1) aerial photograph of
21 U. S. Steel's Gary, Indiana, facilities, is the new 84-
22 inch hot strip mill as it will appear in 1966. Over four-
23 fifths of a mile long, the new mill will be capable of
24 rolling in a single year "enough steel for a band more
25 than six feet wide that would encircle the earth nearly
-------
1195
i 15 times." The new mill will double the Corporation's
2 ability in the Chicago industrial area to produce hot
3 steel strip to supply the rising demand for light, flat-
4 rolled steel products.
5 These engineers (slide 2) at the construction
6 site of the new 84-inch hot strip mill illustrate the
7 approach of United States Steel plants to the new indus-
3 trial waste control problems that confront them every time
9 they install a new production facility. They are
10 examining the site for the equipment designed to control
11 waste discharges which will accompany the operation of
12 the new 84-inch mill.
13 Mill scale will be the principal waste control
14 problem in this new Installation. Hot steel oxidizes
15 rapidly and the scale formed is removed in the rolling
16 process and carried away in a stream of cooling water to
17 scale pits.
18 Three scale pits located over the four-
19 fifths of a mile length of this new facility have been
20 designed with the latest technology to prevent virtually
21 all of the mill scale from escaping.
22 Tne roughing section primary scale pit will
23 be 58 feet long and 57 feet wide. The secondary pit will
24 be 121 feet long and 18 feet wide. They will settle out
25 scale from the roughing stands, which house the mill's
-------
1196
i first reducing rolls. It will be divided into compartments
2 for scale removal in successive stages.
3 The second scale pit, 110 feet long and
18 feet wide, will serve the finishing stands.
5 The third pit, 87 feet long and 18 feet
6 wide, will remove scale from the run-out table.
7 The effluent from the finishing stand
8 scale pit will be further treated in deep-bed sand filters.
9 Tramp lubricating oil will be the other
10 waste problem on the new 84-inch mill. Each of the
11 three scale pits will be equipped with mechanical
12 skimming devices designed for maximum waste oil recovery.
13 Oxygen steelmaking shop: Now, may I show
14 another aerial photograph (slide 3) to locate the new
15 oxygen steelmaking facilities now under construction at
16 Gary.
17 This structural steel framework (slide 4)
18 will house the basic Oxygen Steelmaking Shop.
19 The engineers in the foreground (slide 5)
20 Play a vital part in the construction of this new steel-
21 making facility. Theirs is the responsibility for in-
22 stallation of efficient waste control equipment as an
23 integral component of this ultra-modern steelmaker.
24 In this process, the vessel is charged with
25 steel scrap, blast furnace hot metal and fluxes. The charge
-------
1197
i is then refined by blowing oxygen into the metal bath.
2 During the blow, large volumes of hot, dust laden gases
3 are emitted from the mouth of the vessel and are collected
4 in a water-cooled hood and then directed to the gas clean-
5 ing facility.
6 The water to cool the surface of the hood
7 will be circulated between the inner and outer shell
s and will never come in contact with the dirty gases before
9 discharge to the river.
10 The gases leaving the vessels (slide 6)
u will be cooled by water sprays and enter the gas cleaning
12 plant through this main (1) to the gas cleaning facilities.
13 The effluent water will wash along the bottom to the main
14 to the scupper (2) located Just ahead of the Venturl
15 scrubber. Water and solids collected in the scupper will
16 be piped to a stationary screen, where particles 1/2-
I7 inch and larger will be removed, and finally to a callow
18 cone (3) where additional settling will take place.
19 The solids from the callow cone will be continually
20 drawn off as a flurry to the classifier and thickener
21 (4). The overflow water will be recirculated back to the
22 gas cooling tower and then recycled to the gas cleaning
23 system.
24 From the scupper the gases will pass through
25 the narrow throat of a Venturi scrubber (5) where intense
-------
1198
! water sprays will wash out the dust particles.
There will be two such throat sections for
2
each of the two separators shown in the drawing. They
3
will be connected in parallel so that each will process
4
one-half of the gas.
O
The cleaned gas and dirty water from the
6
Venturi enters the cooling towers (6) at the bottom where
the dirty water is collected and drawn off.
8
The clariflers, 60 feet in diameter, will
9
collect the solids at the bottom and remove them to
10
a centrifuge for dewatering. The water will be recir-
culated back to the thickener and the solids removed as
12
filter cake.
13
Blast furnaces flue dust recover: These
14
(slide 7) are the 12 blast furnaces, which supply iron
15
to the open hearths and will also supply the new OSM
16
shop.
17
Landmarks on the Lake Michigan skyline,
18
they helped build our country and the product they make
19
reaches through the fabric of our economy into the daily
&u
lives of every one of us.
21
The rails that carry you across the continent,
t»f»
the floor of the Mackinac Bridge that transports you to
23
Michigan's upper peninsula, the automobile that takes
you to work, the steel structure of Chicago's newest sky-
Zo
-------
1199
i scraper, bear the stamp of these furnaces.
2 Converting into iron the mountains of ore
3 and limestone you see at the left in this slide produces
4 a lot offlue-dust-laden water, and this part of our
5 presentation describes the network of control devices
6 employed at Gary to keep the elusive iron oxide particles
7 from bothering our down-stream neighbors.
8 Each (slide 8) Gary Works blast furnace
9 is equipped with a four-stage system for flue dust control,
10 and three of the four stages are shown in this photo-
11 graph.
12 Dust generated in the blast furnace passes
13 through the top of the stack to the dry dust catcher where
14 the heavier dust particles are deposited.
is The finer particles that escape the dry
16 dust catcher are moved from the gas stream by sprays
17 in the washing unit. In the third treatment stage the
18 fine dust is captured wet in a Venturi scrubber or electro-
19 static precipltator.
20 The dust laden liquid (slide 9) from the
21 cleaners flows to four sedimentation basins like this
22 where part of it is intercepted as wet sludge with the
23 effluent water going to the Grand Calumet.
24 This huge control complex, designed to do
25 the Job when installed, has an increasingly difficult time
-------
1200
i in keeping up with today's much heavier production loads.
2 As far back as 1923* it was realized that
3 too much flue dust was escaping into the river and dredging
4 of the Grand Calumet commenced.
5 This dredge (slide 10) operates practically
6 full time pumping flue dust out of the Grand Calumet
7 that escaped our treatment processes. The dust laden
8 liquid is pumped (slide 11) to these settling ponds
g where it settles out and the effluent water flows to the
10 river.
n Thus, dredging and lagooning have served
12 as the final stage, so to speak, in Our flue dust treatment,
.. This blast furnace control system is not
reported as a complete and final solution to our flue
dust problem, but rather to indicate what we are doing
ID
,„ to fulfill our responsibility in this area until our
ID
treatment facilities catch up with our production advances.
,. Now, having described our newest and oldest
18
treatment facilities, let's examine our day-to-day per-
iy
. formance at U. S. Steel's Gary facilities in keeping the
zu
waterborne wastes generated in steelmaking out of the
22 river'
_. Mill scale recovery: Mill scale is one
&O
of the heavy-weight control problems at Gary. As we
24
.. have already said, hot steel oxidizes rapidly and the
-------
1201
scale formed must be removed before it is rolled. This
is done by"scale breaker rolls" and huge pressure sprays
with the scale settling pits providing successive sedi-
mentation stages.
Depicted in red (slide 12) is our new
160/210-inch Plate Mill.
7 The (slide 13) mill scale recovery system
8 installed as an integral function of the new mill is
illustrated in this diagram.
10 A water flume runs the entire length of
the Mill's rolling section from the scale breaker, arrow
12 1, the Mill proper, arrow 2, to the leveler, arrow 3.
13 This view (slide 14) of the scale pit shows
14 the various stages of scale recovery.
15 Another function (slide 15) of the scale
16 pits is waste oil removal. Surface skimming keeps waste
17 oil out of the effluent water.
18 This sampling pump (slide 16) is one of
19 two which automatically deposit a composite sample of
20 the effluent water from this Plate Mill in this five-
21 gallon container every day.
22 A D*. S. Steel chemist (slide 17) is shown
23 here analyzing the effluent samplings for solids, oil
24 value, and pH.
25 Representatives of the Indiana Water
-------
1202
Pollution Control Board reviewed steps taken in the design
2 and engineering of this mill scale treatment system.
3 This (slide 18) shows the clamshell bucket
4 and scale it has removed from the 46-inch Slabbing Mill
5 Scale Pit. It was installed when the 46-inch Mill was
6 built in 1958. It is performing adequately under tight
7 operating controls.
8 All Gary rolling mills, including the
g rail mill, the 44-inch blooming mills, and the 11 bar
10 mills have scale pits. The older ones are suffering from
n overloading. Built in accordance with the technology of
the time to handle much lighter production loads, they
are not containing all of the scale generated in
today's rolling operations.
.. Treatment of spent rolling oils: Our
15
discussion (slide 19), up to this point, has covered waste
ID
lubricating oil control as a function of the scale pits.
Waste cold rolling lubricants are handled separately.
18
While some of the cold rolling oil readily separates and
floats, most of it is emulsified in the water and difficult
20
to remove.
22 U. S. Steel's recent facilities have made
substantial progress in keeping this particular effluent
23
2 out of the Grand Calumet River.
25 Have you ever seen a waste water treatment
-------
1203
1 facility which occupies three times as much area as the
2 production unit it serves?
3 This is the new 5-stand cold reduction
4 mill, which increases U. S. Steel's ability to produce
5 cold rolled sheet by 50 percent in the Chicago area.
6 These are the complex treatment facilities
7 for waste cold rolling oils at the new 5-stand mill.
8 They remove rolling oil by gravity separation. Oil skim-
9 med from the top of the separation tanks flows to other
10 tanks for further concentration.
11 The bottom sludge layer is pumped out for
12 further treatment (slide 22).
13 Gravity oil separators (slide 23) further
14 treat the effluent from the separation tanks, concentration
15 tanks, and the chemical treatment section. The settled
16 solids are scraped off the bottom and floating oil is
17 skimmed from the top.
18 This (slide 24) is the end product of the
19 treatment facilities for spent cold rolled oils at the new
20 5-stand cold reduction mill-intercepted before it could
21 reach the river.
22 Here (slide 25) we can see an area being
23 prepared for the new 6-stand cold reduction mill.
24 Treatment facilities for waste cold rolling oil at the
25 new mill will be similar to those we Just saw for the
-------
1204-
1 new five-stand mill.
2 Coke plant wastes: This (slide 26) aerial
photo shows the Coke plant.
4 The Coke Plant which provides coke for
5 the blast furnaces recovers coal chemicals from the coal
charged in the coking process. The major waste stream
7 is used for coke quenching.
8 Beginning in 194-8 in cooperation with the
Gary Sanitary District and with the permission of the
10 Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board tests were conducted
11 to determine the efficiency of treating the major waste
12 stream in the Gary municipal plant. The tests proved
13 successful as reported in an article, "Treatment of
14 Ammonia Still Maste by Activated Sludge Process," by
15 W. W. Mathew, General Superintendent of Gary Treatment
16 Plant, in the February 1952 Sewage and Industrial Waste.
17 The article is submitted with this paper.
18 CHAIRMAN STEIN: It will be included in the record.
19 (Whereupon, the document refer-
red to above was made a part
20 of the record.)
21
22
23
24
25
-------
1205
1 TREATMENT OF AMMONIA STILL WASTES BY THE
2 ACTIVATED SLUDGE PROCESS
3
4 By W. W. Mathews
5 Superintendent-, Gary Sanitary District, Gary, Ind.
6
Presented at 2^th Annual Meeting, Federation of
7
Sewage and Industrial Wastes Assns.; St. Paul,
Minn.; Oct. 3-11, 1951.
9
10
On October 27* 1950, an experiment was
started to determine to what extent ammonia wastes could
12
be treated and phenol effectively destroyed by the activated
13
sludge process. Ammonia liquor from the Gary, Ind., coke
14
plant of the U.S. Steel Company was pumped to the main
is
interceptor on this date and continued without interruption
16
until April 30, 1951. The liquor was discharged at a
17
uniform rate throughout 24 hrs. The first loading was
18
approximately 10 percent of the total load expected.
19
From time to time the load was increased as the experiment
20
progressed.
21
Local Conditions: The Gary treatment
22
plant is connected to about 200 mi. of combined sewers.
23
Some of the heaviest rain storms have occurred in January and
24
25
-------
1206
j February. Excessive runoff could have interfered
2 materially with this experiment. At no time during the
3 period were there any severe storms. Heavy runoffs
4 occurred on a few days, but these were caused by melting
5 snow. Generally speaking, ideal conditions prevailed
6 for the entire period of the experiment.
7 Biochemical Oxidation of phenol: Using
0 a biological process to destroy phenol is not a new de-
O
velopment. Numerous references (l) (2) (5) (6) (7) are
9
available on the use of sprinkling filters and activated
sludge for this purpose. Some of the references report
experimental work, whereas others record plant operation.
The Dow Chemical Company, Midland, Mich., operates a plant
1*3
including sprinkling filters and an activated sludge plant
14
in series, where large quantities of phenol are destroyed
15
each day. As far as the writer has been able to ascer-
16
tain, this is the largest phenol destruction project
in the world (6) (7). The Milwaukee, Wis., activated sludge
18
plant treats phenolic waste with no difficulty. Probably
iy
many plants, either of sprinkling filter or activated
20
sludge types, throughout the country treat this waste or
21
gas plant wastes containing phenol; if it is in low con-
a
centrations and has caused no trouble, the operator
23
may not be aware of its being present in the raw sewage.
24
The Problem at Gary: With the reference
2o
-------
120?
given heretofore, the question may arise as to why the
experiment at Gary was necessary. The south end of Lake
Michigan which serves as a source of water supply for
the four Calumet area cities (East Chicago, Gary, Hammond,
and Whiting, Ind.) and the South Side filtration plant
of Chicago, 111., is a critical area as regards pollution.
7 It is mandatory for all municipalities and industries
8 in the area, as a result of a suit by the state of Illinois
9 against the four cities, the State of Indiana, and the
10 Industries, to abate and keep all pollution out of the lake,
This was agreed upon at hearings before a Master in
12 Chancery, appointed by the U. S. Supreme Court. Certain
13 stipulations were set up and agreed to by the industries.
14 Gary, having a treatment plant in operation
15 at the time, was excused from the suit. East Chicago and
16 Hammond also had plants in operation and were likewise
17 excused. The city of Whiting agreed to take steps to stop
18 Its pollution of the lake. Whiting did not have a sewage
19 treatment plant in operation then and has none in operation
20 now. Arrangements were made by Whiting to have its sewage
21 treated In the Hammond plant for the present. Since the
22 suit, several millions of dollars have been expended by
23 industry in constructing new sanitary sewer systems,
24 connecting to municipal sewer systems, and making process
25 changes (10).
-------
1208
i The physiography of the Calumet area is
2 such that effluents from all sewage treatment plants
3 and Industries which discharge into the Grand Calumet
4 River flow in great part into the south end of Lake
5 Michigan. Since phenol had never been a pollutant as
6 far as Gary was concerned it was necessary to determine
7 how efficiently it could be destroyed if the treatment of
8 ammonia wastes was to be undertaken as an operational
9 routine. The writer was not enthusiastic about starting
10 the project. It was obvious that if appreciable amounts
11 of phenol passed through the treatment plant and finally
12 into Lake Michigan, the city of Gary would be responsible
13 for this pollution. Estimates based on past performance
14 of the Gary plant, insofar as reduction of 5-day
15 B.O.D. was concerned, indicated that 95 percent
15 destruction might be expected. If this estimate proved
17 to be correct, from 75 to 100 Ibs of phenol might be
18 discharged into the Grand Calumet River daily. Some
19 of this, in turn, would find its way into the water
20 supplies of the various cities. If the experiment
21 were to be successful from a treatment standpoint, it meant
22 In this area practically 100 percent destruction would
23 be required.
24 Study of the problem indicated that certain
25 basic data should be collected during the progress of the
-------
1209
i experiment and, as much as possible, established as posi-
2 tive facts. These were as follows:
3 1. Whether the ammonia wastes could be treated
4 effectively, and the efficiency with which phenol
5 could be destroyed;
6 2. The effect on the treatment process of
7 the variable factors in the ammonia wastes;
8 3. The effect of the wastes on gas production;
9 4. Data which would serve as a base in computing
10 fair costs of treating the wastes.
n The list, of course, does not purport
12 to cover all the research work possible on this problem.
13 If obtained, however, the data would give a starting point
14 for a more detailed examination of the problem.
15 The project was cleared as an experiment
16 with the State of Illinois through C. W. Klassen, State
17 Sanitary Engineer, by B. A. Poole, Director of Environ-
18 mental Sanitation, State of Indiana.
19 Stipulations Controlling the Experiment:
20 Before proceeding with the project certain stipulations
21 were set up by the Gary Sanitary District, as follows:
22 Ammonia wastes should be discharged at a
23 uniform rate throughout 24 hrs.;
24 No change in load should be made except
25 as specified by the District;
-------
1210
1 The waste would be shut off immediately
2 if necessary;
3 The test continued for several months,
4 including the month of lowest sewage temperature.
5 The maximum load expected as from 1,500
6 to 2,000 Ibs. of phenol per day in 500,000 gal. of ammonia
7 still liquor. The liquid load was estimated on the basis
8 of 25 gal. of water per ton of coal coked. Phenol content
9 was shown by past analyses as quite low, amounting to
10 less than 0.1 Ib. of phenol per ton of coal coked, and
n this without dephenolizers, as there are none at the
12 Gary plant. E. C. Kennedy, superintendent of the Gary
13 coke plant, stated that the low phenol content results
u from the coal mix, which contains a higher percentage of
15 low volatile coal thafi is ordinarily used at most coke
16 plants.
17 Preliminary Investigations: About four
18 weeks before the experiment started, technicians from
19 Mellon Institute brought in the necessary laboratory
20 apparatus, including a Beckman B. Spectrophotometer.
21 Joseph H. Wells, then Senior Fellow at the Institute,
22 made all arrangements for the laboratory setup. Preliminary
23 determinations were run on river water samples, the raw
24 and clarified sewages, and the final effluent. A few parts
25 per billion were found, but the results were spotty.
-------
1211
1 Checks were made with the local hospitals and a plastics
2 industry to find If phenol was being used. No phenol
3 was being discharged from any of these sources and the
4 plastics industry had none In stock. It was concluded
5 that these test were not significant.
6 Treatment results at Dow Chemical Company
7 (6) showed that with lower sewage temperatures in the win-
8 ter months there was a decrease In the phenol removal,
9 particularly in the sprinkling filter plant. Experimental
10 work (3) (4) has shown that the rate of oxygen utilization
u by activated sludge and sludge-sewage mixtures decreases
12 with lowering temperatures. With the experiment starting
13 in October, facing decreasing temperatures and increased
14 loadings, it was obvious that the critical point would
15 be reached when the raw sewage was at the lowest annual
16 temperature. Prom past records this should occur some
17 time in February. On February 11, 12 and 13 raw sewage
18 temperatures of 48°* ^7°, and 49° *• were noted. Initially
the sewage temperature was 65°F.; at the finish, 60° F.
19
With the completion of this cycle the experiment ceased.
20
Loads Expected from Waste: Preliminary
21
studies Indicated that the increased loading from phenol
22
alone might total about 20 percent of the normal secondary
23
loading. The theoretical oxygen demand of phenol has been
24
shown to be 2.38 Ibs. per pound of phenol (l). Laboratory
25
-------
1212
i tests showed that with synthetic phenol solution this
2 was 1.9 plus Ibs. and that the 5-day B.O.D. is quite close
3 to the ultimate B.O.D. Nothing was known about the
4 5-day B.O.D. of the ammonia wastes, but later determinations
5 showed this ranged from 1,200 to 1,900 ppm as it left
6 the stills. At no time was it possible to establish a
7 direct relation between the pounds of phenol received
8 on any one day and the 5-day B.O.D. of the ammonia wastes.
g Table 1 shows results of analyses of the
10 ammonia wastes. This table is a combination of complete
.. analysis of two samples, plus a few additions on some of
the items made during the test. This does not cover the
IM
13 field of ammonia wastes, but rather local conditions.
As a result, a wide variation from the values given will
be found in numerous articles in technical Journals on
15
.. this waste. (See Page 1213for Table 1)
lb
1? It will be noted from Table 1 that this is
10 a complex waste. It may well be designated a "rough"
lo
1Q waste to treat. Total solids may show variations from
13
2Q approximately 7,700 to 20,000 ppm with volatile solids
ranging from 7 to 46 percent. Suspended solids
range from approximately 1,000 to 2,000 ppm.
22
Description of Experiment: The initial
23
24 loading was Just under 200 Ibs. of phenol per day in 43,000
25 gals, of ammonia waste (Table II) This was held constant
(See Page 1214 for Table II)
-------
1213
1 TABLE I — Analysis of Ammonia Still Wastes
2 Constituent P.P.M.
3 Free lime, CaO 0 to 6,9^0
4 Calcium, Ca 1,900 to 3,00
5 Magnesium, Mg 50 to 750
Sodium, Na 50 to 60
7 Free ammonia, NH3 60 to 1,820
8 Carbonates, 003 1,700 to 3,600
9 Carbon dioxide, C02 90 to 595
10 Sulfate, SOU 110 to 375
Chloride, Cl 2,300 to 2,800
12 Thiosulfate, S20^ 16° to
18
J3 Thiocyanate, CNS 115 to 325
M Cyanide, CN 52
15 Iron oxide and alumina, R2°3 40 to 660
16 Silica, S102 100 to 170
Phenol 400 to 550
Total Solids 7,700 to 20,000
ig Volatile 7 to 462
20 Suspended solids 1,000 to 2,000
21 A combination of two complete analyses
22 plus data noted during experiment. Dilution factor of
23 sewage to ammonia wastes varied from 40:1 to 50:1.
24 2 percent.
25
-------
f
o
.0
o
I
p
•a
c
"o
C
CD
9"9"9" «"8«" S
fc,
s
Alkalini
(p.p.rn.
§oo-i> Q to to
OO WI0O
o <
i^s
65
MNOO NO 00
-------
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
TABLE III. — Monthly Average and Maximum Phenol
of Ammonia Still Wastes, November, 1950,
April, 1951.
Month Phenol Ammonia Phenol
(1950-51) Load1 Still in Still
(ibs./ Liquor1 Liquor
day) (g.p.d.) (its./
1,000
gals.)
November 3*11 81,307 4,2
December 432 151,770 2.9
January 694 225,948 3.1
February 836 281,630 2.7
March 914 275,900 3,3
April 1,578 429,667 3.7
1215
Content
through
Max.
Phenol
in Still
(Ibs./
1,000
gals.)
7.6
3.8
5.9
7.0
4.5
5.4
Average values.
-------
1216
(See Page 1215 for Table III)
i until November 3, when the phenolic load was increased,
2 presumably, to 400 Ibs. per day with a flow of 86,400
3 gal. of waste. It was found that although it was a
4 simple matter to control the rate of flow, phenol load
$ varied considerably with uniform flow. Loading in the
6 secondary bracket—that is, during November— averaged
7 only 34l Ibs. per day (Table III). Daily loading of phenol
8 in this second bracket ranged from a low of 136 Ibs. to
9 a maximum of 657 Ibs. Mixed liquor solids had been increas-
10 ed from 1,100 to 1,354 ppm. (Table IV). On November 2,
n and each day following when backpressure on the blower
12 system permitted, a second blower was operated, usually
(See Page 121
13 from 4 to 8 hours per day and sometimes longer.for Table IV)
14 The phenolic load was increased by incre-
15 ments up to March 21, 1951* when the total waste was dis-
16 charged to the interceptor. This continued until the
17 experiment was terminated. A railroad strike during the
18 winter interfered with coal mixes at the coke plant and
ig necessitated changes in coking time from 17 to 24 hrs.,
20 along with temperature changes. In one month this caused
21 the load to vary daily from a low of 20 Ibs. to a high of
22 1*530 Ibs. (Table II). These fluctuations did not affect
23 the efficiency of the treatment process or the efficiency
24 of the oxidation of phenol.
The highest concentration of phenol in
-------
1217
SEWAGE AND INDU8TBIAL WASTES
February, 1952
u
A
I
o
~«
K
v>
•o
S
CQ
te
6
HI
B5E
it
*»
usp. Solids
(p.p.m.)
II
IE
K«
d'J
Jl
"t"1!
•2-
Eg
§ S 3 S
U9 IO *O ^J*
coo to aos>t~. o v at o t^ co
cooo« co'oco •* oo M coooo co t- 6
c> ofo -Tco
> CJ S « U5 g
«« o>
I -H — IN IN
—i f e» co t- t
O e* —' -r O) oo
O~M"OO"' —"M'OO"
I** *9* oo 55 to ™* (p w £2 *2! ^** *"^ *^3 ^ "^ ^ *^ ^® ^ ® !^
Tf* (O ro *Q t^ **t* *Q p" fQ *r) • *f* ^* t^ CO *O t*» C9
600 666 666 666 odd odd ddd
*J< O N O O — N C5 00 O
CO COU5W ViOCO CO^CO
»2!
SCI <
M I
•«< b-Ct td 00 CO
2S°°" Jfgf*""
I «^ lO O tO f^* C0 O O "*& 00 O (N 00
>«fi eoiSeo "T00^? -<**'-«« poNf*
w co w «** *« eo •«*• c« ec-^ OOtD'tf* CO<«-C»> CDCMW iO 00 «
R2S
> *
UJ
_ t^ — -< <
28" 2;
00 O>l>-
^MO O^*Q lOCOuJ 00 O CO
—• O -^* CNt*.00 O Cl OO OOOSt^
•^•oirf otor* TNO MOW -»f<^HN -^r^c< eotoo*
O toust-
-^vo coo»r^ uso^^
oo>oo> o -i co ooo)
• S .s • «.£ • 5 .s • «.E •«£ • S s -5s
O £ Q 4 £
e
I
-------
1218
the raw sewage was 12.3 ppm. This happened to come on
2 the last day of the run. The final effluent that day
3 showed no phenol. The fact that no phenol registered
in the final effluent was not as important as the fact
that the results all the way through were consistently
low. A phenol content of 5 P.p.b. is equivalent to 1
Ib. of phenol in the final effluent, with a flow of
24 million gallons per day. On only 23 days of the ex-
9 periment was a reading of 5 P.p.b. or more registered.
10 There were five days in which the final
results were out of line with all others. The first was
12 on December 2, 1950, when a heavy thaw and runoff increased
13 the pumpage to., 28.12 m.g. This required the operation of
14 a second raw sewage pump for 12 hrs., which reduced the
15 detention period in the aerators to approximately 3.3 hrs.
16 during that time. The final effluent carried a total of
17 1.8 Ibs. of phenol for this date, although loading at this
18 time was only 4l4 Ibs. of phenol in the raw sewage. The
19 short detention period in the aerators was responsible
20 for this result. On December 4, the final effluent showed
21 1.7 Ibs. with a flow of only 19 m.g.d. The mixed liquor
22 solids were out of balance on account of the high rate
23 of pumpage on December 2; the total mixed liquor solids
24 being only 473 p.p.m. explains the amount of phenol getting
25 through the plant.
-------
1219
1 On January 3, 1951, the final effluent
2 showed 17 p.p.b., with 2.6 Ibs. of phenol in the final
3 effluent. The flow was low (19.23 m.g.) and all operating
4 conditions were apparently normal. No reason was apparent
5 for the high phenol result. Thawing on January 10, 1951,
B again required a second pump in service for 9.5 hrs., with
7 pumpage of 27.00 m.g. The short aeration period for this
8 time again gave a high phenol content of 3.8 Ibs. in the
9 final effluent, with a loading of 99^ Ibs. of phenol.
10 This demonstrated again the importance of an adequate de-
n tention period. On January 11, 1951, with less than
12 1 p.p.m. of D.O. at the end of aeration, the final effluent
13 carried 1.60 Ibs. of phenol. Lack of D.O. was apparently
14 all that was out of line on this date and indicated
15 oxygen deficiency. Undertreatment probably gave the
16 result shown
17 The preceding data appear to be repetitive,
18 but the information is given in detail because of its
19 importance. With a combined sewer system, flows at any
20 treatment plant will have a wide range from low to high,
21 which interferes with the treatment process. This makes
22 it impossible to produce at all times the high quality
23 effluent desirable when treating an industrial waste
24 that should be destroyed practically 100 percent.
25 The total amount of phenol received at the
-------
1220
! plant during the period of test was 145,034 Ibs. Of this
2 total, 83 Ibs. passed through the plant for an average
3 of 0.44 Ibs. per day, or approximately 3 p.p.b. The reduc-
4 tion accomplished was 99.94 percent.
. Phenol determinations were made using the
5
c technique of the 4-aminoantipyrene test as described
o
7 by Ettinger and Kroner (9).
0 Nitrogen Determinations: Nitrogen deter-
O
minations were run on raw and clarified sewages and the
3
final effluent. Analyses were made for organic, ammonia,
n nitrate, and nitrate nitrogen. Ordinarily these are not
run on raw and clarified sewages, except possibly in
special cases where research work may be necessary. In
13
order to have a complete picture of the process before and
14
during the test, these were made dally for about two weeks be
1O
fore and until December 14. There was so little difference
16
shown in the results that after this date they were run
once a week, moving up one day each week.
18
At no time has there been overtreatment
1*3
at Gary. Nitrates in the final effluent have always
ranged from about 0.06 to 0.15 p.p.m. With exceptions
21
of a few maxlmums up to 0.24 and 0.36 and one of 0.60
m*t*
p.p.m., averages throughout the experiment stayed within
23
previous limits (Table V). Final B. 0. D. determinations
have never been hampered by high nitrate content.
(See Page 1621 for Table V)
-------
1221
SEWAGE AND INDUSTBIAL WASTES rebruarjr, 1952
TABLE V.—Nitrogen Determinations', October, 1950, through April, 1951
Month
(1950-51)
Oct.
Av.
Mnx.
Min.
Kov.
Av.
Max.
Min.
Dec.
Av.
Max.
Min.
Jan.
Av.
Max.
Min.
Feb.
Av.
Max.
Min.
Mar.
Av.
Max.
Mill.
Apr.
Av.
Max.
Min.
Nitrogen (p. p.m.)
Raw Sewage
Or«.
15.0
21.3
10.6
11.0
18.5
7.0
14.8
20.7
7.0
16.2
22.4
10.0
17.4
10.6
16.0
13.9
17.6
10.4
11.9
14.6
8.7
NU,
10.0
16.0
4.0
12.3
18.0
6.0
16.8
28.0
8.0
17.3
28.0
8.0
19.3
24.0
10.0
14.0
18.0
10.Z
10.0
16.0
6.0
NOi
0.03
0.10
0.01
0.07
0.40
0.01
0.18
0.30
0.10
0.23
0.35
0.10
0.56
0.70
0.48
0.20
0.38
0.15
0.06
0.18
0
NOi
0.10
0.60
0.06
0.08
0.16
0.00
0.12
0.2G
0.08
0.20
0.50
0.12
0.15
0.24
0.10
0.14
0.16
0.12
0.10
0.16
0.06
Clarified Sengt
Or*
11.2
16.2
8.7
9.5
15.7
5.3
8.7
10.6
5.3
11.0
14.3
9.1
26.4
37.2
11.8
10.8
12.9
9.8
8.75
10.6
7.6
KHi
12.0
16.0
6.0
12.8
18.0
6.0
16.1
24.0
10.0
17.3
26.0
8.0
22.0
30.0
12.0
12.0
16.0
10.0
10.0
12.0
0.0
NO,
0.03
0.10
0.01
0.05
0.30
0.01
0.17
0.28
0.01
0.19
0.31
0.07
0.60
0.85
0.40
0.29
0.45
0.13
0.06
0.15
0
NO.
0.11
0.60
0.06
0.07
0.16
0.06
0.09
0.10
0.06
0.22
0.40
0.10
0.13
0.20
0.10
0.14
0.16
0.12
0.10
0.12
0.06
Final Effluent
Or*.
5.9
9.0
4.2
4.5
10.6
2.0
3.2
3.6
2.5
3.8
5.3
2.5
4.1
5.0
3.1
4.6
6.4
3.1
4.12
4.5
3.6
NH.
12.0
16.0
4.0
11.9
18.0
6.0
15.7
22.0
8.0
17.6
28.0
8.0
21.3
30.0
10.1
16.0
18.0
12.0
14.0
16.0
12.0
"*v
0.16
0.50
0
0.10
0.40
0.03
0.16
0.40
0.05
0.15
0.35
0.03
0.53
0.75
0.15
0.21
0.25
0.18
0.06
0.13
0
NO.
0.11
0.60
O.OG
0.07
0.14
0.06
0.08
0.18
0.04
0.14
0.36
0.06
0.09
0.12
0.06
0.15
0.24
0.08
0.09
0.12
0.08
' Monthly average*.
-------
1222
i Organic and ammonia nitrogen showed very
2 little variation from past records. Single maximums were
3 somewhat higher, but averages for the entire period showed
4 no marked change from previous data. Averages for organic
5 nitrogen over the entire period were 14, 10 and 4 p.p.m.
6 in the raw, clarified, and final effluent, respectively.
7 Corresponding ammonia nitrogen averages were 14, 13 and
8 14 p.p.m. The changes were less than had been anticipated.
9 Functioning of the Activated Sludge Process:
10 During the progress of the experiment certain changes
11 were made in the various parts of the activated sludge
12 process (see Table IV). These included an increase in
13 air blown, higher concentration of solids in the mixed
14 liquor and return sludge, and an increased rate of return.
15 None of these changes were made suddenly except that of
16 return sludge, when, on February 1, 1951, a third pump
17 was placed in operation, which was then operated continuously
18 with the other two pumps until the end of the experiment.
19 Air Requirements: Air, at the beginning
20 of the test, was being supplied at between 9,000,000 and
21 10,000,000 cu. ft. per day. This was at an average rate
22 of 0.47 cu. ft. of air per gallon of sewage. (Cubic feet
23 of air per gallon of sewage is not a good unit to use in
24 comparing the performances of activated sludge plants,
25 but it is a handy tool around a single plant.
-------
1223
1 Cubic feet of air per pound of B.O.D. reduced Is the unit
2 ordinarily employed in making comparisons.)
3 On and after November 2, 1950, a second
4 blower was operated for several hours per day whenever
5 possible, the length of time being governed by the D.O.
6 at the end of aeration. It was not always possible to
7 operate this blower every day because of high backpressure
8 on the blower system. Periods of high relative humidity
9 always cause a rapid rise in pressure when diffuser tubes
10 are partially clogged. With pressure above normal with
11 one blower in operation, it is Impossible to place a second
12 blower on the line.
13 A D.O. of 3 p.p.m. at the end of aeration
14 was desired. Although this was maintained throughout the
is test, as shown in Table IV, except for October and November,
16 there were short periods when the D.O. was below 2 p.p.m.
17 and one period of below 1 p.p.m. The amount of air supplied,
18 as shown in Table IV, indicates a minimum use. Slightly
19 more air would have been used if atmospheric conditions
20 had permitted. In January, aerators 1 to 4 had clean
21 tubes Installed to ensure an adequate air supply until
22 the experiment was completed. Ordinarily tubes are not
23 changed at this time of the year because of the hazardous
24 working conditions from ice forming on the floor of the
25 aerators when drained.
-------
1224
1 It will be noted that in February, the month
2 of highest B.O.D. in the clarified sewage, the D.O. at
3 the end of aeration was the highest for any month. There
4 was only a slight increase in air over the previous month.
5 The reason for this higher D.O. (also in January) was
6 better distribution of air throughout the length of the
7 four aerators where clean tubes had been installed.
8 Clogging occurs in great part at the head end of the
9 aerators, where return sludge mixes with the clarified
10 sewage and mixed liquor. From one-fourth to one-third the
11 length of the aerators may have a sluggish roll, where tubes
12 are partially clogged, so that the computed aeration de-
13 tention period does not give a true picture of actual con-
14 ditions. Only with all tubes clean does the theoretical
15 detention period agree with the actual period.
16 Solids Concentrations: At the start of
17 the test the mixed liquor solids content was about 1,100
18 p.p.m. By January, this concentration had been raised
19 so that the average for that month was 3,035 p.p.m. As
20 the ammonia waste load increased (Tables II and III),
21 higher mixed liquor concentration followed (Table rv).
22 Return sludge solids naturally increased with higher
23 mixed liquor concentration. Initially, return sludge
24 averaged about 4,300 p.p.m. and reached a high level in
25 February, with 13,426 p.p.m. when mixed liquor solids
-------
1225
was 3,5^7 p.p.m. Following February, which was the month
of highest loading, solids were decreased so that in
A
April they averaged 2,430 and 9,529 p.p.m., respectively,
O
The last five days of April showed ranges in mixed liquor
4
solids of from 1,778 to 2,010 p.p.m., with return sludge
5
solids of 7,520 to 8,812 p.p.m.
6
It was intended originally to hold sol-
7
ids at 3,000 p.p.m. With the high organic loading in
8
February, and with the higher concentration producing a
9
very satisfactory 5-day B.O.D. in the final effluent,
10
3*5^7 p.p.m. was maintained with an average of 6 p.p.m.
11
5-day B.O.D. in the final effluent, and with a range
12
of 3 to 11 p.p.m. for the month. Working with high con-
13
centrations of solids, wasting had to be scheduled
14
carefuHy to prevent solids building up to excessive
15
levels. It was noticed that at these levels, solids
16
beget solids, and quite rapidly.
17
Return Sludge Rate Changes: Rate of
18
return sludge has always been maintained at a high level
19
at Gary. When the plant was placed in operation in
20
August 1940, sludge return at 25 percent was tried.
21
In a short time septic conditions developed in the return
22
sludge and the rate was increased. For the first 10 months
23
of 1950, the average rate of return was 35.9 percent.
24
This rate was maintained by operating two out of three
25
-------
1226
l return sludge pumps available. These pumps were operated
„ continuously and any changes in the percentage rate were
3 caused by variations in the sewage flow.
4 To produce a good final effluent with the
c activated sludge process, aerobic conditions must be
0
6 maintained throughout the secondary process. This is
accomplished by supplying air in such quantities that a
. satisfactory D.O. is maintained at the end of aeration,
o
plus a rate of return that will permit the return sludge
y
to enter the aerators before septic conditions have had
time to develop. The sludge mixture has an extremely
high oxygen demand and the supply ceases as soon as the
1 A
mixed liquor flows over the weirs of the aeration basins.
13
It is obvious that the quicker the sludge can be returned
14
to the aerators, the less chance there is of deterioration
15
due to lack of oxygen. The D.O. of return sludge in
16
overflow manholes at the secondary clariflers ranges
from 1.2 to 3.6 p.p.m. Time of flow from manholes to
18
aerators is from 2 to 2.5 min.
19
Sludge return uses relatively little power,
20
as it is a low-head pumping operation. The power require-
ment (minimum for Gary air supply) is one 300-hp. gas
22
engine driving a 7,000-cu. ft. blower; Just above minimum
23
requirements may necessitate an additional unit for 2
24
hrs. per day. Motors for the three return sludge pumps
AW
-------
122?
i total 60 hp., divided into 15-, 20-, and 25-hp. units
2 Only two of these are operated under average sewage load
3 conditions. If either additional air or return sludge
4 capacity is needed, it has been found at times that it is
more economical to run a 15- or 20-hp. motor for 24 hrs.
6 than to run a second blower unit for 2 hrs. It has been
7 demonstrated that with three return sludge pumps in operation
8 (third unit placed in service), a better final effluent
9 can be produced than by operating a second blower part
10 time.
About February 1, 1951, sludge began to
build up on the floor of the secondary clarifiers. (Table
13 IV indicates mixed liquor and return sludge solids at the
14 highest level in February.) Soundings taken three times
daily normally show 6 in. of sludge at the center baffles
16 of the 75-ft. square final clarifiers, less than 6 in.
17 at the quarter point, and the same at the outer walls.
Soundings are taken by conventional sounding rods with
19 6-oz. bottles mounted front and back at 6-in. intervals.
20 About this date soundings showed a build-up to 12 in.,
21 and in one case to 18 in., at the center. This showed
22 that the rate of return was too low and a third unit was
23 placed in operation on February 1 to bring the sludge
24 blanket down to normal level. All three return sludge
25 pumps were then operated continuously until the end of
-------
1228
the experiment, when one unit was shut down. During
the summer months (1951) clogged tubes again interfered
with aeration and the third pump was again placed in opera-
tion. This cleared up a cloudy final effluent. At this
time it was impossible to operate a second blower because of
high backpressure. When cleaned tubes had been installed
7 in six aerators, the extra unit was again shut down.
8 Load Changes on Treatment Process During
9 Experiment: Table VI shows the average daily 5-day
10 B.O.D. loading in the clarified sewage. The total for
11 October can be taken as a base, because this checks quite
12 closely with the load for the previous October and succeeding
(See Page 1229 for
13 || months showed only normal variation. Table vi)
14 The heaviest organic loading in the clarified
15 sewage occurred during the month of February. This re-
16 suited from a combination of two factors—stoppages in
17 the sludge hoppers and raw sludge suction lines caused
18 a greater depth of raw sludge than usual to be held
19 in storage in the primary clarifiers, plus the increased
20 load of the ammonia wastes. The high level of sludge in
21 the primary clarifiers caused the clarified sewage to
22 carry more suspended solids than usual, almost three times
23 I the normal amount. Clearing up stoppages covered the
24 || period from February 23 to March 11, after which no dif-
25 I ficulty was experienced in pumping raw sludge. It will
-------
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1229
TABLE VI.— 5-Day B.O.D. In Clarified Sewage, Average
Dally Loading, October 1950
Month B.O.D. Loading
(1950-51)
(Ibs./ (Ibs./
day) day/cu.
ft. aer.
cap.)
October 13,676 17.1
November 1 5, 839 19.7
December 17,282 21.5
January 20,944 26.1
February 27 , 916 34 . 8
March 19,945 26.0
April 15,125 18.9
through April 1951.
Air per Aer. Eff.,
Ib. Lb. B.O.D.
B.O.D. Dig. per Lb.
Removed 0^ Blown (#)
(cu.ft.)
655 7.82
758 7.79
686 8.6l
601 9.83
406 14.55
533 11.08
801 7.39
•
-------
1230
! be noted (Table IV) that there was a drop in clarified
2 suspended solids and 5-<3ay B.O.D. in March and also in
3 April.
4 The Gary plant was designed for 170,000
5 population loading with 10 aerators in service. Assuming
6 a 35 percent reduction of 5-day B.O.D. in the primary
7 clarifiers, this would give approximately 110,000 equi-
8 valent population loading for the secondary process.
0 Equivalent population loading from February clarified
y
10 sewage was 164,000, with only six aerators in service.
This gave a loading in terms of pounds of 5-day B.O.D.
per 1,000 cu. ft. of aerator capacity much higher than
\t*
usual, amounting to 3^.8 Ibs. This previously had
13
reached 22 Ibs. only, and the average for the year 1950
14
was 17.5 Ibs. Increased loadings may be obtained through
15
cutting down on aeration capacity by reducing the number
16
of aerators in service. If this is done, however, the
aeration period may be decreased to where the quality
18
of the final effluent is degraded and the operator will
iy
find that a better effluent can be produced with a
20
lighter loading and lower aeration efficiency.
There is no reason why loads of 35 Ibs.
22
or more of 5-day B.O.D. per 1,000 cu. ft. of aeration
23
capacity cannot be used, provided adequate air supply is
24
available and a high rate of sludge return is included
25
-------
1231
1 in the plant design. It is interesting to note that the
2 "Tentative Standards for Sewage Works," compiled by the
3 Upper Mississippi River Board of Public Health Engineers
4 and the Great Lakes Board of Public Health Engineers
5 (Jan. 1951) specify that "tank volume shall have 30 cu.
6 ft. per Ib. of 5-day B.O.D. in the aerator inlet." This
7 is equivalent to 33 Ibs. per 1,000 cu. ft. of aerator
8 capacity.
9 During February, daily loadings in the
10 clarified sewage ranged from a low of 9*000 Ibs. to a
n high of 99,600 Ibs. At no time during the experiment
12 were shock loadings experienced with either high alkalinity
13 or acidity. Once the flow of the waste (pH 9.6 to 12.7*
14 with average of 11.5) was started, an alkaline stability
is was established in the raw and clarified sewages.
16 The maximum load of 99*600 Ibs. occurred
17 on February 3, 1951. This was caused by a heavy carryover
18 of a mixture of primary and secondary solids from the
19 primary clariflers during a wasting period of 5 hrs.
20 Ordinarily, wasting was for 2 or 3 hrs. with one of the
21 return sludge pumps shut down. This was to decrease the
22 rate of waste sludge into the primary clarifiers and to
23 prevent an excessive carryover. On this date wasting for
24 5 hrs. was scheduled and the outside operator failed to
zs shut down one of the pumps. This gave a carryover which
-------
1232
showed 1,296 p. p.m. in the composite clarified sample,
„ so during the wasting period it must have been much higher.
A
3 The B.O.D. composite showed 539 p. p.m. Expressed in
pounds of 5-day B.O.D. loading this was 99,667 Ibs., with
e
O
D
8
9
10
4
an equivalent population load of 585,000. The loading
on the aerators was 124 Ibs. B.O.D. per 1,000 cu. ft. of
aerator capacity and the air per pound of B.O.D. reduced
amounted to 124 cu. ft. These two figures happen to be
in empirical agreement, which is of no significance.
The total of this load was not known for
five days, but on the following day the clarified
cone had about 8 in. of solids after settling, whereas
ordinarily this is only about 1 in. Wasting was started
13
at once and maintained on a correct routine so that the
14
solids in the aerators were brought down to a normal content
This heavy load was not reflected by a poor final effluent.
IS
Suspended solids in the final effluent were 11 p. p.m.
on the preceding day, rose to 20 p. p.m. on the day of
18
heavy loading, and on the succeeding day were down to
10 p. p.m. The final effluent 5-day B.O.D. was 7, 6,
ZO
and 5 p. p.m. for the three days. The sludge index showed
the greatest variation, being 119,252, and 121 for the
22
corresponding days.
23
This loading may be called a false loading,
24
in that it originated in the process itself and is one
Zo
-------
1233
that would not ordinarily occur. It may also be stated
that the carryover was primed or seeded for the biological
&
process, as it carried large quantities of secondary
3
sludge, which had the same pH as the secondary process.
Granting all this, the analyses showed that there was a
O
heavy loading of organic material which required treatment.
6
It is further agreed that if the attempt were made to operate
on this level for any length of time, with the small amount
8
of air supplied, the previous normal operation of the
9
process would be upset.
The results of this day's operation indicated,
however, that in buffering the plant for the loading from
1 it
the ammonia wastes, the solids concentration in the
13
mixed liquor was higher than required. Also, that there
14
was considerable reserve capacity at 3,500 p.p.m. in the
it)
mixed liquor present that day. It was concluded that if
16
at some future time the treatment of ammonia wastes were
17
undertaken as a regular treatment routine, the concen-
18
tration of solids in the mixed liquor would be built up
19
at a slightly lower rate than was employed in the experiment.
20
Aeration Efficiencies: Also shown in
21
Table VI is the amount of air supplied per pound of 5-day
22
B.O.D. reduced and the aeration efficiency, which is pounds
23
of 5-day B.O.D. reduced per pound of oxygen blown (not
corrected to standard conditions). It will be noted that
25
-------
1234
l with the exception of November, heavier aerator loadings
2 required less air per pound of 5-day B.O.D. reduced.
3 Table VI shows that with increased aerator loadings
4 higher aeration efficiency may be obtained.
5 Since daily organic loadings on the secondary
g process are beyond the control of the operator, oxygen
7 utilization efficiency is likewise beyond his control.
8 He may have worked out an efficient operating routine as
9 regards concentration of mixed liquor solids, amount of
10 air blown, and rate of sludge return, and produce a
u highly polished effluent. The efficiency, however, is
12 going to vary from day to day: with an increased load
13 and with the same amount of air, will rise: with a
14 decrease in load, it will decline.
15 Effect of Wastes on Treatment Process:
16 No one could predict how the process would react to the
17 treatment of ammonia wastes. Changes were expected and
ig the aerators, final clarifiers, and final effluent were
19 closely watched. Analytical results were checked by
20 visual inspection of the aerators and final clarifiers,
21 and although at times results would indicate a satisfactory
22 effluent, the appearance of the effluent would Indicate
23 some changes were needed. Most frequently noticed was
24 a cloudy effluent which tested low in suspended solids.
25 However, this cloudiness usually indicated undertreatment
-------
1235
from an air supply viewpoint. A slight amount of air
added at various times proved this was what was needed
in a majority of cases.
3
Mixed Liquor and Sludge Index: The mix-
4
ed liquor gradually lost its brown color as the load in-
creased and assumed a grayish cast. At no time did the
6
mixed liquor have as bright a color, if that word can be used
7
while treating the ammonia wastes, as when treating a typi-
8
cal domestic sewage. Yet, despite this drab appearance,
9
the B.O.D. in the final effluent was consistently good.
10
Sludge index records indicate that for about two months
n
adjustments were being made in the treatment process to
12
find a good operational routine. Monthly averages of
13
sludge Indexes for the 6-month period, November to
14
April, were as follows:
15
Month Sludge Index
16 Av. Max. Min.
17 November 224 398 105
18 December 180 312 87
19 January 100 282 4l
20 February 83 252 37
21 March 87 249 65
22 April 140 369 81
23 During the first two months the solids
24 concentration was being built up, so that by December 20,
25
-------
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
10
11
12
13
14
24
25
1236
3,000 p.p.m. had been reached. This level was maintained
or slightly exceeded until about the middle of April,
when the solids were gradually reduced until the waste
was shut off. Air supply was from one and two blowers
each day when possible. After February 1, when a third
return sludge pump was placed in operation the index more
or less stabilized, with fewer peaks than In the previous
8 I months. From March 1 to 17, inclusive, the sludge index
varied only between 64 and 80, with ranges in loading
from 9,000 to 48,000 Ibs. of 5-day B.O.D. in the clarified
sewage and with mixed liquor concentrations of from
2,456 to 4,114 p.p.m. It will be noted that the greatest
variable during this period was in the loading, which
had a range from low to high of approximately 500 per-
15 cent.
The treatment process was quite sensitive
as regards daily sludge index variations. High loads
cannot be determined until five days after they have oc-
curred. Therefore, daily changes in air supply cannot
be made to follow changes of load. At times of high
loading, with one blower in service, or if a second blower
happened to be In operation, the sludge index might vary
overnight from around 100 to 300. When this occurred
sludge index could be brought back to normal if extra air
-------
1237
i could be supplied. High sludge index did not always
2 mean high suspended solids in the final effluent, as
3 shown by the following results at various times:
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13 Pumpage rate probably had more effect on the suspended
14 solids content of the final effluent than any other
15 factor. One day of high pumpage the sludge index was
ie and the suspended solids concentration in final effluent
17 was 28 p.p.m.
18 Secondary Clarifiers: Most of the time
19 when treating domestic sewage only, the secondary clari-
20 fiers are clear and the raking mechanisms can be seen.
21 About two weeks after the experiment started, a light
22 solids blanket had risen to about 4 in. below the water
23 surface. This left a clear zone over the top of each
24 secondary clarifier and final effluent was skimmed out of
25 this zone over the saw toothed weirs. This blanket held
Sludge
Index
181
199
392
312
382
342
123
Susp. S<
in Pin. I
(p.p.m
3
6
1
6
21
20
23
-------
1238
i stationary throughout the experiment and never lifted
2 so that a high solids content appeared in the final effluent
3 Two weeks after the waste was shut off the rakes were
4 again visible. This was on May 13, and they had not been
5 seen since the previous November.
6 Gas Production: Although treatment of
7 waste did not inhibit the aerobic process, it did cause
8 a drop in gas production. In November, a month of light
9 loading of ammonia wastes, the gas production increased
10 about 20,000 cu. ft. per day over October. This was quite
n encouraging and it was thought that possibly the alkaline
12 waste would tend to raise gas production. Through Decem-
13 ber, and up to and including March, each succeeding month
14 showed a decrease. April showed some recovery, but not
15 back to normal. With the waste cut off at the end of
16 April and the contents of the digesters being gradually
17 displaced with raw sludge containing no waste, gas pro-
18 duction started to increase. May and June both showed
ig increases and apparently conditions were back to normal
20 in the multi-digestion system. Total gas production for
the 6-month period from November to April, over the past
22 seven years, showed the 1950-51 period ranked sixth.
23 Digestion was irregular with the waste
24 present. There were periods when gas production decreased
25 for a week or two, followed by a recovery period. This
-------
1239
i was repeated several times from January to April, inclu-
2 sive, surlng the period of heavier loadings of waste.
3 Recirculation and agitation were tried to overcome this
4 handicap, but apparently had no effect. This adds to the
5 cost of treatment. There is the loss of gas, plus the
6 increased amount of gas required to furnish additional
7 air needed for the increase in loading from the waste.
8 Summary: It has been demonstrated that
9 ammonia wastes containing up to 12.3 p.p.m. phenol, in
10 terms of sewage flow, can be treated successfully by
n the activated sludge process at Gary, with the waste having
12 a composition as noted in Table I. It has also been demon-
13 strated that the anaerobic process is inhibited by the
14 waste that is pumped to the digesters with the raw sludge,
15 resulting in a decrease in gas production.
16 Conclusions: Conclusions drawn from the
17 experiments described herein are as follows:
18 Phenol in the ammonia still waste, in terms
19 of sewage flow, could be treated in concentrations up to
20 25 p.p.m. and with approximately 100 percent effective-
21 ness, providing there was no excessive build-up in con-
22 centration of some other toxic substance that might inhibit
23 the aerobic process;
24 Solids concentration in the mixed liquor
25 must be increased to take care of the increased load;
-------
j Extra air must be supplied because of the
2 additional organic load imposed on the treatment process;
3 A higher rate of sludge return is required
if air requirements are to be kept to a minimum;
Complete destruction of phenol cannot
5
e be effected with the aeration period greatly reduced.
D
Acknowledgments: Other persons working
on this project who previously have not been mentioned
8
include San Karan, then Junior Fellow, Mellon Institute,
9
who did most of the laboratory work on phenol de-
terminations; Dean B. Plotts, chemical Engineer, Gary
Coke Plant, U. S. Steel Company, who assisted in the
12
laboratory work or substituted for Mr. Karan; and George
13
J. Haddad, Fellow, Mellon Institute.
14
References
15
Mohlman, F. W., "The Biochemical Oxidation of Phenolic
16
Wastes." Am. Jour. Pub. Health, 19, 2 (1929).---#1
17
Kay, A., "Gas Works Effluents and Ammonia." No. 188
18
Inst. of Gas Eng., London (Nov., 1938).—#2
19
Sawyer, C. N. and Nichols, M. S., "Effect of Sludge
20
Concentration and Temperature upon Oxygen Utilization."
21
Sewage Works Jour., 11, 1, 51 (Jan., 1939).—#3
22
Sawyer, C. N., and Rohlich, G. A., "influence of Tempera-
23
ture upon the Rate of Oxygen Utilization by Activated
24
Sludges." Sewage Works Jour. 11, 6, 946 (Nov.,
25
-------
1241
1939).--#*
Eldridge, E. P., "The Biological Filtration of the Phenolic
ft
Wastes from a Gas Plant." Bull.87, Michigan Eng.
3
Exper. Station, East Lansing, Mich. (Nov., 1939).--#5
4
Powers, T., "The Treatment of Some Chemical Industry
Wastes." Sewage Works Jour., 17, 3, 330 (Mar.,
6
7 1945).--#6
Harlow, I. P., and Powers, T. J., "Pollution Control
8
at a Large Chemical Works." Ind. Eng. Chem., 39,
9 **
1Q 572 (19^7).—#7
Ettlnger, M. B., and Ruchhoft, C. C., "Removal of Phenol
and Cresols from Natural Waters." Ind. Eng. Chem.,
12 "
4l, 1422 (1949).--#8
13
Ettinger, M. B., and Kroner, R. C., "The Determination
14
of Phenolic Materials in Industrial Wastes." Proc.,
15
Fifth Indus. Waste Conf., Purdue Univ., Series
16
No. 72, p. 346 (Nov., 1949).--#9
17
Carpenter, C. B., and Mathews, W. W., "industrial Problems
18
of Water Contamination." Midwest Eng., p. 2 (Oct.,
1948).--#10
20
Carpenter, C. B., and Mathews, W. W., "industries Treating
Wastes in Lake County, Indiana." Sewage Works Eng.,
AA
19,532 (Oct., 1948).--#11
23
24
25
-------
1242
1 DISCUSSION
2
3 by S. Mogelnickl
4 Research and Development Engineer, Waste Disposal, The
5 Dow Chemical Company,
6 Midland, Mich.
7
Mr. Mathews has presented a very comprehen-
8
sive and significant paper. To some of us in industry,
9
however, its greatest significance is not in the technical
10
data revealed, but in the fact of cooperative endeavor
11
on the part of a city and one of its industries toward
12
the solution of a local, but also widespread, problem.
13
He has shown that the Gary municipal sewage
14
plant can treat ammonia still wastes very successfully.
15
The questions remaining are: "Will such a project be
16
undertaken?"; "if so, when?"; and "What action is to be
17
taken?"
18
Successful pollution control nationally
19
is going to call for a great deal more of this type of
20
cooperation between municipalities and their industries.
21
To those engaged in large-scale destruction
22
of phenol, there seems to have been a considerable lack
23
of interest in, or perhaps understanding of, the biological
24
oxidation of phenol. This large-scale experiment is,
25
-------
i therefore,an encouraging sign, as is also the interesting
2 laboratory work of A. Henderson, of the Hydrotechnic
3 Corporation. Such work will no doubt give welcome assistance
4 to those who may be confronted with similar waste treatment
5 problems.
6 It should be emphasized that biological
7 oxidation of phenol is accomplished quite easily with
8 ordinary soil bacteria and does not require a specially
9 developed culture as some people have been led to believe.
10 It has been found that phenol is one of the most readily
11 oxidized organic compounds. With well-seeded dilution
12 water, the 5-day B.O.D. of phenol will be very close
13 to the theoretical 2.38 p.p.m. per part of phenol. This
14 can be confirmed by an oxygen consumed test, although any
15 test which does not compJetely destroy phenol is of
16 limited value. For treatment of phenolic wastes, it is
17 believed advisable to design a plant on the basis of
18 complete oxidation.
19 Mr. Mathews1 paper does not discuss the
20 preservation of samples for analysis, and it can only be
21 presumed that the determinations made were accurate.
22 It should be pointed out that, in working with wastes
23 of this type, special precautions must be taken to Inhibit
24 bacterial oxidation in stored samples in order to prevent
25 erroneous results. Spot samples taken through the treatment
-------
i plant, incidentally, are an excellent check on results
2 of composite samples.
3 With two or three exceptions, the writer
4 is in general agreement with Mr. Mathews1 conclusions.
5 Specifically, exception would be taken with regard to
6 his conclusions on solids build-up, effects on gas pro-
7 duction, and air requirements.
8 Considering the Gary experiment as a whole,
9 it is believed that a misjudgment was made in apparently
10 pre-supposing that certain modifications in process would
u be necessary in handling the ammonia still wastes. Because
12 certain modifications were made before any phenolic wastes
13 were received and continued throughout the experiment,
14 it has still not been proven whether or not the plant
15 could handle these wastes in normal operation. Nor has
16 the experiment shown the degree to which modifications,
17 if any, are needed.
18 Specifically, it might be noted that the
plant was evidently prepared for the still wastes by
2Q increasing the concentration of solids in the aeration
tanks substantially above normal. Had the plant been left
*i
in normal operation instead, then the quality of the effluent
*»*
In terms of phenol would have indicated if and when more
23
_. solids were needed and a determination of the amount needed
24
25
could then have been made. Samples taken through the
-------
1245
i aeration tanks would have demonstrated how and where the
2 phenol disappeared in the process. Also, it is quite
3 probable that 90 percent of the phenol was oxidized in
4 less than 30 rain.
5 As a matter of fact, the writer believes
6 that no build-up of solids was necessary; that the normal
7 concentration was ample to handle the additional wastes
8 satisfactorily. This view would seem to be supported by
9 the fact that, although the daily loadings of phenol varied
10 widely, the phenolic content of the effluent was consistently
n low. It seems to be supported, also, by the experience
12 reported on December 4, when the solids concentration
13 was out of balance. Solids were only 473 p.p.m., whereas
14 they were apparently being carried at an average of about
15 2,500 p.p.m.
16 On that day, it was noted that 1.7 Ibs. of
17 phenol, or about triple the usual amount, was discharged
18 in the effluent. On the face of it, this might appear to
19 be a tremendous drop in efficiency. However, if looked
2Q at from the viewpoint of phenol destroyed, it becomes
21 quite another matter. The average daily phenol input for
22 December was 432 Ibs. If December 4 can be assumed to have
23 been average, then the plant on that day removed 430.3
24 Ibs. of phenol, even though the mixed liquor solids were
25 less than one-fifth of their average concentration for
-------
1246
1 the month. In other words, the drop in efficiency was
2 actually very slight.
3 The results of the Gary experiment showed
4 a decrease in gas production during treatment of the still
5 wastes. However, this might have been due to garbage or
6 other factors, such as sulfates or detergents. Since it
7 is known that phenol undergoes complete destruction under
8 anaerobic conditions, there is no Justification for such
9 a conclusion in view of the lack of conclusive supporting
10 data.
n Mr. Mathews made an interesting statement
12 when he said that loadings of 35 Ibs. of B.O.D. per 1,000
13 cu. ft. of aeration capacity could be used. The writer
14 is of the same opinion, but the loading depends on the
15 rate at which the waste can be oxidized, in the experiment
16 at Gary, the period of highest loading in terms of pounds
17 of B.O.D. per 1,000 cu. ft. of aerator capacity was also
18 the period of highest suspended solids in the clarified
19 sewage. This is very significant and should not be falsely
20 interpreted to mean that an equivalent loading in true
21 solution could be oxidized, unless the rate of oxidation
22 was the same as the previous rate of removal. If the
23
loading were expressed as pounds of B.O.D. oxidized per
1,000 cu. ft. of aerator capacity per hour of aeration,
25 it would take into account the rate of oxidation. The
-------
day of so-called false loading mentioned by Mr. Mathews
2 was indeed a false loading, which was subsequently removed
3 to the digesters.
4 Mr. Mathews was very observing of his activate^
5 sludge process but experience has shown that a "poor-
6 looking" activated sludge is not necessarily an indication of
7 something wrong in the process. On the contrary, some of the
8 best results have been obtained with gray, drab sludges.
Also, cloudiness of the effluent could be the result of
0
over-aeration, as well as underaeration.
The air requirements of a sewage activated
sludge plant and an industrial wastes activated sludge
plant can vary considerably. This is evidenced by the
necessity of maintaining 3 p.p.m. of dissolved oxygen
at the end of aeration in the former, whereas In the latter,
Id
excellent operation and results can be obtained with less
lb
than 0.5 p.p.m. of dissolved oxygen. As a further compari-
son of activated sludge plant information, the following
Jg data are presented from operating experiences at Midland.
The activated sludge plant for treatment of phenolic wastes
uses 4,000,000 cu. ft. of air per day in the treatment of
15 to 20 m.g.d. of waste. This is equivalent to 0.20
22
to 0.25 cu. ft. of air per gallon of waste treated. With
23
a waste flow of 16 m.g.d., the aeration period is 80 min.
based on the total flow through the aerators. Rate of
25
-------
1248
1 sludge return is 35 percent. The suspended solids in the
2 mixed liquor are maintained between 1,000 and 1,500 p.p.m.
3 with a sludge index of 50. The plant oxidizes 4 Ibs. of
4 5-day B.O.D. per 1,000 cu. ft. of air. This is equivalent
5 to 67 Ibs. of 5-day B.O.D. per 1,000 cu. ft. of aeration
6 capacity, or 250 cu. ft. of air per pound of B.O.D.
7 satisfied. The aeration efficiency (pounds oxygen demand
8 satisfied per pound oxygen blown X 100) varies from 16 to
9 22 percent.
10 It should be emphasized that the above data
u are in terms of B.O.D. satisifed, instead of removed,
12 because the activated sludge process in sewage treatment
13 is a method of removing B.O.D., but not a process of
14 complete oxidation, as some of the load is transferred,
15 via the waste activated sludge, to the digesters for final
16 destruction.
17 The experiment at Gary demonstrated the
18 feasibility of treating ammonia still wastes by the acti-
19 vated sludge process. However, the conclusions drawn
20 by Mr. Mathews in regard to mixed liquor solids concentra-
21 tion and air requirement are open to question until defin-
22 itely proven. In view of the experiences at Midland,
23 the writer must disagree with him. However, much can be
24 learned from experiments in the laboratory, and it is
25 hoped that Mr. Mathews can continue his good work and that
all can share in his future findings.
###*******
-------
1249
l (At this point, oral presen-
tation continues.)
2
Unfortunately, at that time it was not
3
possible to work out an arrangement for this method of
4
disposal. Hopefully, we may eventually reach an agree-
5
ment.
6
Early last summer a survey of all Gary
7
Steel Works sewer outlets was begun to determine the
8
extent of contamination contributed by the various operating
9
areas. The survey indicated that the Coke Plant sewers
10
were one of the major contributors. As a result, an inten-
H
slve survey was then started of one of the Coke Plant
12
sewers with an outflow of approximately 45,000,000 gallons
13
per day and is still in progress, attempting to identify
14
the cause by extent of pollution from each facility or
15
process. Hopefully, by identification of the contaminant
16
from each facility and process, we then start to determine
17
remedial action.
18
Spent pickle liquor disposal: "Pickling"
19
(slide 27) in steel mill language refers to the immersion
20
in diluted sulphuric acid solution by which steel rids
21
itself of the oxide film which has formed during cool-
22
ing.
23
The reaction of acid and scale gradually
24
reduces the strength of the solution and this spent
25
-------
1250
l sulphate liquor presents the disposal problem.
2 Continuing research over many years has
3 yielded many processes which promised high efficiency
4 disposal but none has proven practical in full-scale
5 operation except the disposal of the liquor in wells drilled
6 to a depth far below the water table—the level of water
7 that may be drawn upon directly for community use or that
8 might find its way into adjacent streams.
9 With the approval of the Indiana Stream
10 Pollution Control Board, the deep well injection method
11 of waste sulphuric acid disposal has been adopted.
12 This drilling crew (slide 28) is winding
13 up a 43-day water conservation assignment. They have Just
14 completed a 7-inch well 4,000 feet down into the Mt. Simon
15 Sandstone Strata which will absorb the plant's spent
16 sulphuric acid wastes.
17 This solution to the stubborn spent pickle
19 liquor disposal problem was developed after geological
19 studies established that deep well injection in the Mt.
20 Simon strata would not impair the quality of ground or
21 surface water.
22 Our engineering people worked closely with
23 Indiana's Stream Pollution Control Board in the design
24 and installation of this deep injection well and, at the
25 Board's request, provided test boring samples through-
-------
1251
out the drilling. The well will be in operation, providing
complete disposal of spent pickle liquor, by late 1965
when lagooning will be discontinued.
Treatment of chemical wastes: Waste segrega-
tion for maximum control efficiency is a basic guide
line of our over-all waste treatment program. A good
example is this (slide 29) drawing of a waste acid treat-
8 ment plant. It is nearlng the construction stage now
9 and will be operating by late 19&5.
10 This new treatment plant will neutralize
11 acid and caustic wastes from No. 5 and No. 6 tinning
12 lines and the nitric and fluoride wastes from the stainless
13 steel pickle lines. The widely varying acid wastes from
14 these processes have one common characteristic: All of
is them are effectively treated by lime neutralization.
16 In their own treatment, the caustic wastes will also be
17 useful in neutralization of the acids.
18 This plant, which will occupy a site adjacent
19 to our new deep injection well, was designed in close
20 coordination with the Indiana Stream Pollution Control
21 Board.
22 Sanitary waste treatment: The City of
23 Gary's Municipal Sanitary Waste Treatment Plant, which
24 treats the wastes of all U. S. Steel Gary facilities,
2s except the Universal Atlas Cement Plant which provides
-------
1252
1 its own treatment, illustrates our community wide approach
2 to water conservation.
3 Every resident of the Gary district, of
4 course, has a stake in this treatment plant. We're
5 reminded of our personal interest when the bill arrives.
6 We incorporate Gary's treatment plant as
7 part of U. S. Steel's treatment story because we have
8 three important links to this modern plant. First, as
9 a major taxpayer, we shared in its construction costs.
10 Second, between 1948 and 1952, we constructed
11 separate sewer lines from our facilities to the treat-
12 ment plant, segregating sanitary wastes from both storm
13 and process waters. Our investment in this arrangement
14 of our intricate sewer line complex involves a civic
15 benefit by preventing storm water from flooding the
16 treatment plant.
17 Interest No. 3: As users of the plant,
18 we pay a significant part of its operating costs.
19 Our community-wise approach to water con-
20 servation is working, beyond question, to the benefit of
21 everyone in Gary.
22 We have presented this rather comprehensive
23 review of industrial waste practices at our Gary plants
24 in the hope that as conferees, you will gain a better
25 understanding of the problems and the type of things we
-------
1253
i have done to solve them. As I have indicated, all the
2 facilities that have been constructed in recent years in
3 our Gary plants have very efficient water treatment controls
4 installed as a matter of routine. This has been done
5 not only to comply with the requirements of the Indiana
6 Stream Pollution Control Board, but also in compliance
7 with the Nationwide policy of U. S. Steel to provide
8 adequate waste treatment on new installations.
9 As I am sure the conferees are well aware,
10 the cost of installation of waste treatment facilities
n in an industrial plant, like those in the steel industry,
12 can be very high—particularly when it is necessary to
13 install equipment on facilities that have been built
14 a number of years in the past.
is In recent years, the Indiana Stream Pollution
16 Control Board has Intensified its program to have water
17 treatment facilities installed at all industrial
18 locations and they have put themselves on record that they
jg expect a rapid acceleration in the development of such
20 facilities in the years ahead. U. S. Steel, like all
21 industry, has accepted the program of the Indiana Board
22 in the spirit in which it has been formulated, we believe
23 that they are qualified by knowledge and experience of
24 industrial practices in their State to see that this pro-
25 gram is carried to its logical conclusion.
-------
l As I have indicated, treatment facilities
2 are not only costly to install and costly to operate,
3 but do not result in any increased production or advan-
4 tages. Some members of the Indiana legislature have recog-
5 nized this fact and are promoting legislation which
6 would provide for exemption from certain state taxes in
7 cases where facilities used for water treatment purposes
8 are installed.
9 I have appreciated this opportunity to
10 discuss with you the industrial waste control practices
11 of U. S. Steel at its northwestern Indiana plants. The
12 interest that you have taken in my remarks is deeply
13 appreciated. I hope that what I have said has been help-
14 ful to you as you seek to determine the size and scope
15 of any interstate water problems which may exist in
16 the Calumet area.
17 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you, Mr. Howell.
18 Are there any comments or questions?
19 MR. POSTON: I would like to ask Mr. Howell if he
2o intends to make a statement at a later date concerning
21 the Southworks Plant of United States Steel. Is this
22 anticipated?
23 MR. HOWELL: I am prepared to do that if requested.
24 MR. POSTON: I see.
25 MR. KLASSEN: I was interested in a couple of points
-------
1255
l Mr. Howell; principally it centers around your pickle
2 liquor problem.
3 Do I understand that all your pickle will
4 be discharged to this disposal well by 1965?
6 MR. HOWELL: Yes, sir, from the Gary facilities.
6 MR. KLASSEN: And the next two may be more for
7 personal information.
8 The newer process of descaling is mechanical
g descaling, is that it?
10 MR. HOWELL: Descaling and high pressure water
n separation. Yes, sir.
12 MR. KLASSEN: Yes, and this scale then will be
13 handled in the normal settling sedimentation?
14 MR. HOWELL: Yes.
15 MR. KLASSEN: Out of Just—Another out of personal
16 interest. I have seen what you successfully did at one
17 of your Illinois plants on pickle liquor to protect the
18 lake in Waukegan and it is quite a novel process.
19 I am wondering why this wasn't applied
20 here. Was this a cheaper method, a better method?
21 Wasn't your waste at northern Indiana amenable to the
22 same process?
23 MR. HOWELL: The answer to that, Mr. Klassen, is the
24 Waukegan facilities generate something less than 20 percent
25 of the amount of pickle liquor generated at Gary,
-------
1256
l and it would not be practical to use that solution at
2 Gary.
3 MR. KLASSEN: Also, getting into the area of money,
4 I was interested because we work with a number of Atomic
Energy installations and know the high percentage of
6 waste costs.
7 Have you Just a round, rough figure of
8 what percentage of the capital investments in the City
9 of Gary works has gone into waste treatment?
10 I know these figures don't mean much, but
n I mean in percentages, is it 1, 2, 3?
12 MR. HOWELL: I am sorry, sir, I can't answer that.
13 I don't know.
J4 MR. KLASSEN: One last question.
This is an observation. I was particularly
interested in, I think it was the second very fine picture
17 you had here of your new works and I was particularly
interested in the tall derrick and this boom that extended
lo
way up into the sky.
20 I wondered whether I detected a piece of
pie on the end of it?
22 (Laughter.)
„ MR. HOWELL: That is possible.
23
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Any more comments or questions?
MR. LANE: Mr. Chesrow.
-------
1257
1 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Colonel Chesrow.
2 MR. CHESROW: Yes, please.
3 You referred to all that United States
4 Steel has been doing in contributing to the economy of
5 the country, rails, bridges, skyscrapers.
6 Those are fine. I don't think you are
7 devoting, and it was brought out as you were asked what
8 percentages go into Just plain people that make all this
9 possible. We've got to give due consideration to the
10 time off that these people have. Now, it's been borne
n out that we are getting pollution into the lake and we
12 are getting it into Illinois.
13 The beaches in Indiana and the beaches
14 on our South Side of Chicago are closed due definitely
is to polluted water.
16 Now, the statement is a very, very fine
17 one; but the problems of getting rid of the actual
19 polluted material — you have a dredge in the Grand Calumet
19 to remove this blast furnace flue dust that you speak of,
20 that's fine.
21 Now, a good percentage of that is coming
22 down into, as a pollutant, into our Lake Michigan.
23 Wouldn't it be possible to set up a
24 sediment basin and avoid that flowing down the Grand
25 Calumet and avoiding this so-called derrick that you have
-------
1258
1 permanently set up there to remove all of this?
2 MR. HOWELL: I think I brought out in my statement,
3 sir, that my report on flue dust recovery is not reported
4 as the final action. This, we are studying.
5 MR. CHESROW: Well, you are devoting, again you
6 are making such an extensive study on development, in
7 enlarging your plant facilities, I think more time
8 and effort should be given to enlarging your pollution pro-
9 blem facilities.
10 MR. HOWELL: Well, sir, you made the statement that
n a large percentage of this flue dust flows down the Grand
12 Calumet some 12 to 14 miles and then north and gets into
13 the lake.
14 I don't agree with that. I think in years
15 past this was partially true. In recent years, the Army
16 Engineers, I think, have determined that very little
17 of this flue dust gets into the Indiana Harbor Ship Canal
18 from the Gary facilities.
19 MR. CHESROW: Well, in your Indiana book you dls-
20 charge indirectly into Lake Michigan; process waste
21 waters are discharged into the Grand Calumet.
22 Benzol condensates are discharged to the
23 River.
24 Is any processing done prior to their
25 going into the Grand Calumet?
-------
1259
I MR. HOWELL: Definitely, my report covered this.
2 MR. CHESROW: But the Indiana book here, Indiana
3 Stream Pollution Control book does not qualify the state-
4 ment.
5 I am reading from this book, "Benzol
6 condensates are discharged to the river."
7 "Untreated Waste waters to the Grand
8 Calumet River."
9 MR. HOWELL: The facts are, sir, when each facility
10 was installed at Gary by United States Steel, entirely
n adequate controls were installed at that time for the
12 production loads that we experienced at that time. And
13 in accordance with the technology at that time.
14 I stated that the facilities in all cases
15 are not adequate today and that our production increases—
!6 Or our waste treatment control have failed to keep pace
n with our production Increases.
18 MR. CHESROW: Well, thank you.
19 Yes, I was going to—You answered ay next
20 question by going at this in reverse and you have answered
21 that very well.
22 One other question—What do you consider
23 unreasonable pollution?
24 Here in your statement on page 6 it says,
25 "The Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board has set forth
-------
1260
I on September 6, 1963, by Mr. Blucher Poole, the Board's
2 Executive Secretary: 1. Unreasonable pollution be
3 abated as soon as possible."
4 Is there a set standard for what is con-
5 sidered reasonable and what is considered unreasonable?
6 MR. HOWELL: Well, certainly that is not my language.
7 I didn't make that statement.
8 I am quoting; you will have to ask somebody
9 else.
10 MR. CHESROW: But, the standard has been set for
u your corporation and your following the standard?
12 MR. HOWELL: I know of no such standard.
13 MR. CHESROW: Thank you.
14 CHAIRMAN STEIN: You have another question?
15 MR. CHESROW: I was going to ask if I could have a —
16 Would it be possible to get a copy of the standards set
J7 forth by Indiana as far as reasonable and unreasonable
.. pollution?
lo
19
MR. POOLE: I don't know if we have one, Colonel,
2Q as far as reasonable or unreasonable is concerned.
21 We got one simple standard which I would
22 be happy to send to you. I think in connection with
23 this, Just to clarify the air, that I think there is
24 still some unreasonable pollution coming from the Gary
25 works of United States Steel, Mr. Howell, oils —
-------
1261
1 MR. CHESROW: What Is reasonable? He is refering
2 to you, Mr. Poole, in all due respect to you —
3 MR. POOLE: I think reasonable, Colonel, is pollu-
4 tion that does not damage another beneficial water use.
5 In other words, I don't happen to sub-
6 scribe to the theory that you keep every drop out, but I
7 think you must keep out enough that you do not damage other
8 beneficial water use.
9 MR. CHESROW: Not to belabor the subject, but what
10 I am pointing out is that he does refer to the rule set
11 forth on September 6 of 1964 that are their guide lines.
12 No other questions.
13 MR. POSTON: I would like to ask Mr. Howell, if, in
14 connection with his pickle liquor well, would you have
15 stand-by treatment in the event that your well fails to
16 function?
17 MR. HOWELL: Yes, sir. We will have a second well
18 plus a lime neutralization plant.
19 MR. POSTON: I see. Those will be available. It is
20 similar to what inland proposed.
21 MR. HOWELL: Yes, sir.
22 MR. POSTON: Do you agree with the figures on waste
23 discharges in the Grand Calumet River as shown in the
24 Public Health Service report?
25 MR. HOWELL: Mr. Poston, we have no scientifically
-------
1262
l reliable data as to water analyses except on newer facili-
2 ties that I have shown on the slides.
3 MR. POSTON: Then, you wouldn't question the dis-
4 charges as posed in the Blue, February report of the
5 Public Health Service?
B MR. HOWELL: No, sir, I do not.
7 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Any further comments?
8 MR. POSTON: I don't think so.
9 MR. CHESROW: I have one.
10 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Yes, Colonel?
11 MR. CHESROW: Do the figures reported in our bible
12 here, the Blue Book, so-called Blue Book, 1,700 pounds
13 of cyanide per day. Is any effort made to recover,
14 treat or dissipate the cyanide?
15 MR. HOWELL: No, sir.
16 MR. CHESROW: Where does that 1,700 pounds per day
17 go, please?
18 MR. HOWELL: Goes to the river, of course.
19 MR. CHESROW: Grand Calumet?
20 MR. HOWELL: Yes, sir, it was found in the river by
21 the Public Health Service.
22 MR. CHESROW: I am wondering if this cyanide is a
23 contributing factor. The other day we heard about the
24 fish and birds on Lake Michigan.
25 Cyanide being the most deadly poison we
-------
1263
have, I wonder whether this is a contributing factor to
the poisoning of the loons and the birds and the ducks
A
that have been referred to in excess of 10,000. If so,
3
I am surprised that nothing is being done to abate the
amount of cyanide that goes into the river.
5
MR. HOWELL: As I said in my statement, we are
6
making an extensive survey at the moment and we are
studying this problem.
8
MR. CHESROW: But, you still proceed to build
9
12
13
lo
16
18
19
20
«1
22
23
bigger and better plants to roll out more steel to build
higher skyscrapers but this affects the little man, the
man on the street, and that's who we are interested in.
I thought that the purpose of this session
was to protect the people and it is in that interest that
I am directing my questions and especially to the chemicals
that are being dumped into our waters.
These figures are correct, you accept them
as being correct?
MR. HOWELL: I am not in a position to comment on
the Public Health Service report, since we have no know-
ledge as to the technics of sampling, duration, location,
method of analysis, et cetera.
MR. CHESROW: They may have been received from some-
body at your organization, your engineers and your chemists.
I don't think these were picked up —
-------
1264
1 MR. HOWELL: No, sir, the Public Health Service got
2 these figures themselves.
3 MR. CHESROW: Well, from somebody?
4 MR. HOWELL: From analysis of the river.
5 MR. CHESROW: Came up with the factor that you are
6 dumping 1,700 pounds of cyanide a day?
7 MR. HOWELL: That's a calculated figure based on
8 a sample taken at a bridge.
9 MR. CHESROW: Could it be more?
10 MR. HOWELL: It could be less, I am not in a position
11 to say.
12 MR. CHESROW: Thank you.
13 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Are there any further comments or
14 questions?
15 (No response.)
16 If not, Mr. Howell, thank you.
17 I want to commend you. It seems to me you
18 are the ideal type of witness for anyone.
19 I have never seen a combination of more
20 exalted rococo and industrial prose as was in your
21 statement and yet such plain answers to questions.
22 The combination is wonderful.
23 MR. KLASSEN: Mr. Chairman, this is a meeting for
24 the common people. Just use ordinary language, please.
25 MR. POOLE: American Oil Company, Mr. R. C. Mallatt,
-------
1265
is Director of the Technical Services. He will make the
presentation.
MR. MALLATT: Mr. Chairman, distinguished conferees,
ladies and gentlemen:
My name is Russell C. Mallatt. As Techni-
cal Service Superintendent at the Whiting, Indiana, re-
finery of the American Oil Company, I am here to present
a brief summary of our Company's program and facilities
9 for improving the quality of effluent water. My discussion
10 will cover both our Whiting refinery and the Calumet
n Nitrogen Products plant at Hammond, Indiana.
12 The principal points that I shall make
13 are two:
14 First, American Oil has demonstrated its
is interest in the purity of public water in practical ways.
16 In 19^8 we spent several million dollars on facilities
17 for the treatment of wastes in the effluent water at the
18 refinery, and in 1960 we spent more millions of dollars
19 on additional facilities for the same purpose. Beyond
20 that, we have spent considerable sums on research in the
21 complex problems of water quality control.
22 These were not investments made with any
23 hope of earning a profit on them. They were expenditures
24 made to protect the quality of Lake Michigan water.
25 Second, despite this spending of time and
-------
1266
money and energy, we are under no illusion that we have
completed our Job in this important area. We have plans
already in the works for further improvements, some of
4 which will be brought to realization within the current
5 year.
6 The need for improvement in the quality
of public water is obvious. We ask only that any proposal
for obtaining the needed improvement should be demonstrated
9 to be in the public interest and should be technically
10 and economically feasible.
11 Most of the research leading to the con-
12 struction of waste treatment facilities at each of our
13 several refineries has been carried out at Whiting. We
14 have found that effluent quality control is a complex
15 business, and technical and economic considerations
16 have resulted in the development of a unique solution
17 to the problems at each location.
18 At Whiting, we use the Bio-Flotation process,
19 which I shall describe in some detail after presenting
20 a brief summary of our present effluent treating facilities
21 and pertinent background information.
22 The American Oil Company refinery at Whiting,
23 Indiana, has a crude oil processing capacity of 207,000
24 barrels a day and produces a complete line of petroleum
25 products. Process and cooling water is pumped from
-------
1267
l Lake Michigan at a maximum rate of about 140 million gallons
2 a day and is returned to the lake after treatment.
3 Most of the water is used only for cool-
4 ing. Ninety to one hundred millions of gallons a day
5 are recirculated through cooling towers and reused. All
6 sanitary sewage is routec! to the Hammond sewage treatment
7 plant—none enters the lake in our effluents. I would,
8 of course, like to stress this point.
9 Process water is gravity settled in a large,
10 modern oil-water separator of API design and then routed
11 to the bio-flotation process for secondary treatment prior
12 to being returned to Lake Michigan. Cooling water is
13 handled in a separate collecting system and API oil-water
H separator.
15 Construction of the Whiting refinery began
16 in 1889. Until 1924, spent cooling water, process water,
17 and sanitary sewage from the refinery were handled in
18 a common collecting system and the combined effluent re-
19 ceived primary treatment. Thus, we have also had some
20 form of treatment.
21 In 1924 a separate collecting system for
22 cooling water was installed, and in 1934 the carrying
23 capacity of the process water collecting system was greatly
24 expanded. In connection with this expansion, a large new
25 oil-water separator of API design was constructed
-------
1268
1 to provide additional protection for Lake Michigan.
2 Water quality requirements had grown as
3 the crude running capacity of the refinery increased,
4 and the years 1941-43 saw appreciable further expansion
5 of the refinery to produce 100-octane aviation gasoline,
6 toluene, and other material vitally needed in the war
7 effort.
8 Despite war-time restrictions on manpower
9 and materials, we began work on a major expansion of
10 our waste handling facilities, developing these plans in
11 cooperation with the Indiana Board of Health, engineers
12 with whom we have always had the finest and most effective
13 working relationship.
u Engineering was completed and construction
is began as soon as the Government would permit use of materials
16 for such a project. Sixteen pumping stations and a good
17 many miles of collection systems were installed and on
18 December 13* 1948, a large, modern API oil-water separator,
19 consisting of 34 units and covering about 4 acres of ground,
20 was completed and placed in operation. The new separator
21 handled process water, the former separator was placed
22 in spent cooling water service and all sanitary sewage
23 was routed to the Hammond sewage treatment plant. This
24 is the facility mentioned earlier that was constructed
25 in 1948.
-------
1269
i With the startup of the new facilities,
2 we undertook on our own initiative a comprehensive review
3 of all operations within the refinery, as part of a con-
4 tinuing good-housekeeping program. Sixteen monitoring
5 stations were provided as a means of exercising control
6 over the quality of process and cooling water discharged
7 to the collecting systems within the refinery.
8 These monitoring stations are automatic.
9 Permanent monitoring stations were also
10 installed on the two effluent streams, process and cooling
n water, being discharged to Lake Michigan. Equipment at
12 these stations collect composite samples over a 24-hour
13 period and analysis of the samples provides a measure
14 of the quality of our effluents.
15 For many years a separate Reclamation
16 Department has operated the conservation and waste treat-
17 ment facilities within the refinery and has assisted
18 other departments in improving the quality of both air
lg and water. About 19^9 management instituted a long-range
20 research program aimed at evaluating processes for secondary
21 water treatment at Whiting and other locations.
22 Prom 1950 to 1955, our technical service
23 staff studied the applicability of many conventional
24 treatment methods to the further purification of refinery
25 effluents. These studies included laboratory and pilot
-------
1270
1 plant work, some on a very large scale, on chemical
2 flocculation, trickling filters, activated sludge, bio-
3 logical treatment in oxidation ponds, chlorination, ozoni-
4 zation, and other processes. All of these processes were
5 found to have definite limitations for use at Whiting.
6 However, as an outgrowth of this extensive
7 research, we developed the essentially new process, which
8 we call bio-flotation. This process, which we have
9 protected by patents, embodies the principles of sedi-
10 mentation, biological oxidation, and air flotation.
n The process features a novel means of aerating water by
12 means of rotating water wheels or brushes.
13 The air is impelled into the water as a
u myriad of fine bubbles, which provides maximum surface
15 area and efficient oxygen transfer. The new secondary
16 treatment facilities, placed in operation at Whiting in
17 I960, are of this type. These are the facilities mentioned
19 earlier which were constructed in I960.
19 Our present lakefront treatment facilities
20 are shown in Figure 1—Are shown in the first slide,
21 if we may have it, please.
22 Spent process water ic carried from the
23 refinery through a large underground collecting system
24 and enters the modern oil-water separator, shown in the
25 center of the figure, through a bar-screen located at point
-------
1271
l "A". The purpose of the bar screen is to remove any
2 large pieces of solids which may have entered the
3 collecting system.
4 The water is then distributed among the
5 34 compartments of the oil-water separator. Each compart-
6 ment consists of a primary and secondary stage and each stage
7 provides almost two hours of retention time at present
8 flow rates. The compartments are equipped with
9 mechanical skimmers or flight scrapers to recover the
10 separated oil from the surface and remove separated solids
11 from the floor of the compartments.
12 The oil and water removed from the surface
13 is transferred to a large rectangular basin shown between
14 the parallel roadways near the center of the separator.
15 From this collecting basin, oil and emul-
16 sions are transferred to four emulsion treating tanks
17 shown at the right-center. Oil from emulsion treating is
18 returned to the refinery; the water is returned to the
19 separator. The sludge, which is removed from the bottom
20 of the separator compartments, is transferred to the
21 vertical tank at the left end of the separator and processed
22 through a centrifuge to recover occluded oil and water.
23 Effluent from the oil-water separator is
24 lifted by.huge pumps located in the two-story building
25 adjacent to the separator and discharged into the reinforced
-------
1272
i concrete-walled channel, which carries it to the bio-
2 flotation basin shown in the lower left portion of the
3 picture.
4 Water enters the upper right hand compart-
5 ment through a distribution baffle. The first compart-
6 ment provides about three hours of additional gravity
7 settling. Facilities are available for the periodic re-
8 moval of oil from the surface of this first presettling
9 compartment of the bio-unit. The water passes from
10 the presettling compartment over control weirs and through
11 the mechanical aeration devices located at B, C, D
12 and E. The retention time in each of the compartments
13 following the aeratixm stages is about three hours.
14 Biological oxidation, additional sedi-
15 mentation, and air flotation of biological solids and
16 oil occurs in each aerated basin.
17 The surface skimmings are removed by a
18 patented skimming device at point E. The treated effluent
19 passes over a level control weir at point F, through
20 the outfall channel, and enters the lake at a location
21 not shown on the photograph.
22 Although the performance of both the pri-
23 mary and secondary treatment facilities has fully met
24 our expectations, we recognize that the quality of our
25 process water effluent can be further improved. Mere
-------
1273
l expansion of the facilities is not the answer, however,
2 We believe that the best way to achieve further quality
3 improvement is to reduce the load on and improve the1
4 performance of these facilities.
5 The refinery has undergone rapid moderni-
6 zation in the last ten years. Despite an increase in
7 the capacity of the refinery, maximum total water pumped
8 from the lake for use in the refinery has been reduced
g from 260 million gallons a day in the early 1950's to
10 140 million gallons a day in 1964. Retirement of obsolescent
n process units has brought about a significant reduction
12 in the amount of oil and other contaminants entering
13 the refinery collecting system.
14 Within the next 30 days, we expect to bring
15 on-streara a modern hydrofining unit, which will permit us
16 to retire the acid and clay treating section of a lubrl-
17 eating oil dewaxlng plant. This modernization step will
18 eliminate a source of finely divided solids which have
}g tended to interfere with operating our effluent quality
2Q improvement facilities at peak efficiency.
21 During the coming year, we plan to install
22 additional aeration equipment in one or more compart-
23 ments of the bio-flotation basin on an experimental basis.
24 If beneficial results are obtained, these facilities will
25 be made permanent.
-------
l We are also watching with interest the
2 success of neighboring companies in the use of deep wells
3 for the disposal of small-volume, concentrated wastes.
4 Our own studies show that the geology of the area is
5 highly favorable, and we are giving serious consideration
6 to drilling a 5000 ft. deep well for this purpose. A
7 few carefully selected wastes which have a high oxygen
8 demand would be pumped down the well. This would reduce
9 the load on our present treating facilities and improve
10 the quality of water entering the lake.
ll Let's turn now to a very brief discussion
12 of Calumet Nitrogen Corporation facilities.
13 It is pertinent to point out that the plant
u began operations in 1956 as a joint project of Standard
15 Oil Company (lndl£.na) and Sinclair Refining Company.
16 The facilities are operated by personnel from American
17 Oil's Whiting Refinery.
18 At present, the plant produces a maximum
19 of 450 tons per day of ammonia, a part of which is con-
2o verted to nitric acid for subsequent use in the manufacture
21 of ammonium nitrate solutions, which are in turn
22 blended with ammonia and urea to produce a variety of
23 agricultural chemicals. To provide a permanent solution
24 to the problem, an agreement was worked out with the
25 City of Hammond to send the most contaminated wastes to
-------
i the municipal sewage plant for treatment.
2 A tie-in to the Hammond sewer system was
3 completed in July 1964, and contaminants entering
4 the Indiana Harbor Ship Canal from the Calumet Nitrogen
5 Corporation plant have been greatly reduced. The data
B in Table VI-5c of the February 19^5, Public Health
7 Service report on Illinois-Indiana water pollution were,
8 as the report itself says, taken before this connection
9 to the Hammond sanitary sewage system.
10 These, then, are the two points that I
H said at the outset I would make: First, American Oil
12 has demonstrated by major expenditures on research and
13 facilities and considerable success in results, its practl-
14 cal concern with Improving the quality of public water.
is Second, we recognize that there is room for further im-
16 provement in our facilities and operations, and we are
17 studying steps to Insure that improvement.
18 We hope that future water quality goals
19 will be established on a technically sound and reasonable
20 basis.
21 Some questions in this area still need
22 answers: What, for example, are the proper and practical
23 quality requirements for the different uses of water? What
24 are reasonable water-quality goals for Lake Michigan?
25 Where will they be applied?
-------
1276
2 Through active participation in the work
2 of the Technical Committee of the Great Lakes-Illinois
3 River Basin Project, our company has tried to contri-
4 bute to the answers to these and other pertinent questions,
. Unfortunately, this Important work is not
O
6 yet completed, and I for one would hope that no prect-
7 pitate action will be taken before the results of
0 this careful study are in and can be fully evaluated.
O
. Now, although the foregoing concludes
9
my formal remarks, I would like to address a few com-
ments to the recommendations in Section 9 of the Public
Health Service report that pertains to industry.
Recommendation #1 pertains to further
lo
exclusion or treatment of wastes by industrial plants.
Ours is a continuing program and the
ID
additional steps which we have in progress and under
16
study are consistent with meeting the objectives of
this recommendation.
18
Recommendation #2 pertains to permanent
*y
programs of sampling plus submitting effluent quality
20
reports to the appropriate State agencies.
21
We have been doing essentially this for
««
the past 18 years.
23
Recommendation #3 pertains to appropriate
24
state or local agencies establishing a system for
25
-------
1277
monitoring the quality of public waters at strategic points,
In the past we have made our own limited
surveys of the quality of lake waters and would be glad
to cooperate with the Stream Pollution Control Board in
any program that may be deemed appropriate.
In conclusion, I would like to show five
or six colored slides to give you still a better under-
8 standing of the scope of our operations.
9 This is a general view of one section of
10 the refinery showing its proximity to Lake Michigan.
11 The units which you see in the foreground are cracking
12 units essential for the production of gasoline and 28
13 associated vapor-recovery units, the cooling towers from
14 which the water vapor is rising are, of course, an
15 essential part of our water reuse program.
16 I think I probably should get in a plug
17 for our effective air pollution control also. In this
18 slide you will notice the air over the refinery is
19 quite clean.
20 Can we have the next slide, please?
21 This is an aerial view of our waste treat-
22 ment facilities. It is quite similar to the one you
23 saw presented by the Public Health Service on the first
24 day.
25 Near the top of the slide is the API
-------
1278
l separator which is used for processing our cooling water.
2 This slide does show something that the
3 previous one did not; namely, the bay into which our
4 effluent discharges.
5 You will note here there is no free-
e floating oil to create an unsightly appearance either
7 in this slide or the one shown by the Public Health
9 Service on Tuesday.
9 I am rather proud of the appearance of
10 our refinery effluent.
n May we have the next slide, please?
12 This is a close-up view of one end of the
13 biological treatment facilities and shows in some detail
14 the location of three or four areas of aeration equipment
15 and shows the effervescent—The water inside the pond is
16 considerably deeper than outside.
17 You notice the lightening in color as it
18 goes through the treatment process.
19 Next slide.
20 This is a close up view showing some de-
21 tail on the aeration devices which are employed. This
22 equipment is capable of putting in of the order of 40
23 pounds of oxygen per linear foot per day, we got 720
24 linear feet of the things so you can see we are putting
25 in a tremendous amount of oxygen for purification purpose.
-------
1279
l Next slide.
2 This is the final slide and I inserted it
3 simply to give you a better feel for the size of these
4 facilities. You are looking now at the presettling com-
5 partment with the water-entry canal coming in from the
S lower right-hand side. The gray and purple boxes at
7 the end are electrical control equipment for the pumps,
8 sumps, and other equipment associated with the opera-
9 tion.
10 I believe that is all of the slides.
U Now, in addition to the facilities which
12 I have discussed and shown, we, of course, do carry out a
13 number of additional, highly beneficial, programs and
14 good housekeeping practices which have been mentioned by
15 others but not named specifically in my report.
16 For example, we also seal most of our
17 spent caustics and we return all our spent acids and
18 acid sludges to the processor for recovery.
19 We have ballast water handling facilities
20 and separators in our dock area and so on. These are
21 actually not named in the report but we have them.
22 Mr. Chairman, this concludes my presenta-
23 tion unless there are questions.
24 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you. Are there any comments
25 or questions?
-------
AMERICAN OIL COMPANY
1280
-------
1281
1 MB. KLASSEN: I wanted to ask Mr. Mallatt when,
2 specifically referring to Calumet Nitrogen on page 19*
3 I think of the Indiana report, it indicated that your
4 waste waters from the American plant plus your cooling
5 water blow-down is discharged to a separation basin.
6 Is this the waste that now goes to
7 Hammond?
8 MR. MALLATT: Yes, the bulk of that does now go to
9 Hammond.
10 MR. KLASSEN: In other words, the waste from the
il ammonia plant plus your cooling tower blow-down goes to
12 the Hammond area?
13 MR. MALLATT: Mr. Klassen, what we have done there
14 is to divert to Hammond the blow-down waters that contain
15 the predominant amount of ammonia nitrogen and total nl-
16 trogen alone. They were shown in that tabulation.
17 Actually, these amounts have been reduced
18 about 80 percent, they are 20 percent of previous
19 values and we have additional plans which will make
20 another 3C percent reduction.
21 MR. CHESROW: What is the oil concentration at the
22 effluent of the bio-flotation process?
23 MR. MALLATT: You are talking about concentrations
24 of oil, you have to define your analytical—In order that
25 we are talking on a common basis with the Public Health
-------
1282
Service report and use a pH method which is the one used
2 by the Public Health Service report.
. The oil concentration on a total average
4 basis would be of the order of 10 to 15 parts. If you
are talking on a few parts per million of oil, this is
O
e not in any sense floating oil but it will impart at most
b
a slight florescence to the water. The figures I quoted
are combined, which is consistent with the—
8
MR. CHESROW: Parts per million would be 10?
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Ten to 15.
MR. CHESROW: One other question.
MR. MALLATT: Somewhat higher on the process water,
some lower on the cooling, the cooling water is probably
13
four to five parts per million.
14
MR. CHESROW: You have done a fine Job in reducing
10
the water from 260 million gallons per day down to 140.
16
I was wondering if any thought had been
given to recirculation?
18
MR. MALLATT: We are recirculating about 100 million
gallons through cooling towers which were shown in one
20
of the slides.
21
MR. CHESROW: How about the balance, does that go—
That goes into Lake Michigan?
23
MR. MALLATT: That is right.
24
MR. CHESROW: I'm Just wondering.
-------
1283
1 MR. MALLATT: The amount of so-called contaminants
2 in our cooling effluent are so very low they do not
3 constitute -a problem.
4 I mentioned in our cooling tower, our oil
concentrations are probably of the order of four to five
parts per million by the APH.
Our suspended solids are also very low and
when you have this situation, it certainly is not Justi-
fiable to practice additional recirculation.
10 Your cooling exchangers, so on, in the
refinery are designed for water at certain temperatures;
12 in connection with new units we do give consideration to
13 the relative merits of additional cooling.
14 MR. CHESROW: Thank you, my thought was to try to
15 prevent even that effluent from going to Lake Michigan.
16 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Are there any further comments?
17 MR. POSTON: Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask
Mr. Mallatt whether he disagrees with the figures of
19 the amounts of waste discharged as shown in the Public
Health Service report of February that applied to the
21 American Oil Company,
22 I did note in one place he indicated a
23 change.
24 I mean, at the time this test was made,
25 these figures compared with your results.
-------
1284
l MR. MALLATT: I would have no reason for taking
2 exception to these dat% Mr. Poston. I think they quite
3 probably could have been the values on the sampling day
4 involved.
5 In other words, they fall within the
6 normal range of probability for the quality of our
7 effluent.
8 All right.
g MR. POSTON: Now, one other question that I would
10 like to ask concerns the taste and odor problem that is
ll occasioned at the South District Treatment Plant of the
12 Chicago Water Department. They indicate that one of
13 their greatest problems comes from hydrocarbon type
14 odors, and I wondered whether—I realize that there are
15 other refineries and other sources for this, but, I
18 wondered whether you would care to comment on this as
17 to what this might consist of, how this might be traced
18 a little better to the actual sources.
19 This has been a very difficult problem
20 from the standpoint that nobody, no one knows what it is
21 and the analytical procedures for collecting the small
22 amounts involved are also difficult.
23 I wondered if you would care to comment
24 on that.
25 MR. MALLATT: I believe that the Public Health
-------
1285
1 Service presentations shows very clearly that the bulk
2 of the oil does not come from oil refineries.
3 Therefore, I think it is a little unfor-
4 tunate to refer to this as refinery type odor.
5 Oil is oil regardless of the source.
6 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Are there any further comments
7 or questions?
8 You know, there is one thing I wondered
9 about.
10 You said at American Oil, before you put
n that effluent in Lake Michigan, do you run that through
12 a "final filter"
13 MR. MALLATT: I have to confess we do not.
14 (Laughter.)
15 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you.
16 MR. POOLE: Next is American Maize-Products and
17 Dr. G. H. Mclntosh, who is Chief Chemist for the Company.
18 He is going to make their presentation.
I9 DR. MCINTOSH: Mr. Chairman, members, and conferees,
20 ladies and gentlemen:
21 My name is George H. Mclntosh. I am
22 Chief Chemist-Quality Control of the American Maize-
23 Products Company, Hammond (Roby), Indiana, on whose
24 behalf I am speaking today.
25 American Maize-Products Company is a
-------
1286
i manufacturer of starches and syrups, and we derive these
2 principal products from corn as the raw material. Our
3 plant was built in 1907, and is located in Hammond,
4 Indiana, although our post office address is Roby.
5 The plant is located approximately 2,000
6 ft. from the south shore of Lake Michigan.
7 We have a 36 inch fresh water Intake
9 2,200 ft. off-shore and a 36 inch outfall back into the
9 lake about 800 ft. off-shore. We pump an average of
10 11 million gallons of water from the lake each day of
n operation, and return to the lake as cooking water an
12 average of 9 million gallons. The 2 million gallons
13 that are retained are treated in our water treatment de-
14 partment and are used by our power department, in cer-
15 tain stages of our process.
16 The process that we employ to derive starch
17 from corn and to isolate the other components in the
18 kernel is called the wet milling process, and this process
19 is typical of what is sometimes termed a "bottled-up"
20 system.
21 The essential components of the kernel of
22 corn are the germ, which contains the oil, the gluten,
23 starch and fiber. Relatively large volumes of water
24 are used in the process, first to steep the corn, which
25 in turn softens it and facilitates the separation of
-------
128?
l the kernel's components; second, to slurry the material
2 after grinding and thus to have the water used as a
3 vehicle for transporting the material through the various
4 stages of process; third, as cooling water; and fourth,
5 for manufacture of steam by the power department.
6 The primary objective of our entire process
7 is to isolate the starch. The germ, gluten, and fiber
g are considered by-products, although they have valuable
9 uses.
10 The starch, which comprises about 76 percent
n of the corn kernel on the dry solids basis, is washed
12 free of solubles and is either processed to dry starch
13 products, or converted to corn syrups. Fresh water
14 enters the system only for washing the starch in the final
15 stage, and about 10 gallons of water is used in this way
16 for each bushel of corn ground.
17 A plant processing 50,000 bushels of corn
lg per day will produce about 500,000 gallons of process
19 waters which have to be concentrated by evaporation.
20 The raw water required to condense the vapors in the
21 evaporation will approach 3 to 4 million gallons per day.
22 Another 4 to 6 million gallons of raw
23 water is required in the concentration of the corn syrup.
24 It is in the concentration of these liquors that traces
25
of the product are carried to the condensing or cooling
-------
1288
l waters.
2 At this point I would like to touch on some
3 of the highlights in our experience with waste control.
4 In 1940 sanitary sewage facilities were made available
5 to the plant by the Hammond Sanitary District, and from
6 that time on—about 25 years, now—no sanitary sewage
7 has been included in the waters that we have returned
8 to Lake Michigan.
9 In 1944, we launched an extensive waste
10 abatement program that spanned a six year period, and which
11 incorporated these major improvements in our in-plant
12 systems and methods:
13 The isolation of all waste-bearing waters;
14 The reuse of process waters;
15 The recovery of all solids possible by
16 tightening up of losses at their source.
17 This phase of our over-all program was
18 completed in 1950, at a cost approaching 1 million dollars,
19 and with the result that our daily plant loadings in the
20 cooling waters to Lake Michigan were reduced approximately
21 92 percent.
22 In 1952, we started a plant modernization
23 and expansion program that essentially converted our
24 operations from a batch type process to a continuous
25 stream process. An outgrowth of this operational transl-
-------
1289
i tion was the development of more waste waters than could
2 be handled by the waste abatement program that we had
3 Just completed about a year or two before.
4 Extensive research was carried out to de-
5 termine the best way to handle these waters. We ultimately
6 evolved an idea that led to the creation of an original
7 two-stage lagoon system on our property for the bacterio-
8 logical reduction of much of our industrial wastes. Ten
9 acres in size, it consists of an anaerobic first section
10 covered with Syrofoam Insulation followed by an aerobic
ll second section employing mechanical aeration. The Styro-
12 foam insulation on the anaerobic section raised the
13 average yearly efficiency of the system from 68 percent
14 overall to 88 percent overall.
is I will not go into detail on this aspect
16 of our experiences because our exhibits, which I will
17 submit at the conclusion, will contain detailed descriptions
18 of the lagoon operations.
19 The latest phase of our plant modernization
20 program was completed in June 1964, with the virtual
21 completion of an electronically controlled continuous
22 conversion syrup refinery. Since 1952, we have spent more
23 than $20 million on plant modernization of which $700,000
24 went directly for waste abatement. This large capital
25 investment has had a most beneficial effect on our
-------
1290
1 waste control efforts. Furthermore, during this same
2 period, the plant capacity has been increased 40 percent.
3 The volume of water required has not increased
4 due to the conservation program we have followed.
5 In connection with our day to day efforts
6 in waste abatement, we have a modern laboratory, with
7 a chemist and two senior technicians assigned full time
8 to the Industrial Waste Program. In addition, we have
g one man assigned full time to "in-plant dontrol" of
1Q product losses.
n Chemical analyses are made each day, seven
days a week, of the cooling waters returned to Lake
Michigan, and a bacteriological analysis is made five
lo
days per week. The volume of these waters is accurately
measured and recorded, the temperature is recorded, and
15
the waters sampled by a continuous sampler. The cooling
16
waters we return to Lake Michigan are chlorinated and
contain absolutely no sanitary sewage.
18
in addition to this outfall sampling, we
iy
have 33 sampling stations throughout the process, 14
20
of which are on the cooling water lines connected to
«i.
the Lake Michigan outfall. These stations have contin-
22
uous samplers, and the principal ones have volume recorders,
23
The samples are collected at eight hour intervals, and
24
are analysed daily, seven days per week. The annual
25
-------
1291
operating costs for Industrial Waste Control is now
approximately $130,000 per year.
Our 1965 Industrial Waste Control Program
calls for several corrective measures that should make
5 for considerably more improvement. The program calls
for a surface condenser for a large evaporator, a clari-
D
7 fler for the waters going to the lagoon, the increasing
of the lagoon's capacity, and the diverting to the lagoon
_8
of some condensates from the cooling waters now going to Lake
9
Michigan. Thus, our continuing capital program
for waste abatement will total approximately $170,000
for this year 19^5 and we expect to reduce the reported
load in our cooling waters going to Lake Michigan by
13
50 percent or more.
14
From the very beginning of our waste abate-
ment program our policy has been to work closely with the
16
Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board and the Hammond
Sanitary District. Both of these agencies have received
18
monthly reports of our daily operations, and both agencies
have been very helpful to us in our work.
20
Our program for pollution control and water
conservation has been part of our operations for a long
AA
duration. Our management has had a deep-rooted and serious
23
interest in the problems connected with water conserva-
tion and the fostering of beneficial programs in the
-------
1292
l control of industrial waste. The program has never
2 taken on the character of a short-term expediency to
3 meet some fleeting problem, but rather has been established
4 deeply and permanently with us as a continuing and
5 essential phase of our over-all operations for today and
6 the days to come.
7 As evidence of the work we have done at
8 American Maize-Products Company in the field of waste
9 abatement, we submit the following publications as part
10 of this statement:
11 A reprint from INDUSTRIAL AND ENGINEERING
12 CHEMISTRY, Vol. 44, March 1952, entitled, "Corn Products
13 Manufacture." This reprint gives a detailed account of
14 the waste abatement program that was started in 1944 and
15 completed in 1950.
16 A reprint from the January 1964, issue
17 of GOOD PROCESSING Magazine entitled, "Year Round Lagoon
19 Operation." This reprint describes the lagoon operations
19 at American Maize-Products Company.
2o A brochure entitled, "Lagoon Treatment of
21 Corn wet Milling Wastes." It gives a detailed discussion
22 of the Anaerobic-Aerobic lagoon treatment system in
23 operation at American Maize-Products; also, much analytical
24 data and the costs of operations.
25 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Dr. Mclntosh, if it is agreeable
-------
1293
1 with you, these three will appear as exhibits and not part
2 of the transcript. The references will be there and since
3 this is a readily available published material I think
4 they can refer to it if they wish.
5 DR. MCINTOSH: Briefly, in summary:
6 Since 1940, twenty-five years ago, all
7 sanitary sewage has been sent to the Hammond Sanitary
8 District.
9 Between 1944 and 1950 we put into effect
10 a waste abatement program costing almost 1 million dol-
11 lars which reduced our loadings to Lake Michigan approxi-
12 mately 92 percent.
13 Since 1944 we have had an active research
14 program including a laboratory devoted solely to indus-
15 trial waste and water conservation.
16 Between 1952 and the present time we
17 have raised plant capacity 40 percent with no increase
18 in water demand.
19 We maintain a 365-day-per-year, around-
20 the-clock monitoring system on incoming, in-plant and
21 out-going waters.
2? All cooling waters returned to Lake Michigan
23 are chlorinated.
24 The annual operating cost for Industrial
25 Waste Control is now approximately $140,000 per year.
-------
1294
i Since 1940 our capital expenditures speci-
2 fically for waste abatement and control have totaled
3 1.7 million dollars and we expect our expenditure of
4 $170,000 this year, 1965, to reduce the loadings in our
5 cooling water going to Lake Michigan by 50 percent or
0 more.
7 Our management policy in this entire problem
8 has been and will continue to be one of full coopera-
9 tion with all agencies.
10 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you, Dr. Mclntosh.
jj Are there any comments or questions?
12 MR. KLASSEN: One on the percentages, Dr. Mclntosh.
13 You say reduce it by 50 percent. We are
14 getting more and more that we like to have some
15 actual figures and I say this because in the Indiana
16 presentation on page 25 it says, "The ultimate objective
17 of the company is to produce a plant effluent with a
18 .5 population equivalent per bushel of corn processed."
19 Was this correctly stated, would you
20 s*y?
21 DR. MCINTOSH: Yes, sir, that is the terminology
22 that has been used in the corn industry as population
loadings in terms of bushel of corn ground.
23
MR. KLASSEN: Population equivalent?
24
25
DR. MCINTOSH: Per bushel of corn ground in reference
-------
1295
to this we might say that this figure of 44,000, we al-
2 ready report our figures in pounds of B.O.D. and C.O.D.
3 and this 44,000 the report we accept as being very accurate.
4 MR. KLASSEN: The reason I bring this out is .5
population equivalent first of all, it's good to see
6 that you recognize population, the term population equi-
7 valent and also, the East Chicago and Hammond plants, I
0 believe are reducing their load there, 95 percent which
o
g gives them a .05 population equivalent.
._ Yours is.5 and theirs is .05 and I am
Just wondering about the objective of the American Maize
.„ as compared to what the cities are doing.
13 DR. MCINTOSH: Well, I better restate that.
14
Ours is as I say in the corn industry we
have reported it in terms of bushels of corn processed
10
16 and it's a five-tenths of a population equivalent per
bushel of corn.
18 Now, you want to go back to the pounds
of B.O.D., that 44,000 will represent about 7,400 pounds
of H-O_r>
20
21 We will reduce that, we hope over 50 percent
We are quite sure, we want to be a little conser-
vative.
23
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Any other further comments or
24
questions?
25
-------
1296
l (No response.)
2 If not, thank you very much.
3 Before we go on, there are one or two
4 announc ement s.
5 One, on Tuesday, I understand to avoid
6 involvement with the admission charge which might be
7 required for the boat show, it is suggested that you
8 enter through the north entrance which is up in that
9 direction, although I suspect we have had meetings
10 in conjunction with boat shows before, we suggest that
11 entrance at the time we are calling the meeting, to
12 avoid too much confusion.
13 However, if you do run into a problem, we
14 have a liaison man, Mr. Tom Keller.
15 Would you stand up, Tom?
!6 If you have any problem with the boat show
17 or get involved with them and want to be sorted
18 out and come to us, ask for Mr. Keller and he will handle
19 it. Sometimes it gets to be a very big operation.
20 MR. KELLER: May I remark?
2i In 214 we have an exhibit from the United
22 States Public Health Service.
23 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Now, we have several statements
24 which have been submitted for the record.
25 One is by Charles Sandor, Superintendent,
Department of Water Works, Hammond, Indiana. He will
-------
1297
put it in the record as if it were read.
MR. SANDOR: The City of Hammond, Indiana, owns,
maintains and operates a complete waterworks system.
The waterworks system includes a complete and modern
5 water filtration plant which employes the latest conven-
6 tional methods and equipment in water treatment. The
7 Hammond Water Department's obligation is to provide a
3 safe and satisfactory water to its patrons; to the towns
9 of Munster, Indiana; Highland, Indiana; Lansing, Illinois;
10 and to the Peoples Water Company of Black Oak, Indiana.
n A total of 75,000 people as well as many industries
12 depend wholly on the Hammond Water Department for its
13 water.
14 The Hammond Water Filtration Plant is
15 located on the south edge of Lake Michigan at Calumet
16 Avenue and Lake Front, Hammond, Indiana. The water
17 supply is taken from Lake Michigan. The three water
18 intakes which supply water to the filtration plant lie
19 within the basin formed by the southernmost end of Lake
20 Michigan.
The City of Hammond began operating the
22 waterworks in 1891. In the period from 1891 to the
23 1930's, the only treatment required to provide a safe and
24 satisfactory water was chlorination. In the early 1930's
25 the water often was unpalatable mainly due to pollution.
-------
1298
A water filtration plant was built and placed into opera-
tion in 1936. Although the degree of pollution in the
water supply was constantly increasing from 1936 to the
early 1950's, the water filtration plant was able to
provide a safe and excellent quality water for its consu-
6 mers.
7 Since the early 1950's there has been an
accelerated degradation of the quality of Hammond's raw
water supply. A definite pollution problem exists and
10 it is becoming more and more difficult to produce a safe
11 and satisfactory water. An analysis of the records of
12 the Hammond Water Filtration Plant indicates the severity
13 in the increase of pollution at Hammond's water source.
14 Pure water is practically tasteless and
15 odorless. However, when pollution is introduced into
16 the water, disagreeable odors and tastes in a water supply
17 result. The most common causes of disagreeable tastes
18 and odors result from (1) micro-organisms, either alive
19 or dead, (2) dissolved gases, (3) mineral substances, and
20 W Phenols and other tarry or oily wastes.
21 Hammond's raw water supply usually contains
22 a combination of causes for disagreeable tastes and odors
23 and very frequently there are two or more distinct types
24 of taste and odors in the raw water at the same time.
25 Very likely, the raw water that the Hammond Water Fll-
-------
1299
l tration Plant is forced to accept through its intakes
2 is second to the poorest in quality of any water treatment
3 plant using Lake Michigan water.
4 Let us take a look at the increasingly
5 poor quality of Hammond's raw water during the last
6 eleven years. A dramatic parameter to illustrate this
7 is the threshold number.
g The qualitative and quantitative determina-
g tion of odor adopted by the American Public Health Associa-
j0 tlon is the threshold number. This method is used by the
n Hammond Water Department. Generally speaking, the
12 higher the threshold number, the more pollution is present,
13 and the more intensive treatment and greater amount of
14 chemicals are required to produce a finished water which
J5 is both safe and satisfactory. Please bear in mind,
16 where Lake Michigan water is relatively pollution free,
17 the threshold number barely exceeds 3 or A.
18 Three charts pertaining to the duration
j of raw water odors have been prepared from the records
2Q of the Hammond Water Filtration Plant. Figure 1 pertains
to the duration in hours when the raw water had a thres-
21 (See
hold odor of thirty and over. This graph shows that: Page
1300)
23 The raw water in 1964 was by far the poorest
2 quality ever recorded by the Hammond Filtration Plant.
25
The duration in hours for the year 1964
-------
1300
-------
1301
amounted to 4,966 or 56-1/2 percent of the time;
2 The 1964 total is an increase of 98 percent
3 over the previous record year of poorest quality
4 water which was in 1963 when odors of 30 and over existed
5 2,5H hours;
6 The 1964 duration is 279 percent greater
7 than the yearly average for the preceding ten years.
0 Figure 2 pertains to the duration in hours
o
Q when the raw water had a threshold odor of fity and
y
10 over. The graph indicates that: (See Page 1302)
The duration in hours for the year 1964
12 existed for 2,£88 hours or 30 percent of the time;
13 The 1964 total is an increase of 73 percent
. over the previous record year 1959 when odors
of 50 and over existed for 1,544 hours;
lg The 1964 duration is 248 percent greater
._ than the yearly average for the preceding ten years.
18 Figure 3 pertains to the duration in hours
when the raw water had a threshold odor of one hundred
and over. The graph points out that: (See Page 1303)
21 The duration in hours for the year 1964
existed for 698 hours;
23 The 1964 total is an increase of 38 percent
24 over the previous record year in 1960 when odors
25
of 100 and over existed 504 hours;
-------
1302
-------
1303
-U-I--
ri
sft
«r
ffl
-r-J-
-ii
-H-
Ifc
7<
-i*.
cr
o
>D
0-
Tr
Wtt
-H-
ii
n
S
r
\r>
-------
1304
l The 1964 duration is 262 percent greater
2 than the yearly average for the preceding ten years.
3 The following observations may be made
4 from the graphs:
5 The average raw water is rapidly becoming
6 poorer in quality;
7 The instances of poorest quality raw water
8 is occurring more frequently and for greater hours in
9 duration;
10 There are some dips in the graphs; these
11 dips may well be attributed to the years of slight economic
12 recession and/or to temporary or token pollution abatement
13 efforts.
14 The pollution which strains the Hammond
15 Water Filtration Plant the most are the phenols and oily
16 wastes, sewage and plankton.
17 The phenols and the oily wastes give the
18 greatest problems. Very often these industrial wastes
19 travel in slugs. The filtration operators are trained,
20 schooled and skilled. They must practice everlasting
21 vigilance because a slug might enter the water intakes
22 at any moment. The operators take threshold number odor
23 tests and make phenol tests hourly. When the water is
24 extremely poor, tests are taken every twenty minutes.
25 It is only because the filtration operators arc ever
-------
1305
1 vigilant, skilled, diligent and because of the high dosages
2 of chemicals used that the quality of water entering the
3 distribution mains is safe end of satisfactory quality
4 during these peak pollution period?;.
5 Chemical dosages per million gallons of
6 water run extremely high when these peak pollution periods
7 exist. Activated Carbon is usually fed into the raw water
8 at a rate of ^0 pounds per million gallons of water at
9 10 threshold number odor when sewage or plankton type
10 pollution is present. Carbon has been fed into the water
11 at a rate of 1,200 pounds per million gallons of water
12 at 600 threshold number odor when phenol pollution existed.
13 At times the industrial pollution is so
14 great that all the activated carbon slurry that the pumps
15 can feed into the raw water is not ample. In these
16 cases, additional carbon is added on top of the filters
17 in order to complete the chemical requirement. We are
18 wondering what will happen to the quality of our finished
19 water if this pollution is allowed to continue and if this
20 pollution is allowed to increase.
21 The Hammond Water Filtration Plant is located
22 such that it rarely escapes heavy pollution. When the wind
23 is from the south, the sewage pollution greatly increases
24 with the duration of the southerly wind. When the wind
25 persists in the east and northeast, large amounts of oil
-------
1306
1 type pollution and phenols are expected from the industries
2 east of the Hammond Water Filtration Plant. When the
3 wind direction is from the west for an extended period,
4 the Hammond Water Filtration Plant receives sewage pollu-
5 tlon and industrial pollution beginning from the second
6 or third day of west wind, and greater concentrations
7 exist until the wind changes direction. This pollution
8 coming in with an extended westerly wind undoubtedly
9 comes from the Illinois side of Lake Michigan.
10 Only when there is a strong north wind
11 does the pollution diminish in the Filtration Plant's
12 raw water supply. The fresh water from the north pushing
13 in displaces and dilutes the polluted water.
14 When there is an ice cover extending from
15 the shore past the intakes, pollution increases alarmingly.
16 The water movement is restricted, there is little air
17 contact with the surface of the water and the pollution
18 becomes more and more concentrated; there are records of
19 twenty to thirty days of constant and increasing pollution
20 occurring before the ice moved out.
21 To sum it up the quality of raw water
22 at the Hammond's water source was excellent between the
23 years 1891 and 1925, satisfactory between the years 1926
24 and 19^5, poor between the years 1946 and 1955, and very
25 poor quality between the years 1956 to 1965. The quality
-------
1307
1 level of the period 1926-19^5 should be restored and
2 maintained.
3 The effect of the degradation of the
4 present water quality is that it is becoming very diffi-
5 cult to produce a safe and satisfactory water using the
6 present conventional equipment and chemicals and employing
7 the present conventional water treatment methods.
8 The Hammond Water Department respectfully
9 requests that the Conferees initiate steps which would
10 improve the quality of water in the receiving basin of
H the Hammond Water supply. The Hammond Water Department
12 further recommends the establishment of water criteria
13 for municipal water sources in the lower end of Lake
14 Michigan and also recommends that the water quality
15 criteria encompasses the development of the maximum limits
16 permissible under various parameters of quality for
17 municipal water sources which, after conventional treat-
18 ment, would produce safe and quality water supplies.
19 CHAIRMAN STEIN: We have a statement from the
20 City Hall, East Gary, Lake County, Indiana, from Mr.
21 Paul Wagner, the East Gary City Engineer.
22 MR. WAGNER: Gentlemen:
23 The City of East Gary is aware of the
24 necessity of abatement of pollution sources, and our plans
25 are pointed in such direction.
-------
1308
I We also realize that while our involvement
2 in the pollution problem is small, we still would be
3 expected not to increase the problem by any lack of
4 effort on our part.
5 A survey of our disposal system can be
6 summarized as follows:
The establishment of a cumulative sewage
disposal fund in about the year of 1952. At that time the
8
Town was partially sewered, with raw sewage discharged
y
into the Burns Ditch.
10
By 1956 work was started on construction
of sanitary sewers, which at the present time is approxi-
1 A
mately 70 percent complete. Disposal was started with the
1*3
first phase of the sanitary system by intercepting the
14
original raw sewage discharge into Burn's Ditch and
15
provided a delivery system to the Gary-Miller Disposal
16
Plant.
17
The Gary-Miller Disposal Plant is operated
18
by the City of Gary, "he East Gary sewage is processed
*y
through this plant on the basis of number of households
20
served. The treated sewage is discharged into Burn's Ditch,
A!
The present East Gary sanitary system includes old combined
22
sewers as well as recently constructed sanitary sewers,
23
which at times of heavy runoff causes overflows into
24
the Burn's Ditch.
25
-------
1309
The City of East Gary proposes to continue
the Tax Levy providing for the cumulative disposal fund
and thereby allow for the construction of storm sewers
to relieve the heavy load on the combined sewers.
With no problem of industrial wastes contri-
buting to the pollution of our outlet, that is, the
Burn's Ditch, our plans are to either acquire the Gary-
8 Miller disposal plant, or in the event of the abandonment
9 of the said plant, to connect our outlet with the Gary
10 sanitary system in the Northwest area of our town. The
latter proposal would largely eliminate our pollution of
12 Burn's Ditch except for some discharge of diluted sanitary
13 flows contributed by our combined sewers.
14 East Gary is populated largely of one-family
1S dwellings, located in the area along and south of the
16 Michigan Central Railroad. At the present time with no
17 industrial development, our City has a low assessed valua-
18 tion, which results in one of the highest tax rates in the
19 State of Indiana. Our contribution to the cleanup
20 of stream pollution must necessarily be limited to
21 availability of funds, but this does not hinder us from
22 taking steps toward this end.
23 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Another presentation from the
24 Town of Schererville, Indiana.
25
-------
1310
1 THE TOWN OF SCHERERVILLE, INDIANA, BY CLYDE E.
2 WILLIAMS AND ASSOC., ENGINEERS, BY Mr. G. H. TOMBAUGH:
3 The Town of Schererville, Lake County,
4 Indiana, is in the process of laying sewer pipe and build-
5 ing the Treatment Plant at the present time, and expect
6 to have the plant in operation, on or about April 15, 19&5.
7 This should solve our pollution problem.
8 CHAIRMAN STEIN: We have a statement from the Porter
9 County Chapter of the Izaak Walton League of America.
10 PORTER COUNTY CHAPTER, IZAAK WALTON LEAGUE OF AMERICA,
H JAMES M. FALLIS, PRESIDENT, AND HERBERT P. READ,
12 CONSERVATION CHAIRMAN:
13 Mr. Chairman and Conferees:
14 The Porter County Chapter of the Izaak
15 Walton League of America owns property and has its club-
16 house on the Little Calumet River about 2 miles east of
17 the Junction of the Little Calumet and Burns Ditch. As
18 residents of the area and as part of a group with a long
19 history of interest in attempting to prevent water pollu-
20 tion, we have first-hand knowledge of the magnitude of
2i the problem. We know where pollution is, some of its
22 sources, and, most important to us, the developing and
23 future sources of water pollution.
24 Federal Problem: We believe water pol-
25 lution to be an interstate and therefore a Federal issue
-------
1311
l because:
2 The Little Calumet River watershed is in
3 two states;
4 Lake Michigan borders four states;
5 The proposed Port of Indiana is planned
6 for a location 1-1/4 miles east of Burns Ditch and for
7 which Federal funds are expected;
8 The proposed Indiana Dunes National Lake-
9 shore would be 1-1/4 miles east of the aforementioned
10 port.
ll Since wind and current do not respect man-
12 made political boundaries, pollution introduced into any
13 point within the Calumet River basin or Lake Michigan
H can travel from one state to another. The direction
is of pollution travel often varies with the shifts in wind,
16 which in turn affects the direction of water flow. The
17 rate of fall of the Little Calumet in many areas near
18 the Illinois-Indiana state line is so slight that wind
19 shifts readily reverse direction of flow. While the main
20 direction of Lake Michigan water is from northwest to
21 southeast, a littoral drift along the shore travels back
22 toward the west, thereby carrying any pollution present back
23 and forth between two, three, or even four states.
24 Sources of Pollution—Existing and Potential:
25 Upstream from our property on the Little
-------
1312
l Calumet River, the Town of Porter, Indiana, is dumping
2 untreated sewage. The town is presently annexing much
3 of the unincorporated area along the river, which at
4 least simplifies the jurisdictional responsibility.
5 Bethlehem Steel has cut a new and very
6 large ditch into the Little Calumet River at the Portage-
7 Westchester line, which drains much of their plant site.
8 We are not aware of pollution now, but the water should
9 be regularly monitored.
10 At the junction of the Little Calumet and
11 Burns Ditch, pollution enters from the west, sources of
12 which are both municipal sewerage and miscellaneous.
13 Near the mouth of Burns Ditch, Midwest
14 Steel has a large discharge pipe. At times discolorations
15 appear in the discharge water, and we request that this
16 source be regularly monitored. We have a colored slide
17 of the water discoloration.
18 Midwest Steel is disposing of its acid-
19 bearing process wastes into large pits. At first the
2o pits were located on the state owned property of the
21 proposed port. Recently the pits have been located west
22 of Burns Ditch on Midwest Steel's own property. We request
23 that the effect on the water table be investigated to see
24 if there has been sufficient filtering action. We also
25 request that future disposal plans for this waste be
-------
1313
l determined, since the pits are rapidly filling up with
2 sediment and cannot be used indefinitely.
3 Bethlehem Steel plans to use a deep well
4 to dispose of their acid-bearing process wastes. We
5 are not satisfied with the vague assurances that future
6 water supplies will not be contaminated. We therefore
7 request that a more comprehensive study be undertaken.
8 The potential pollution due to the proposed
9 Port of Indiana is of critical importance. One of the
10 conditions recommended by the U.S. Bureau of the Budget
11 and endorsed by the Army Corps of Engineers is:
12 "Water and air pollution sources will
13 be controlled to the maximum extent feasible in order to
14 minimize any adverse effects on public recreational
15 areas in the general vicinity of the harbor."
16 However, no evidence of plans for such
17 preventive measures exist. One of the users of the pro-
18 posed harbor will be the Rail-to-Water Transfer Co. which
19 now operates a coal transfer facility along the Calumet
20 River. This is an extremely dirty operation as illustrated
21 by the remarks of Mr. Leo Geissal, President of Rail-
22 to-Water, as taken from the record of the Interstate
23 Commerce Commission hearings concerning the Monon Rail-
24 road plans for a coal dock. Excerpts from Mr. Geissalfs
25 testimony are as follows:
-------
1 P. 1558
2 Q. (By Mr. Krueger) "Mr. Geissal, when you
3 are on the dock, as you describe in your testimony, in opera-
4 tion, does it produce any dust?"
5 A. ¥Well, at certain times of the year, yes,
6 sir. Under certain loading conditions it does.*
7 *****
8 P. 1559
9 Q. "Now, what is your prevailing wind
10 direction at your dock?"
11 A. "The prevailing wind at our dock is from
12 the west."
13 Q. "At the time of your operation — your
14 dock is in operation, does this wind have any effect on the
15 dust?"
16 A. "Yes, sir, it carried the dust toward the
17 east.1'
18 Q. "You are explaining the action of the
19 wind."
20 A. "And sometimes I will have to admit, the
21 dust is pretty thick which causes a scum to form on the
22 river."
23 Q. "Does that scum on the river lie dormant
24 around the dock or does it move with the water?"
25 A. "it Just depends on how much movement we
have in the river, sir. Sometimes if there is no movement in
the river the dust stays there, but when a ship comes around
-------
1315
1 and agitates the water then, of course, it is carried away."
2 p. 1560
3 Q. (By Mr. Shepard) "You testified that we
4 have no practical way of allaying the dust that you testified
S to at this time. That means that you don*t have at Rail-to-
6 Water any particular installation for the purpose of allaying
7 the dust; is that correct?"
8 A. "I do not have."
9 Q. "But there are such devices in existence?
10 A. "Yes."
* # # # *
12 The plans of the Indiana Port Commission are
13 to transfer the existing equipment from the Calumet River to
14 the lakefront only 1-1/4 miles west of the proposed Indiana
is Dunes National Lakeshore and 3 miles west of the existing
16 Indiana Dunes State Park. Since the wind and water can
17 carry coal dust many miles, you can understand our concern.
18 A review of the cost breakdown for moving
19 and reconstructing the coal dock as shown by the Indiana
20 Port Commission includes no allowance for coal dust control.
21 In addition, there is the potential problem
22 of disposal of petroleum wastes in connection with port
23 facilities, and of controlling discharges from ships.
24 We hope that this conference can take the nece
25 sary steps to control and prevent the pollution problems we
have outlined here.
-------
1316
i Porter County Chapter, Izaak Walton League
2 of America.
3 James M. Fallis, President
4 Herbert P. Read, Conservation Chairman
5 M. R. Box 438, Chesterton, Indiana
6 Addendum:
7 Informal conversations with some of the coal
8 shippers described above have indicated willingness to incor-
9 porate coal dust controls. However, we believe that all po-
10 tential harbor users should be advised that pollution
n controls would be expected of them, so that the costs of
12 such installations can be taken into consideration before
13 work is begun.
14 CHAIRMAN STEIN: We have a presentation from the town
15 of Dyer, Indiana.
16 The statement which follows is submitted
17 on behalf of the Town of Dyer, Indiana, by its consulting
18 engineers for use in the conference in Chicago, Illinois,
19 beginning March 2, 1965, regarding water pollution in the
20 Calumet District. The statement is being made consistent
21 with advice received by the Town officials from Mr. B, A.
22 Poole, Technical Secretary, Stream Pollution Control Board,
23 State of Indiana.
24 The Town of Dyer, Lake County, Indiana, is
25 located on the stream of Plum Creek (Hart Ditch), some
five miles upstream from its junction with the Little
-------
1317
Calumet River. Plum Creek passes through the built-up
portion of Dyer, which comprises approximately fifteen
percent of the total corporate area.
The town which is residential in character
has a present population of about 4,000. During past years
the town has utilized an existing system of local and sub-
main sewers and drains which collect both raw sewage and sep-
tic tank effluent from residences and other buildings and
9 discharge the same directly to Plum Creek at some 25 separated
10 points. As the population in the developed area has
11 increased, there has been a corresponding increase in the
12 extent of pollution in the stream and in the degree of
13 resulting nuisance.
u Since early 1963, anticipating aid in
15 financing through a Federal grant the Town of Dyer, through
16 its Board of Trustees, has been engaged in efforts to
17 construct facilities for the proper collection and treatment
18 of the sanitary sewage, and thus eliminate the pollution of
19 Plum Creek.
20 Subsequent to the earlier employment of its
21 engineers and the preparation of plans and specifications,
22 bids were received in December 1963 for the construction of
23 an intercepting sanitary sewer system and a sewage treatment
24 plant; also for a system of local and sub-main sanitary
25 sewers connected to the intercepting sewer system, to permit
the treatment of sewage from approximately 500 people in a
-------
1318
i developed area located remotely from the main built-up
2 area of the town.
3 An entirely new group of town officials had
4 been elected shortly before the construction bids were
5 received. The new officials who assumed responsibility
6 in January 1964 necessarily required time to become ac-
7 quainted with the proposed project in all of its aspects.
8 Construction contract awards, however, were made in early
9 February 1964, conditioned upon receipt of a Federal grant
10 and upon the sale of bonds to finance the project costs.
ji Shortly thereafter some organised local
12 opposition to the project developed, which resulted in an
13 injunction suit being filed against it. This delayed
u progress in carrying out the required legal proceedings
15 preliminary to the sale of bonds, until early October 1964,
16 at which time the objectors finally agreed to withdraw the
17 injunction suit. The statutory proceedings preliminary to
18 the sale of the bonds were completed as soon as possible
19 thereafter, thus permitting revenue bonds in the amount of
20 $720,000 to be sold on November 12, 1964.
21 Since November 13, 1964, the town has had in
22 progress the construction of the intercepting sewer system,
23 the sewage treatment plant and the other sewers described
24 above. Schedules provide for completion of the construction
25 to permit the plant and system to go in operation by Septem-
ber of this year.
-------
1319
l The intercepting sanitary sewer system is
2 located and designed to intercept the sanitary sewage from
3 the existing sewers in the built-up areas of the town as well!
4 as that from the new sewered areas and to deliver the same
5 to the sewage treatment plant. The intercepting sewers are
6 designed to serve a population of approximately 24,000,
7 thus to meet the estimated requirements at the end of an
g approximate 45 year period.
9 The sewage treatment plant is of the
10 diffused air activated sludge-separate sludge digestion
ll type with facilities included for the chlorination of final
12 effluent. The plant is designed to provide complete
13 treatment for the sanitary sewage from a population of 6,000
14 people. The structures and plant layout, along with the pro-
15 perty acquired for the site all lend themselves readily
16 to future expansion and enlargement.
17 It is anticipated the Dyer Sewage Treatment
18 Works will provide a continuously responsible contribution
ig to the Lake County Stream Pollution Control Program.
20 Respectfully submitted,
21 Besozzl, Carpenter & Ignelzi, Consulting
22 Engineer.
23 By Carl B. Carpenter, Partner, Project
24 Engineer March 1, 1965,
25 CHAIRMAN STEIN: We have a statement by Mr. Thomas E.
-------
1320
1 Dustin, State Secretary, Indiana Division of the Izaak
2 Walton League of America.
3 (Statement)
4 The Indiana Division of the Izaak Walton
5 League of America is grateful for this opportunity to
6 address this conference. For your records, I would like
7 to introduce representatives of several northwestern Indiana
8 League chapters who are also present here: Mrs* Edith Adele
9 Jensen, of Gary, and a member of the Marquette Chapter,
10 Portage; Mrs. Beatrice Jannelle, of Chesterton, President
11 of the Marquette Chapter, and also a National Director of
12 the League; Mr. John Yuhasz, of Gary, and a member of the
13 Gary Glen Park Chapter; and Mr'. Herbert Read, Past President
14 of the Porter County Chapter, and also a resident of
15 Chesterton.
16 I am Thomas E. Dust in, State Secretary of
17 the Indiana Division of the League, of Fort Wayne. Since I ajn
18 not a resident of the immediate area whose problems you are
19 considering, I would like to defer presently.to Mr. Read,
20 whose long association with the region will be useful.
2i However, I am not unfamiliar with the area,
22 and have long enjoyed the natural regions of the Indiana
23 dunes. I have also often flown over the Indiana shoreline
24 with the specific intention of observing the extremes of its
25 environmental condition.
-------
1321
l On two such occasions, April and September
2 1963, I made many aerial slide photographs of the Indiana
3 Lake Michigan shoreline from Michigan City Harbor on the east
4 to Indiana Harbor on the west. I have these slides with me,
5 and they are available for your examination. If it pleases
6 the panel, the Indiana Division wishes to supply one set
7 of enlargements of these slides which pertain to your
8 purposes, and would like to send these to the Chairman for
9 more detailed study. Many of the photographs are exception-
10 ally detailed, and I think they will be useful.
11 The problems of water and air pollution are
12 of central concern to the Izaak Walton League. We are
13 concerned about both present and future pollution of both oui
14 cities and our remaining natural and unspoiled areas. The
15 environmental conditions in this particular bi-state Lake
16 Michigan border region are very probably the worst in the
17 United States; and I say that with some previous exposure
18 to some other port and industrial complexes from New York
19 to San Francisco.
20 Specifically among the photographs I will
21 forward (slides available at the conference) are several
22 indicating what is probably illegal encroachment on the
23 riparian lands of Indiana by one of the Lake County steel
24 firms. The photograph shows a remnant beach almost entirely
25 covered with possibly 20 feet or more of slag and other waste
-------
1322
1 used for fill. At irregular intervals, the slag not only
2 entirely covers the sand beach, but also bulges out into
3 the lake waters. This is unquestionably a source of
4 pollution through leaching of soluble contaminants. The
5 irregular and patternless encroachment of this fill material
6 into the waters would indicate that it has not been sanctionejd
7 by public authority.
8 Others of these aerial photographs illustrate
9 dramatic discoloration of waters, particularly at Indiana
10 Harbor and extending eastward along the shore to Gary Harbor,
n where it again becomes more intense. Since there is little
12 if any soil silt in these particular waters, the littoral
13 flow being sand, the discoloration is evidently chemical or
14 other waste matter directly attributable to the manufactur-
15 inS plants of that area. Some of the photographs pretty
16 well indicate the sources, especially in the case of the
17 Inland Steel Company works on the large artificial land
18 fill area forming the east side of Indiana Harbor.
19 For your additional interest, I am attaching
20 a copy of an investigation of this shoreline pollution
21 published in the August 27, 1963 edition of the Indianapolis
22 (Indiana) Times. This illustrated story indicates not only
23 the ruin of existing recreational values, and the growing
24 evidence of the spread of this blight, but also indicates
25 the threat of pollution from future ports and industry on
-------
1323
l the Indiana shoreline.
2 While the Izaak Walton League is gravely
3 concerned about pollution past and present, which has been
4 going on and getting worse here for 50 years or more, it
5 is equally or more concerned about pollution, future. If
6 we set and stand by proper ground rules now, it will be
7 easier to avoid the calamities which are before us.
8 We are not entirely satisfied with public
9 relations claims and non-specific assurances of the newer
10 plants in Porter County, and will not be until these are
n supported with well-defined and publicly understood
12 standards^ We believe it is in the public interest that
13 such standards and commitments to them be established.
14 Broad assurances are too subject to later interpretations.
15 It is our understanding that present and
15 planned discharges from the newly established finishing
17 mills in Porter County — a subject entirely germane here —
18 largely consist of water which the industrl3s describe as
19 cleaner than when drawn from the lake. We have no specific
2o cause at this time to question the claim, but it would seem
2i quite appropriate that all these discharges be independently
22 monitored on a regular basis by appropriate Federal
23 agencies to assure that standards are met in perpetuity.
24 Establishment of such standards is especially
25 important because the new complexes in Porter County are only
-------
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1324
in their earlier stages of development. Production of basic
steel, which we understand may at some time be contemplated,
is quite another matter. Those problems, and their firm
solutions, should be specifically known before - not after -
the fact.
It is further understood that plans of the
Bethlehem Steel Company in Porter County - at least according
to a recorded statement by the General Manager of the plant -
include discharge of some materials into the Little Calumet
River. I do not know what all of these materials may be,
but would like to note that even chemically pure water can
be a deadly pollutant and can biologically murder a stream
if it is hot when discharged. If that is the case, it would
seem wise to require that any materials, even water, dis-
charged into this interstate stream or into other bodies
of water, incapable of quick self-rectification, meet not
only physical and chemical tests of purity, but also thermal
and biological,
We also understand that the more lethal
effluents of the new Porter County plants are being contem-
plated for deep-well disposal. This may be an adequate
solution, and we do not specifically oppose it at this time,
but it is worth asking the question if this approach is
merely handing the problem to the future.
Several biologists to whom this approach has
-------
1325
been suggested are not sure it is a wise idea. For example,
I have been informed that substances below the impervious
layer of that area are carbonates or lime-like. These would
react with acids, and for a period of time would presumably
be self-neutralizing.
However, the natural availability of these
neutralizing agents is not inexhaustible, and the spread of
contaminants and the eating away of the understructure would
seem almost certain. The capacity of these disposal wells
10 would probably outlive us, and might even outlive the
plants, but it would seem that knowledge of the long term
l2 legacy should be determined in advance of the fact. Such
l3 massive poisoning of sub-strata could be likened to radio-
active contamination, since nothing could really be done
about it by the time the first evidence appeared. Curing
16 problems of this scope at a future time could make child's
17 play of the huge problems we have even in 1965. It would
18 seem as much in the public interest to prevent ills as to
19 cure them.
20 In May and July of 19^2, a chemical settling
21 pond was observed east of the Porter County plant of Midwest
22 Steel Corporation, only a short distance from the edge of
23 Lake Michigan. While specific tests were not made of this
24 material, it was apparent from the varigated colors that the
25 liquid was not water alone.
-------
1326
l Seepage through the completely porous sand of
2 that area from such practices would Inevitably find the way
3 into the waters of the lake. I do not know if this pond is
4 still in use, and if it is not, what alternatives are being
5 used, but I do have colored photographs of it, and these
B will be included in the portfolio I will forward. I have
7 the colored slides of this, however, and would be pleased to
8 show these to you at this time if you care to take the time.
9 Since it is probable that much of what remains
10 of the unspoiled shoreline and dunes area will be established
11 as The Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore which will be region-
12 al and National in significance, either legal or illegal
13 pollution would seem untenable.
14 In closing, I would like to note one additional
15 event which may help set an example for us in this region.
16 I have seen a budget figure for the State of New York
17 quoted at $1,700,000,000 for antipollution efforts alone.
18 This figure seems so fantastic that it is difficult to believe
19 --- and I apologize to this panel if I am mistaken. But if
20 the figure is accurate, it cannot help being compared to
21 almost an exact same amount which the Indiana General
22 Assembly contemplated only a few days ago for the operation
23 of the entire state for the next two years.
24 At this time, if I may have permission to do
25 so, I would like to yield to Mr. Read, who has also prepared
-------
1327
i a statement based on his lifetime of intimate knowledge of
2 this region.
3 Thank you.
4 CHAIRMAN STEIN: We have a statement from the City of
5 Hobart, Indiana, submitted by Mayor Titus.
6 (Statement)
7 To: Stream Pollution Control Association
8 Re: Statement of improvements during the last 12 years.
9 Gentlemen:
10 The City of Hobart, Lake County, Indiana, from
11 July 1953 to June 1962 was served by a Primary Sedimentation
12 type of sewage treatment plant with one 50 ft. diameter heated
13 digester designed for a flow of 2 million gallons per day,
14 plus facilities for chlorination of final effluent. During
15 these nine years, the average daily flow was in the order of
16 620,000 gallons per day with a removal of 49 percent of B.O.D.
17 and 6l percent of suspended solids.
18 In order to secure a better reduction of organic
19 material, facilities for Secondary Sewage Treatment was
20 added in June of 1962.
21 The new plant was designed as a complete
22 activated sludge type of installation and in June of
23 1962 the secondary portion of this plant was completed and
24 put into operation, our present average daily flow is
25 903*000 gallons per day, a 31 percent increase over 1955.
-------
1328
l At present, we are removing an average of 84 percent of
2 the suspended solids and 8? percent of the B.O.D. from the
3 sewage treated,
4 The cost of additions to our plant and sewer
5 extensions since 1961 has exceeded $2.6 million. The design
B of additional sewers for the west side of the City of Hobart
7 is under contract at the present time at an estimated
8 construction cost of over $1.2 million.
9 It is our desire to give every assistance
10 possible to the Stream Pollution Control Association to
11 preserve the natural resources,health, and well-being of the
12 Southern Lake Michigan Region.
13 Respectfully submitted,
14 Luther J. Titus, Mayor
15 Carl R. Boutilier, Operations Superintendent.
16 CHAIRMAN STEIN: We have a presentation from the City
17 of Valparaiso, Indiana, presented by Mayor DonaE E. Will:
18 (Statement)
19 The Citycf Valparaiso, Indiana employed 0. M.
20 Leonard & Associates to make a survey, report, and recommenda-
21 tions on the current and future estimated requirements for
22 the City of Valparaiso, Indiana, in the light of the indicated
23 expansion of industry in this area.
24 This report has been promised to be furnished us
25 in the near future, but it will not be completed for use or
-------
1329
presentation in its entirety for this March meeting in
Chicago, Illinois.
The City requested Mr. Leonard to furnish a
letter giving an outline of the summary recommendations. I
have a copy of the Engineer's letter, and request permission
to read this and use it as my report.
This letter will show that the City has already
recognized the probability of a pro*blem and has taken steps
to have it analyzed, and then initiate a progressive program.
10 Sincerely,
11 Donald E. Will, Mayor of Valparaiso.
12 * * * *
13 The Honorable Mayor, and
Board of Public Works & Safety
14 City of Valparaiso, Indiana
City Hall
15 Valparaiso, Indiana
16 Re: City of Valparaiso, Indiana
Sewers and Sewage Treatment
17 Facilities
18 Gentlemen:
19 In accordance with your request we herewith
20 present a brief resume of the data which will be presented
21 in our engineering report and recommendations for sewerage,
22 sewage treatment, and drainage for the City of Valparaiso,
Indiana.
24 1. Scope of Planning: The City of Valparaiso,
25 Indiana, is adjacent to and is a part of a large industrial
-------
1330
l expansion in the Calumet area. Expenditures of new capital
2 have been estimated at one billion dollars per year for the
3 tri-county Calumet area. Valparaiso has experienced an
4 increase in the past three (3) years of about 5*000
5 population in the utility area served by the City.
6 It is our opinion that this present population
7 of approximately 17,000 within the 4 1/2 square miles of
8 incorporated area, may be reasonably expected to double,
9 and the corporate area to increase to about 14.0 square
10 miles within the next fifteen years (1980). In addition to
11 the anticipated increase in residential area, provision for
12 some Industrial waste treatment will be necessary for
13 industries moving into the area.
14 ?. Sewerage and Drainage System: The
IS present sewerage system serving the City is a combined
16 system. This system improved and extended in 1958 has
17 adequate capacity for storm and waste water service to the
18 present area of the City, and sufficient capacity for the
19 anticipated future sanitary and waste water which will be
20 discharged from the additional and partially developed
21 areas now under study, provided that all storm drainage
22 from future areas are discharged into separate storm
23 drainage systems; discharged direct to natural drainage
24 watercourses.
25 The engineering survey and report we are now
-------
1331
preparing for the City of Valparaiso, Indiana, will show
the boundaries of seven (7) separate storm drainage areas.
The total area encompassed by these separate districts
or areas are shown on the attached sketch drawing.
All sanitary and waste water collected in
these new areas to be served by a separate system of sanitary
sewers.
(a) That the operation of all sewerage
systems and sewage treatment facilities be supervised by
10 a qualified professional engineer who is a member of the
Board of Public V.'orks and Safety, or such other professional
12 engineer employed by the Board to review and approve
13 plans for all new construction and all proposed alterations
14 to existing sewerage or sewage treatment facilities, and
15 to also supervise the proper operaton and maintenance of the
16 systems and treatment facilities.
\>e believe that by adoption of, and enforcement
18 of the regulatory ordinances necessary to provide for all
19 sanitary sewage and trade wastes from new additions to be
20 separate, and that the supervision and operations of the
21 sanitary sewerage system and sewage treatment facilities be
22 made a mandatory responsibility of an experienced and
23 technically qualified authority,that the municipality can
reasonably meet the requirements imposed by the accelerated
25 population growth and area expansion which the City is
-------
2
3
4
5
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1331-A
now taking place.
Yours very truly,
C. M. Leonard & Associates
Signed by 0. M. Leonard
Enclosure: (Area Outline Map) (See Page 1332
•*#*•*
CHAIRMAN STEIN: We have a statement by the Board of
Trustees, Town of Porter, Indiana.
STATEMENT BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES,
TOWN OP PORTER, INDIANA
The Town of Porter is now daily discharging
approximately 65,000 gallons of raw sewage into the Little
Calumet River, in Westchester Township, Porter County,
Indiana.
The discharge takes place one-half mile down-
stream from the recently constructed sewage treatment plant
now treating the sewage from the Town of Chesterton.
Chesterton's capacity far exceeds current
requirements, and the two Town Boards, Porter and Chesterton,
have beennegotiating a contract by which Porter would lease
capacity in the Chesterton plant equal to twice Porter's
present requirements. It is expected that the two towns
will reach an agreement within the next three or four weeks.
Board of Trustees, Town of Porter
Signed by Thomas Wagner, Trustee.
-------
1332
pjraaBann
[IcIrlJliiDD
AREA OF PLANNING
':_ FOR
DRAINAGE & WASTEVVATER TREATMENT
CITY OF VALPARAISO, INDIANA,
O.M, teONARD A ASSOCIATE-I
-------
1333
1 CHAIRMAN STEIN: We have the statement of Mr. Leo
2 Louis, President of the Gary-Hobart Water Corporation,
3 Gary, Indiana.
4 (STATEMENT)
5 As testimony presented to the conference on the
6 matter of pollution of interstate waters of the Grand Calumet
7 River, Little Calumet River, Calumet River, Lake Michigan,
8 Wolf Lake, and their tributaries - March 2-5, 1965, McCormick
9 Place, Chicago, Illinois:
10 I wish to refer to the 1965 Report of the
11 United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare
12 on the matters discussed at this conference, particularly
13 in regard to the comments in the report referring to Gary-
14 Hobart Water Corporation.
15 On page 12, under Chapter V - Water Uses, it is
16 indicated that we are one of the municipal water systems in
17 Indiana which uses Lake Michigan as its source of water
18 supply. We do have two filtration plants -- one of which
19 was completed in 195^* and the second one now nearing
20 completion.
21 Our Jefferson Park Filtration Plant in Gary
22 is located at Seventh Avenue and Madison Street near the
23 downtown area, and the water supply for this plant is obtained
24 through a three mile long intake tunnel which was constructed
25 at an elevation approximately 90 feet below lake level. This
-------
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
1334
intake extends due north from our plant under the United
States Steel property and ends in an intake crib located at
the bottom of the lake in approximately 40 feet of water.
Water flows by gravity from the intake to our
filtration plant, and the end of the intake is approximately
one mile from the present shore line. This intake was
constructed in the years 1906-1908 and is now reaching its
design capacity during our peak days in summer months. Our
records indicate the intake was designed for about 55
million gallons per day, and, in 1964, we did pump around
54 million gallons per day through our plant.
The second filtration plant, now under
construction,is being built in the southwest corner of the
Town of Ogden Dunes adjacent to the Inland Steel Company
property. The primary reason we moved that far east was
because we were unable to obtain other property and access
to the lake closer to Gary.
We do not have room at the Jefferson Park
location for further expansion, and we decided it would be
too difficult to do with our decision to move to the Porter
County site. The intake for the Ogden Dunes plant consists
of a pipe line located in the lake bottom terminating in an in
let at the bottom of the lake in approximately 25 feet of
water 2,300 feet from the shoreline.
25 The report indicates that the principal lake
-------
1335
currents flow from east to west and from south to north in our
area. Consequently, the principal sources of pollution
mentioned in the report, after they are mixed with lake
water, do not generally flow toward our intakes with the
exception, of course, of Burns Ditch. For this reason,
we have not encountered the extreme conditions noted by
other water utilities.
In general, our raw water supply is very good,
and, while we do have some periods of unsatisfactory water
10 which result in some increased chemical costs and increased
11 technical supervision techniques, we have never complained
12 too much about these problems.
13 We are anxious, of course, to keep pollution
14 in the lake to a minimum, but we have been willing to
undertake some increased treatment costs realizing that
16 Lake Michigan water is so very much better than many other
17 utilities in other parts of the country have to deal with.
18 We are also cognizant of the fact that we are located in an
19 industrial area, we serve large industries with at least
20 part of their water supply, and we are anxious to have
21 other industries locate in our area to promote the growth
22 of the area and our water system.
23 On page 19* in the last paragraph, the report
24 includes - :;The lakeward reaches of Indiana Harbor are rust-
25 colored from v;aste pickle liquor." Iron wastes in the raw
-------
1336
water at our Jefferson Park station do constitute our major
complaint on lake water pollution. At fairly regular inter-
vals, our raw water is highly colored and does contain
4 measurable amounts of iron.
5 During the last three years the average iron
6 content in the raw water has been approximately 0.2 parts
per million to 0.3 parts per million. Of course, as I
have stated, we do not have iron in the water at all times,
9 so these average figures do indicate that when we do have
10 iron the quantities are much higher.
11 In 1963, we had a maximum concentration of
12 iron in our raw water of 2.9 parts per million. This iron
13 is generally in the ferric or insoluble form, which has
14 been oxidized and is high colored. V.'e have flown over the
lake during periods of iron in the raw water, and we can
16 definitely see the red colored water flowing toward our
17 intake from Indiana Harbor.
18 It was our impression that this iron may have
19 originated from the iron ore storage bins along the Harbor
20 but, of course, we can't be sure of that. Actually, aside
21 from the appearance of the raw water, the iron doesn't
22 cause us too much difficulty in treatment. It does in-
23 crease our chlorine demand slightly but not sufficiently to
24 cause us any overall increases in our costs.
25 We are, of course, worried from the standpoint
-------
1337
l that there may be other things in the water that would be
2 more harmful than the iron when this pollution does approach
3 our intake. As I stated, generally the lake currents do not
4 flow from Indiana Harbor toward our intake, and I would
5 assume that the only time this condition occurs is when the
6 wind direction changes and the currents then change from
7 west to east toward our intake.
8 On page 40, the second paragraph again
9 mentions Gary-Hobart Water Corporation. The report indicates
10 I! The Gary-Hobart Water Plant reports that, when high
11 carbon dosages are required, hydrocarbon odors are always
12 responsible." This statement is a little too positive
13 because, while this is generally true, we do not always have
14 hydrocarbon odors when there are high carbon dosages.
15 Most of this paragraph accurately states,
16 however, that we do have mod: of our problems in the winter
17 months. Vie think that most of these problems are caused
18 by ice cover on the lake during this period of the year.
19 cur carbon dosages at our plant are not nearly as high
20 as other water plants with usual winter carbon dosages
21 consisting of from 80 pounds to a maximum of 150 pounds per
22 million gallons of water.
23 V.'e have made phenol analyses on occasions and
2* these have indicated the phenol content in our raw water
25 during winter months running as high as 0.048 parts per
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1338
million.
Although our water treatment problems in
1964 were not generally as severe as they were in 1963,
we have noted an upward trend in our costs of treating
water. Cur total chemical costs for the period 1958 through
1964 have run as follows:: (These figures are in dollars per
million gallons of water treated). Delivered costs of
chemicals, with the exception of a five percent increase in
aluminum sulphate in 1962, remained the same in this period.
1958 $6.52
1959 7.51
I960 6.50
1961 6.80
1962 7.13
1963 7.32
1964 7.62
The trend of upward costs is not necessarily
indicative of taste and odor producing wastes, however.
The cost of treating the water with activated carbon for
taste and odor removal was actually the lowest in 1964
since 1958. Cur carbon cost in 1964 was $1.50 per million
gallons compared with $1.42 in 1958 and $2.36 in 1959. The
cost of chlorine has not changed materially. In 1964, the
chlorine cost was $124 per million gallons compared to $0.94
in 1958 and $1.23 in 1960.
The cost of aluminum sulphate in 1964 was $3.08
compared to $2.40 in 1960 and $2.93 in 1959. AH of these
costs are again in dollars per million gallons of water
treated.
-------
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1339
Cn page 43 of the report, the Gary-Hobart
VJater Corporation is again quoted in the last paragraph.
The report indicates that we are reporting odors suggesting
gasoline, our laboratory thinks we have been misquoted
here because we usually describe these odors as hydrocarbons.
It is true we do experience fairly high ammonia
concentration. In 1963, ammonia nitrogen averaged 0.17 parts
per million and in 1964 averagedO.13 parts per million. The
maximum ammonia nitrogen noted in our raw water was 2.43
parts per million. For some reason,however, the ammonia
has decreased to almost none present during the last few
months.
Page 44 again quotes us on iron concentrations,
and I have already mentioned this. However, we did not
indicate that: "This iron probably comes from waste pickle
liquor discharged to Indiana Harbor."
We have collected intermittent samples, particul-
arly in 1963, of water near the end of our intake at the
Ogden Dunes plant, and the water collected is not too
different than the quality of the Jefferson Park intake. We
do note that the iron content is much lower while the ammonia
nitrogen content is as high if not higher. This may indicate
that the relatively high ammonia content in our raw water
at the Jefferson Park plant is actually coming from sewage
in Burns Ditch if the prevailing westviard lake currents flow
-------
4
5
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
from Burns Ditch toward Gary.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: We have the statement of the Georgia-
Pacific Corporation:
(Statement)
On January 1, 1965 Georgia-Pacific Corporation
purchased the paper mill at Gary, Indiana, formerly owned
and operated by Stiner Tissue Mills. This is such a short
time ago that it hasn't had time to develop a program of
pollution abatement.
For this reason it has no specific statement
of plans for future work to present at this time. The
Corporation is in agreement with the aims of the conference
and can be depended on for its complete cooperation.
Yours very truly,
Signed, Paul Solheim, Resident Manager.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: We have the statement from the Town
of Griffith, Lake County, Indiana:
(Statement)
Attached is a chronological resume of the
Town of Griffith, Indiana, activities and construction
relative to the abatement of stream pollution in Turkey
Creek, Cady Marsh Ditch and tributary streams.
All residential, commercial and industrial
construction within the Town of Griffith is required to tie
into the sanitary sewer sysbem.
-------
During 1964 and currently, the Town of Griffith
has planned and installed internal sewer facilities in
addition to the original proposals. These facilities are
being installed and extended by the Town in such a manner
and location that makes it mandatory for all new construction
to tie in.
7 Signed, Chester J. Ziemniak, Town Engineer
8 Glen Rayome, Sewer Commissioner.
9 TOWN OP GRIFFITH, INDIANA - SEWER PROJECT
10 STREAM POLLUTION ABATEMENT ACTIVITIES
11 July 30, 1959. Town of Griffith received
12 from the Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board a Cease and
13 Desist Order from causing and contributing to the pollution
14 of Cady Marsh Ditch, Turkey Creek and tributaries.
November 21, 1959. Town of Griffith enters
16 into agreement with Consoer, Townsend & Associates, Chicago,
17 Illinois, as Consulting Engineers to prepare plans and
18 specifications for the construction of a system of sanitary
19 intercepting sewers to convey sanitary sewage from the
20 Town of Griffith to the City of Hammond, Indiana - sewage
21 treatment facilities.
22 June 11, 1960. Upon recommendation of its
23 consulting engineers, the Town of Griffith formally petitions
24 the city of Hammond to enter into a sewage treatment contract
25 with the Town of Griffith whereby the Sanitary District of
-------
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Hammond will accept and treat the sanitary sewage conveyed to
it for treatment by the Town of Griffith.
June 16, 1960. Town of Griffith enters into
agreement with the Board of Sanitary Commissioners of the
Hammond Sanitary District for the treatment of Town of
Griffith's sewage.
September 1961: Town of Griffith received
Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board approval and
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare tentative
approval of the Town of Griffith's plans and specifications
for sewage facilities.
September 5, 1961. Town of Griffith advertises
for construction bids in connection with the above sanitary
sewage facilities project.
December 5, 19^1. Town of Griffith receives
bid proposals for construction of intercepting sewers, force
mains, and pumping station.
January 16, 1962. Town of Griffith awards
contracts to successful bidders on the above sewage facilities,
March 19&3. Pumping station begins delivery
of Town of Griffith sewage to Hammond on a test basis.
May 20, 1963. Pumping and delivery of sewage
to Hammond begun in accordance with contract agreement.
August 1963. All construction work covering
approved plans and specifications is basically completed.
-------
1343
l CHAIRMAN STEIN: We have the statement from the Town
2 of Portage Town Trustees.
3 STATEMENT PRESENTED AT THE MARCH 2, 1965 CONFERENCE
4 ON WATER POLLUTION PRESENTED BY ALBERT W. YOVANCVICH
5 VICE PRESIDENT, PORTAGE TOWN BOARD
6 Gentlemen:
7 The Town of Portage, Indiana is located in the
8 northwest corner of Porter County, and encompasses an area
9 of roughly twenty-two square miles.
10 Portage is drained by Willow creek in the
H western areas, and empties into Burns Ditch just inside the
12 western boundary, and by Salt Creek in the eastern areas and
13 this empties into Burns Ditch approximately one and one-half
14 miles from the discharge of the ditch into Lake Michigan.
15 Salt Creek is joined by the Calumet River just inside the
16 eastern boundary.
17 Portage is a new town, being incorporated in
I8 July 1959* and is still largely a residential area except
19 for the industrial growth along the lake. Our growth has
20 been rapid in the past five and one-half years. Our
21 population in the 1960 Federal Census was 11,822, and late in
22 a special census found 13,654 persons living in Portage. It
23 is now estimated that our population is in excess of 17,000
24 people.
25 Being such a new town, we have not had time to
-------
1344
l construct many public facilities, but have started planning
2 for them. A Master Plan was adopted in 1960 to insure
3 that the building boom then in progress did not progress
4 in a manner to endanger the health and safety of the existing
5 and future inhabitants of Portage.
6 m 19^1 an engineering firm was hired to
7 survey the town for three major facilities, water supply,
8 storm drainage and sanitary sewers and disposal plant.
9 Since that time a water supply system has
10 been installed by the Portage Water Company, a subsidiary of
11 the Gary-Hobart Water Company.
12 Storm drainage has been started, plans have
13 been prepared by our consultant and have been approved by
14 the Indiana Flood Control and \ ater Resources Commission.
15 We are presently interviewing consulting
16 engineering firms with the intention of hiring one to design
17 and supervise the installation of a sanitary sewer system
18 and a sewage disposal plant.
19 At the present time there are three small
20 private disposal systems in operation in Portage, two of
21 them being in subdivisions, and the third serving the P0rtage
Senior
22 Township Junior High School and,High School located near the
23 center of town. All three units were approved by the State
24 Board of Health before installation.
25 Last September the Indiana State Board of
-------
1 Health ordered these units to provide chlorination of all
2 effluent. Two of these units are already chlorinating
3 effluent and the third will be by July 1, 1965. These units
4 have been operated in an excellent manner, but cannot be
5 considered permanent solutions to the problem. The Town
6 Board has already enacted an ordinance providing that all
7 private systems will connect their sewers to the public
8 system when it is installed,
9 In addition to providing for connection of
10 sewers, the ordinance referred to above provides for in-
11 spection of installation of individual disposal systems.
12 In the past it was the duty of the County Sanitarian to
13 inspect such installations, but because of the building
14 throughout the county,he could not give the service needed.
15 It was at his suggestion that the inspections were taken over
16 by the Portage Building Department after enactment of the
17 ordinance.
18 Just this past week a survey was completed of
19 the watersheds in Portage with regard to stream pollution.
20 AS you know, this is not the best time of the year to
21 determine degrees of pollution because of the cold, nor is
22 one survey sufficient to be specific as to causes of
23 pollution, but a general idea can be gained from even one
24 survey taken at this time.
25 In general this survey shows that Portage does
-------
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
IS
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
contribute slightly to the problem, but much of this can
probably be attributed to agricultural sources and to the
bog lands through which our streams flow. Perhaps later
surveys can pinpoint sources of pollution which can be
dealt with individually until our sewage system can be
installed. This survey also shows that much more pollution
enters the town from outlying areas, some of which are rural,
and some urban in character.
In conclusion, I wish I could say we have
sewers and a disposal plant being installed, but I can say
we hope to be started on such a system in the very near
future.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: We have a statement from the Simmons
Company of MUnster, Indiana.
PRESENTATION FOR CONFERENCE ON POLLUTION OF THE
INTERSTATE WATERS EFFECTING VARIOUS RIVERS, ETC.,
AS OUTLINED BY THE SECRETARY OF HEALTH, EDUCATION,
AND WELFARE TO THE STREAM POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
FOR THE STATE OF INDIANA, DATED DECEMBER 15, 1964.
Mr. Chairman and members of this conference:
My name is James R. Hooper. I am Central
Division Chief Engineer for Simmons Company with headquarters
at our Munster, Indiana Plant, located at 9200 Calumet Avenue,
Our Munster Plant began manufacturing in March
of 1958. We employ at the present time approximately 1,600
-------
134?
people; our principal products at Munster are mattresses,
upholstered dual-purpose furniture, and metal furniture.
Sanitary wastes are handled by the Hammond
Sanitary District.
The wastes from our Plating operations are
combined with our storm sewer facilities and are pumped
approximately one mile to the Little Calumet River (West).
These wastes are inorganic in nature.
On April 30, 1959* plans for a Waste Treatment
10 Plant were submitted to the State of Indiana. After
11 exchanging modified plans several times, the State of
12 Indiana gave us an approval "go ahead" on September 30, 1959.
13 In April 1961 we found it necessary to do our
14 own chrome plating, and on April 14, 1961, we applied to
the State of Indiana for such permission. Approval from
16 the Stream Pollution Control Board of the State of Indiana
17 was made on July 18, 1961.
is Operation and Cofrtrol of Facility
19 All work and/or consulting was performed by
20 the Industrial Filter & Pump Manufacturing Company of
21 Cicero, Illinois, on all phases of our installation of our
22 Waste Treatment Plant.
23 pH Control is maintained by the use of the
24 Foxboro Controllers which insure optimum pH in the
25 effluent.
-------
13^7-A
The system for destroying cyanides to gaseous
end products is as follows:
1. Cyanide rinses enter the first reaction
basin, where a mixer insures a homogeneous mixture with lime
and sodium hypochlorite.
6 a - Sodium Hypochlorite - 15 percent.
7 b - Calcium Hydroxide, approximately 1 Ib.
per gallon.
c - Retention time in the basin approximately
10 48 minutes.
n d - pH range 9-5 to 10.
12 The line is fed by means of the Foxboro
13 Controller which is actuated by electrodes in the basin. The
14 flow is through an automotic valve over the basin which is
15 controlled again by the Foxboro instrument. The Sodium
16 Hypochlorite is fed by means of an ORP Controller Recorder
17 which is actuated by electrodes in the basin. The flow is
18 through an automatic valve over the basin which is controlled
19 by the ORP Controller.
20 2. After the specified retention time the mix-
21 ture, now with the cyanides oxidized to the cyanate form,
22 overflows a weir and underflows a baffle into the second
23 reaction basin. This method is used to insure against short
24 cycling across the top of the basin. In the second basin a
25 mixer allows for a homogeneous mixture of the chemicals:
-------
1348
1 a - Sodium Hypochlorite 15 percent
2 b - Sulphuric Acid 10 percent
3 c - pH range 7.5 to 8
4 d - Retention time approximately 42 minutes.
5 e - Provision for lime fed manually.
6 The acid is fed into the second reaction basin
7 by means of the Poxboro pH Controller, which is actuated by
8 electrodes in the basin. The flow is through an automatic
9 valve over the basin which is controlled by the Foxboro.
10 The Sodium Hypochlorite is fed by means of a
11 Poxboro ORP Controller Recorder, which is actuated by
12 electrodes in the basin. The flow is through an automatic
13 valve over the basin, which is again controlled by the
14 heretofore mentioned instrument.
15 Lime may be fed through a manually operated
16 valve into this basin in the event that the pH should drop
17 below the optimum levels.
18 After the specified retention time, the waste
19 overflows a weir and underflows a baffle into the final
20 neutralization to undergo hydration and pH adjustment.
21 The reaction basins are equipped with covers
22 and adequate ventilation.
23 The procedures outlined herewith indicate the
24 methods employed at our Monster Waste Treatment Plant, and
25 the State of Indiana carefully checks our procedure and the
-------
1349
resulting effluent carefully and often.
Charts are maintained on a time basis, pH basis,
quantities of chemicals consumed, O.K.P. final neutralization,
and chlorine residual and are dated to conform to state
requirements.
In 1964 we used 6,875 gallons of Sodium Hypo-
chlorite, 1,155 gallons of Sulphuric Acid, and 26,000 Ibs. of
lime.
We have, on a full time basis, one man for
10 each shift who continually checks the Poxboro automatic
11 controllers and makes continuous checks of our Chrome
12 Reduction and makes reports via charts and schedules of the
13 Waste Treatment operation.
14 The effluent as it leaves our Waste Treatment
Plant is clear and practically odorless.
16 All plans, specifications, and procedures were
17 submitted to the State of Indiana and approved prior to any
18 operation at our plant.
19 The last inspection by the Indiana Stream
20 Pollution Control Board was made in January 1965.
21 We are planning, in the near future, on setting
22 up a standard procedure, with a most reliable and fully
23 equipped laboratory, for a program of sampling our effluents
for a complete analysis. This will be done on a monthly
25 basis and in accordance with effective procedures followed in
-------
1350
1 such an evaluation of our type effluent.
2 A waste water flow meter will be installed.
3 Cur charts maintained for the Stream Pollution
4 Control Board will be expanded to include our planned future
5 controls as I have just mentioned.
6 Simmons Company is most happy to be committed
7 to a program of rigid controls for pollution abatement in the
8 Calumet area. We join with all other industry in this area
9 in thanking the State of Indiana for the fine cooperation we
10 have received from its Stream Pollution Control Board, which
11 has helped in making our beautiful plant truly a modern
12 institution.
13 CHAIRMAN STEIN: We have a report from the La Salle
14 Steel Company, Hammond, Indiana, submitted by W. A. Thiel,
15 Chief Engineer:
16 (Statement)
17 As reported in Table VI-4A of the United
18 States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare report
13 on the pollution of the waters of the Grand Calumet River,
20 Little Calumet River, Calumet River, Lake Michigan, Wolf
21 Lake, and their tributaries, La Salle Steel Company disposes
22 of some pickle liquor, which is neutralized by the addition of [Uine,
23 by discharging it into the Grand Calumet River.
24 The amount disposed of is relatively small,
25 about 18,000 gallons a week. This is neutralized by the
-------
1351
i addition of lime to achieve a neutral pH reading. This is
2 accomplished by simultaneously emptying the pickle tube
3 and the lime tube, both draining into a large settling
4 basin having a capacity of 19,700 gallons. Here the
5 neutralization is fully accomplished; the solids, lime,
6 iron oxides and other solids settle out. The liquid is
7 then pumped into a drain that empties into the Grand Calumet
8 River.
9 In 1961 an abrasive cleaning machine was
10 installed and in 1963 another similar machine was installed
11 to replace 80 percent of our pickling operations. These
12 machines clean the steel by using steel grit. It is our
13 intention to use abrasive cleaning for all of our cleaning
14 operations and eliminate pickling entirely. V.e hope to
15 accomplish this in the near future.
l6 In the meantime, It is our Intention to continue
17 to neutralize all of the spent pickle liquor which is dis-
18 charged into the Grand Calumet River, checking the pH
19 reading before discharge, thereby making sure no acid
20 liquor is discharged into the river. The solids are removed
21 by means of a bucket and disposed of by a commercial carrier.
22 All sanitary sewage is connected to the Hammond
23 sanitary sewer system.
24 CHAIRMAN STEIN: We have a statement of the Northern
25 Indiana Public Service Company, submitted by Rollin M.
Schaefer, Vice President and Joseph A. Pelletier, Manager,
-------
2
3
4
5
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
1352
General Engineering Department.
STATEMENT ON THE
SEWAGE AND INDUSTRIAL WASTE FACILITIES
OP THE
NORTHERN INDIANA PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY
MARCH 1965
The Northern Indiana Public Service Company has
three plants located within the area included in the Feb-
ruary 19^5* Report on Pollution of the Waters of the Grand
Calumet River, Little Calumet River, Calumet River, Lake
Michigan, Wolf Lake and their tributaries; namely, the By-
Product Gas Plant located on Indianapolis Boulevard and
Riley Road adjacent to the Indiana Harbor Ship Canal, the
D. H. Mitchell Electric Generating Station on Lake Michigan
immediately east of Buffington Harbor, and the Bailly
Electric Generating Station, on Lake Michigan, in Westchester
Township, Porter County, Indiana.
This report covers the work that has been done
to prevent water pollution with details concerning the
sewage and industrial waste disposal facilities installed at
each of the above stated plants.
By-Product Gas Plant
21 This plant, constructed in the early
22 twenties, operated originally as a purification plant for
23 boke-oven gases. It presently operates as a natural and
24 propane gas storage plant where propane and air are mixed
25 with natural gas for peak shaving operations.
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1353
All sanitary sewage at this plant goes into
the sanitary sewer located on the north side of Riley Road.
ether plant waste consists of storm water, roof drains and
gas holder water overflow. These empty into a 30" storm
sewer located on the east side of Indianapolis Boulevard.
The water-sealed gas holder overflow is approximately 3,000
gallons per year (varies with rainfall). Propane storage
tanks are located within concrete retaining dikes to
prevent runoff in the event of tank leakage.
Deaii H. Mitchell Electric Generating Station^
On June 1, 1955, Approval No. 3114 was
received from the State of Indiana Stream Pollution and
Control Board for sewage and industrial waste disposal
facilities proposed for Dean H. Mitchell Generating
Station, which was under construction.
Sanitary System
The sanitary waste at this plant is discharged
into septic systems set up for the main buildings and con-
struction buildings. These facilities cost approximately
$3^,900.00.
Oil Drainage
Turbine oil storage has been provided with
an oil drainage bed 20' x 32'-6!lx7' deep and is filled with
coarse gravel. Oil-filled transformers located on the property
are surrounded by coarse gravel filter beds 55Ix55'xll deep.
-------
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Each pair of transformers has a filter bed of the stated
size which is adequate to absorb all of the oil in the
transformer in case of accidental rupture.
Circulating Water
Circulating water used by the plant to absorb
waste heat is circulated through the condensers and
returned to the lake. The quantity of water circulated
by the plant is 1^9,000 g.p.m. when the lake-water tem-
perature is coldest and 318,000 g.p.m. when the lake-water
temperature is warmest. The water temperature is raised
approximately 23°F. with the 159,000 g.p.m. flow. To
control algae growth in the condenser, chlorine is the
only chemical injected into the circulating water. The
following quantities are used:
Winter - 1.736 pounds per minute for five
minutes twice a day.
Summer - 1.736 pounds per minute for five
minutes three times a day.
Ash System
The ash produced by burning coal in the boiler
is conveyed to ash storage area settling ponds. Approx-
imately 370 tons of ash per day are conveyed to the ash
storage area. Ash is hauled from the property by truck.
Bailly Electric Generating Station
On August 23, 196l, Approval Number I.W. 66 was
-------
5
6
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
1355
received from the State of Indiana Stream Pollution and
Control Board of the sanitary sewer and industrial waste
disposal plans for the Bailly Generating Station, which was
under construction.
Sanitary Sy s_t em
The sanitary waste is discharged into septic
systems set up for the main buildings and construction building
These facilities cost approximately $13,500.
Drainage
Large oil—filled transformers located south of
the main building are placed on concrete foundations surrounded
by a filter bed 95' x 31' x I16" deep filled with coarse
gravel. The capacity of the bed is more than the volume of
oil that could be discharged in case of rupture of the
transformers. An oil-drain bed is provided near the gas, oil,
and hydrogen building to absorb the oil from the turbine-oil
tank if it should ever become necessary to dump the oil.
Circulating Water
Circulating water used by the plant to absorb
waste heat is circulated through the condenser and returned
to the lake. The quantity of water circulated by the plant
is 70,500 g.p.m. when the lake—water temperature Is coldest
and 141,000 g.p.m. when the lake-water temperature is warmest.
The water temperature is raised approximately l6°F. with
25 70,500 g.p.m. flow. To control algae growth in the condenser
-------
1356
chlorine is the only chemical injected into the circulating
water. The following quantities are used:
Winter - 1.38 pounds per minute for a five
minute period three times a day.
Summer —1.4 pounds per minute for nine
minutes three times a day.
7 Ash System
8 Approximately 175 tons of ash per day from
firing the main steam generator is conveyed by water to an
10 ash storage area south of the plant. Ash is hauled from
li the property by truck.
12 Summary
13 Our By-Product Gas Plant, as a storage and
14 mixing plant, is a closed system with no exposed raw
15 materials, treating or extraction facilities and is generally
16 free of industrial waste materials.
17 The electric generating stations circulate
18 large volumes of water to absorb waste heat from the steam
19 condensers. Daily chlorination of the water and removal of
2o debris with screen filters improves the condition of the
2i circulating water returned to the lake. Both of these
22 plants are relatively new and the sanitary systems and
23 waste disposal facilities were installed to prevent
24 possible water pollution.
25 CHAIRMAN STEIN: We have a statement from the Town of
-------
1357
Highland, submitted March 3, 1965, by David A. Morrow,
President, Board of Trustees, Highland, Indiana:
3 (Statement)
4 It is with a great deal of pleasure and
appreciation that we, of Highland, Indiana, have been asked
to appear before this committee for abating stream pollution
in the Calumet area. The United States Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare and this committee are to be commended.
Their vital interest and concern for the well-being of the
10 people of this area and the future of America is evident.
11 This being the date set for a hearing
12 relative to pollution of the waters of the Grand Calumet
13 River, the Little Calumet River, Lake Michigan, Wolf Lake
14 and their tributaries in Illinois and Indiana, and that the
IS Town of Highland, Indiana, has been mentioned as a con-
16 tributing factor, we, therefore, wish to present facts
17 pointing out that we are correcting this problem as finances
18 are available.
19 In retrospect, Highland has been working
20 toward the ultimate goal of no pollution since May of 1958.
21 On this date the City of Hammond entered into its first
22 contract with the Town of Highland to treat and dispose of
23 a part of the sanitary sewage. Subsequently, Highland has
24 been installing sewers and lift stations to deliver sewage
25 to our Fifth Avenue pumping station from which we pump into
-------
1358
Hammond's system.
By June of 1966 Highland will have spent,
since 1958, approximately $1.5 million on sewers, lift
stations, and appurtenances necessary to deliver our sewage
to the City of Hammond.
This seemingly insurmountable problem of
disposing of Highland's sewage could not have been accom-
plished had it not been for the foresight, knowledge and
courage of the City of Hammond, their Mayor Dowling; City
10 Engineer, A. G. Gianinni; City Controller, Mike Kampo; The
11 Hammond City Sanitary Board and the Hammond City Council,
12 chaired by Mr. George Carlson. These men, contrary to some
13 public opinion and ridicule, in 1964, ratified a new contract
14 with the Town of Highland.
15 We would be remiss in our presentation today
16 if we did not mention that the Town of Highland, with a
17 population of 20,000, has sacrificed many and varied other
18 services, conveniences, and necessities, in order to cease
19 and desist the pollution of these waterways, by expending
20 their tax dollars toward this goal.
21 The Town of Highland by the end of 1966 will
22 no longer be polluting these streams except during excessive
23 rain fall. This cannot be eliminated until the combination
24 type sewer is made obsolete. Vie can only realize this end
25 result as finances are available, which means that Federal
-------
10
12
13
15
16
17
18
20
21
23
24
25
1359
grants are going to be necessary to expedite or speed up
this solution.
The City of Hammond is willing to help and
serve their smaller neighboring towns, but continue to have
their own problems and need assistance also.
Jn conclusion, it is obvious the major stumbling
block for the complete elimination of this problem is fin-
ancing. It follows then that if this job is to be accom-
plished by the individual cities and towns, we will be
another half century debating in committee the pros and cons
11 before the ultimate goal is realized.
We, therefore, wish to point out that the
need for complete cooperation and coordination is more
14 prevalent now than ever before between Federal, state and
local governments.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: We have a report from the City of
Crown Point, Indiana:
(Statement)
19 The City of Crown Point in Lake County,
Indiana, is about to construct two new large interceptor
sewers. These new interceptor sewers will make is possible
22 for the City to install local sewers in parts of the City
not previously served, to relieve existing sanitary sewers
and separate certain combined storm and sanitary sewers, and
to serve new areas being annexed to the City.
-------
1360
1 The City of Crown Point is also in the
2 process of expanding and improving its sewage treatment
3 plant to handle the increased sewage flow from the new
4 interceptor sewers. It is believed that no untreated sewage
5 will leave the City of Crown Point after the completion of
6 the new interceptors and the expansion of the treatment plant.
7 Respectfully submitted,
8 Signed, William F. Carroll, City Attorney.
9 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Now, you can be sure that all these
10 statements will be read carefully and listed by the con-
11 ferees and this will be part of the record. Just because
12 they are not read, in the interest of time, we nevertheless
13 will give it full credence, and we will take these into
14 account.
15 As an example, to show you the type of
16 importance of these, we have the statement of Charles
17 Sandor, Department of Water Works, City of Hammond, Indiana,
18 and I would like to read a few sentences from his statement,
19 which will indicate the type of material.
20 "The raw water in 1964 was by far the
21 poorest quality ever recorded by the Hammond Filtration
22 Plant.
23 "The average raw water is rapidly becoming
24 poorer in quality.
25 "The instances of poorest quality raw water is
-------
1361
l occurring more frequently and for greater hours in duration.
2 "The pollution which strains the Hammond
3 Water Filtration Plant the most are the phenols and oily
4 wastes, sewage and plankton.
5 "At times the industrial pollution is so
8 great that all the activated carbon slurry that pumps can
7 feed into the raw water is not ample.
8 "To sum it up, the quality of raw water at
9 the Hammond's Water source was excellent between the years
10 1891 and 1925, satisfactory between the years 1926 and 1945,
11 poor between the years 1946 and 1955, and very poor quality
12 between the years 1956 to 1965. The quality level of the
13 period 1926 to 1945 should be restored and maintained.
14 "The effect of the degradation of the present
15 water quality is that it is becoming very difficult to
lg produce a safe and satisfactory water, using the present
17 conventional equipment and chemicals and employing the
18 present conventional water treatment methods."
19 We have one other statement by the Mayor of
2o the City of Whiting, Mayor Joseph B. Grenchik:
21 (Statement)
22 Mr. Chairman, conferees, ladies and
23 gentlemen:
24 I am Joseph B. Grenchik, Mayor of the City of
25 Whiting, Indiana. This statement is for and on behalf of the
-------
1362
people of Whiting.
The City of Whiting is interested in abating
water pollution in Lake Michigan for several reasons. First,
we have a moral obligation to all the people who also benefit
by their proximity to Lake Michigan. Secondly, our raw
water supply for our Water Filtration Plant is drawn from the
Lake along our shoreline. Thirdly, we have, over a great
number of years, maintained a beach on Lake Michigan which
attracts hundreds of bathers daily during the hot summer
10 months. The City of Whiting intends to keep this beach open
11 in the future if the Lake County Board of Health permits.
12 In 1945 the City of Whiting entered into an
13 agreement with the Board of Hammond, Indiana, Sanitary
14 District, for the treatment of its sanitary sewage. This
15 agreement is today in full force and effect. Over the past
16 five years the City has paid approximately $8.00 per year for
17 each man, woman and child residing in whiting for the treat-
18 ment of its sanitary sewage, and the agreement calls for highe
19 costs in the future.
20 It is true that during torrential rainstorms
21 it becomes necessary to by-pass the sewage plant of the
22 Hammond Sanitary District. Not having a dual sewer system
23 makes this necessary. As soon as the sewer level recedes, the
24 by-pass to the Lake is closed. Since taking office on
25 January 1, 1964, one of my main concerns is to be certain
-------
1363
that the by-pass is closed except during a heavy rain.
In December of 1964, the present City
Administration negotiated a contract with the engineering firm
of Consoer, Townsend and Associates for the purpose of
conducting a complete survey of our entire sewer system.
The cost to the City for this survey will be approximately
$1.00 per each citizen.
Just last year the City celebrated its 75th
Anniversary, and many of our sewers are at least that old.
10 I cannot say that the City of Whiting will install a separate
11 sewer system as a result of this survey, but I can say that
12 the Administration will cooperate in the problem of water
13 pollution abatement.
14 Thank you for giving the City of Whiting
15 an opportunity to make this statement.
16 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Mr. Klassen?
17 Mr. Klassen: Mr. Chairman, could I add one more
18 statement from the Hammond Water Works Superintendent?
19 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Certainly.
20 MR. KLASSEN: "Only when there is a strong north wind
21 does the pollution diminish in the filtration plant's raw
22 water supply. The fresh water from the north pushing in
23 displaces and dilutes the polluted water."
24 CHAIRMAN STEIN: I can assume from your selecting that
25 sentence that Illinois is in that direction?
-------
1364
l (Laughter)
2 MR. POSTON: Mr. Chairman,
3 MR. KLASSEN: This is of particular interest, though,
Mr. Chairman, inasmuch as the Mayor, I believe, of East
Chicago, yesterday intended to show that the water in that
area was of good quality and I think — I don't know Mr.
Sandor, don't know anything about him, but I think that,
from reading this, he's certainly joining the ranks of
dedicated people who are trying to do a job in providing
10 safe water under extremely difficult conditions.
11 CHAIRMAN STEIN: I will give these to the reporter and
12 would you enter these into the record, please.
13 MR. POOLE: I have an emergency phone call.
14 Would you introduce —
15 MR. POSTON: Mr. Chairman, I noticed that you read one
16 of these many reports which you have entered in the record
17 here.
18 Does that infer that all of the other
19 reports are of the same significance as this one of Mr.
20 Sandor?
21 CHAIRMAN STEIN: I just selected sentences from the
22 record.
23 I made no evaluation as to significance.
24 I hope the conferees will read them carefully.
25 Mr. Poole or Mr. Miller, will the Mayor of
-------
1365
1 Hammond — is he going to appear so that we could ask him
2 some questions about that?
3 MR. MILLER: Mr. Giannini has been designated.
4 MR. POOLE: By the Mayor of Hammond.
5 MR. KLASSEN: A representative of the City, we will get
B an opportunity to ask him some questions.
7 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Mr. Miller.
8 MR. MILLER: The next representative will be from the
9 City of Hammond and will be Mr. A. G. Giannini, City
10 Engineer, Sanitary District, Hammond, Indiana.
11 MR. GIANNINI: Mr. Chairman, conferees, ladies and
12 gentlemen:
13 I have presented this brief as requested by
14 our Mayor Dowling, in reply to the report prepared by the
15 Health, Education, and Welfare Department in February of 19&5.
16 In presenting this brief, if I may, Mr.
17 Chairman, I should like to just skip over briefly
18 the various chapters in the interest of saving time.
19 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Would you want the whole thing to
20 appear?
21 MR. GIANNINI: I would like the whole thing to appear.
22 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Without objection, this will be done.
23 MR. GIANNINI: The Hammond Sanitary District, charged
24 with the task of disposing of all sanitary waste materials
25 from sources within the district, was organized on October
-------
1366
31, 1938 > more than 50 years after Hammond became an
incorporated city. In the years preceding its formation,
the city fathers had become concerned about the city's
drinking water supply and were searching for ways to solve
the increasing lake pollution problem. Local sanitation
also was becoming a problem.
During the growth of Hammond, the city,
through its Board of Public Works and Safety, had builfc a
network of sewers which handled both stormwater and sewage.
10 All of the waste from the kitchen, laundry and bathroom,
11 as well as surface water from streets and industrial
12 wastes, were discharged into the Grand Calumet River, the
13 -Little Calumet River, and Lake Michigan. This situation was
14 creating both a health hazard and a nuisance.
15 Of greatest concern to the city fathers, was
16 the fact that dumping raw sewage into Lake Michigan increased
17 the problem of supplying safe drinking water to the residents
18 of the area, since Hammond and other Calumet Region cities
19 all obtain their water from the lake. It was time, they
2o felt, to provide a special treatment of domestic and
21 industrial wastes before the situation became serious.
22 The Sanitary District was thus formed through
23 authority cf the Indiana Acts of 1917, which contained rules,
24 regulations and procedural instructions for its establishment.
25 The District today is still governed by these acts and
-------
1367
subsequent amendments. A Board of Sanitary Commissioners
was set up to run the District and carry out the aims of
the administration. Members of the Board include the city
engineer, by virtue of his office, and two other men
appointed by the mayor. The Board meets every first and
third Thursday in the Administration Building and all such
meetings are open to the public.
Under the law, the district also had bonding
power apart from that of the city. It was this that
10 enabled the District to raise funds through the sale of
ll bonds so that it could build facilities to handle the
12 sanitation problem. At its inception, the District had
13 bonding power limited to two percent of the assessed valuation
14 within the boundaries of the city of Hammond. (Today, the
15 District's bonding power has risen to a limit of eight
16 percent of the assessed valuation of the cities of Hammond
17 and Munster combined, which came into the District in 1948,
18 or more than $15 million, compared with about $3-5 million
19 in 1938).
20 Once the District was created, the
21 commissioners got down to the business of building facilities.
22 But before they could do this, they had to raise the money
23 to be able to pay for them. Fortunately for the District,
24 the Federal Government at this time was providing funds for
25 cities to improve their public works facilities.
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1367-A
The Government, through the Public Works
Administration, would pay 45 percent of the cost of building
a treatment plant, pumping stations and necessary inter-
ceptor sewers. However, the Government could not enter into
the cost of the site. The total cost, including the site,
to get the sanitary district in operation, came to about
$7 million. But of the total, the District only paid about
$3,250,000 as its share of the cost. This included purchase
of the site.
Once the plans for the District facilities
were complete the Commissioners had to look around for a
treatment plant site. There were two requirements that had
to be met in finding a suitable location. First, the site
had to be near a receiving stream, so that the treated flow
could be removed and, secondly, the area had to be large
enough to handle the wide-spread facilities needed for the
operation of a sewage treatment plant and also for its
future expansion.
The Commissioners began searching the city
for a location that not only would meet these requirements
but one that also could be bought cheaply. Several sites
were found that would suit the purpose of the Sanitary
District and it was finally agreed that a 58-acre tract
9
along the Columbia Avenue and the Grand Calumet River was
best suited for the purpose.
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1368
The land was cheap because it was river
bottom land and of little value for industrial or commercial
usage. It also was picked because the city already owned
about one-quarter of it which could be turned over to the
Sanitary District.
And, finally, a pumping station had been
built by the Board of Works on Columbia Avenue to handle the
flow to the river which could be converted for use by the
Sanitary District. The only thing necessary to make the
property usable was to fill it in and thus raise it several
feet above the level of the river.
Once the necessary papers were signed to give
the District ownership of the 58-acre tract, ground breaking
ceremonies followed. Construction of the plant facilities
was begun in December of 1938, just two months after the
District was created. At the same time, the District took
inventory of what equipment and facilities already in use
could be converted for sanitation purposes.
The engineers found that much of the existing
sewer system could be used to transport sewage to the
treatment plant, with modifications and improvements. It
also was determined that the pumping station on District
property, at Columbia Avenue, could be renovated and
enlarged to direct the sewage to the plant.
At the same time, it was determined that
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
11
17
1369
three pumping stations would have to be built to accommodate
the operation. These were located at Kennedy Avenue and
Michigan Street, the South Side station at 77th Street and
Columbia Avenue and the Robertsdale station at 115"th Street
and Atchison Avenue.
Construction of the treatment plant itself
included a network of tanks, such as primary, aeration,
final clarification and sludge digestion, through which the
sewage would pass and be treated; buildings to house
mechanical equipment needed to operate the tanks, and an
administration building from which to direct the operation
of the plant.
The administration building, located in the
center of the District property, houses offices for the
Board, superintendent, supervisory personnel and clerical
help and a laboratory where the tests are made of the
various processes the sewage passes through while it is
18 I treated. Finally, 20 miles of intercepting sewers were
19 added to the city's sewer system to facilitate the movement
20 of waste to the plant.
21 The work that started in late 1938 to give
22 the City of Hammond a sewage treatment works took four years
23 to complete. The multi-million dollar plant was placed
24 in complete operation in September of 19^2.
25 Since that time, all the sanitary sewage
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1370
originating within the District, as well as all industrial
wastes discharged to the sewer system, has received complete
treatment in the Columbia Avenue plant.
Designer of the treatment works was Charles
H. Kurd. Most of the District improvements during the
past few years have been designed by Consoer Townsend and
Associates, the city's consulting engineers.
Pour years after completion of the treatment
plant, the first improvement in the city's sanitary sewer
system was made. Sewage was being dumped into the existing
sewer system and during heavy rains, the sewers couldn't
handle the increase and caused the sewers to back up and
flood basements.
It was decided that an extension of the south
side interceptor sewer be made from 165th Street and Columbia
Avenue to Michigan Street and Columbia Avenue. This extension
paralleled the existing city sewer and removed the load from
it in heavy rains.
In 19^8, the town of Munster was brought into
the District, through mutual agreement of the administrations
of the two municipalities. Munster residents were taxed
equal to those in Hammond and they were to receive the
same benefits. This arrangement also increased the bonding
power of the District because it would then include the
assessed valuation of Munster.
-------
1371
The addition was made during the early part
of the year and work began immediately to tie in the Munster
sewer system so that the sewage could be treated at the
Hammond plant. The District, by this arrangement, was
responsible for building a pumping station to service Munster
and also to build an interceptor sewer to establish the
connection.
When this work was completed, sewage in the
far east and far west portions of Munster was relayed for
10 treatment in the Hammond plant. At this time, most of the
11 center of Munster was still farm land. The Munster work cost
12 about $360,000 to complete.
13 One year later, in 1949, the Hanmond Sanitary
14 District took over the responsibility of operating all the
15 stormwater pumping stations in the city from the Board of
16 Works. This required renovation of stations along the
17 Little Calumet River and the addition of two more pumping
18 stations, one at Tapper and the river and the other at Van
19 Buren and the river. With the two that had been built along
20 the Little Calumet at Baring and Hohman Avenues, this brought
21 to seven on the Hammond side of the river for which the
22 Sanitary District was responsible. There were two more on
23 the Munster side.
24 It wasn't until 1952 that expansion finally
25 was needed at the sewage treatment plant. Because of the
-------
1372
growth inside the District, the plant was reaching capacity
and had to be made larger to handle projected increases.
First three additional stormwater pumps were put in the
Columbia Avenue pumping station. Then three sludge con-
centration tanks were added to aid sludge disposal at the
plant. Also added were eight sludge disposal beds and an
extension of the south side interceptor to Cline Avenue.
All of these additions in 1952 totaled
$850,000 and was the first major work at the plant since its
10 original construction.
Besides treating all of the sewage in
12 Hammond and Munster, the Hammond Sanitary District also
13 treats sewage from the towns of Whiting, Griffith and
14 Highland. However, since theyj«r«not part of the District
15 itself, they are charged by the amount of sewage treated
16 on a contractural basis. The town of Griffith made prepara-
17 tions in 1963 to have the Hammond Sanitary District treat
18 its sewage, similar to the other neighboring towns.
19 Treatment Plant and Its Operation
20 The physical properties of the sewage treat-
21 ment plant cover about 20 acres of the 58-acre tract owned
22 by the Sanitary District along Columbia Avenue and the Grand
23 Calumet River. During the latter part of 1962 and early
24 1963, a multi-million dollar expansion program was carried
25 out at the plant to increase its capabilities. This
-------
1373
expansion saw several more acres of the property covered with
new structures and equipment.
Various size tanks and sand drying beds are
located at the Sanitary District site, besides a number of
buildings from which the operation is run and controlled.
Located there are the Administration Building,
Primary Treatment Building, Power Building, Gas Control
Building, Sludge Control Building and the Maintenance and
Equipment Storage Building. The buildings are constructed
10 of yellow brick, are fireproof and are equipped with the
11 most modern instruments, electrical and mechanical machinery
12 needed to carry out the sewage treatment process.
13 There are 12 shift operators at the plant
14 and 12 at the pumping stations scattered throughout the
15 city. Relief operators are available for vacation purposes
are
16 and emergencies. The operatorsAselected for their mechanical
17 aptitude and are given whatever training is necessary to make
18 good operators.
19 Other personnel of the District include two
20 chemists for the laboratory, a part-time electrician, a truck
21 driver used for hauling sludge, seven maintenance—men
22 mechanics, painter and laborers, all used when necessary to
23 maintain the buildings and repair equipment. Maintenance of
24 the equipment is important because the plant is in operation
25 2^ hours a day, seven days a week.
-------
10
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1374
The treatment plant is of the so-called
biological type, employing the activated sludge process
along with separate sludge digestion. Essentially, the
plant functioning is dependent upon the utilization of
certain bacteria and other biological organisms normally
contained in the sewage which reaches the plant for treat-
ment.
The physical plant in operation provides and
maintains environmental conditions favorable to the life
requirements and growth of these biological individuals,
11 which are put to work in accomplishing the sewage treatment
process.
The sewage, or influent, comes into the
plant system through the Columbia Avenue pumping station,
after passing through the maze of sewers and pumping stations
located throughout the city to collect and relay the v/aste
material. The first stage of treatment is handled at the
pumping station. All rough and coarse material is removed
by screens and transported to a hammer mill grinder inside
the station. Here, ragfl, sticks and other coarse debris
are removed, ground and fed back into the sewage to be
treated. This process prevents pipes through which the
waste passes from clogging up and protects the expensive
pumping equipment.
The sewage is first pumped into pre-aeration
-------
10
11
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1375
tanks (20 by 30 feet wide and 8 to 12 feet deep) where two
functions are performed. One is the removal of grit, con-
sisting of sand, cinders, etc., by separating it from the
organic matter. The grit is thoroughly cleaned and makes
excellent fill material, which has been used on the District
property.
After it is cleaned, the grit is moved by
conveyors to trucks and then to where it is needed. About
3 or 4 cubic feet of grit is processed each day.
The second function of the pre-aerat±n tanks
is to freshen the raw sewage by blowing air under pressure
12 into it. The waste material then passes into primary
sedimentation basins where more solids are separated from
the liquid waste. This is all part of the primary treatment
process. The sewage is then run through a secondary treat-
ment process before it is discharged into the Grand Calumet
River, a clear liquid.
During the treatment of the sewage, two by-
products are acquired which become available for use at
the plant. One is a methane gas which is produced in sufficient
quantities to be used as fuel for two 425 h.p. gas engines.
If this gas were bought, it would cost between $1,600 and
$2,200 a month to keep the plant fully supplied.
The gas engines drive blowers producing air
required in the aeration tanks. Heat recovered from both
-------
1376
the water jacket and the exhaust gasses of the engines is
used for maintaining temperatures within the sludge digestion
tanks. Boiler facilities also are provided that use the by-
product gas for heating the sludge digestion tanks and plant
buildings.
During the digestion of the sewage solids,
after the volatile matter (biological breakdown) has been
reduced to a practical limit, the character of the residual
material is entirely changed. It becomes a thick viscous
10 liquid, having a not unpleasant tarry odor, and is otherv/ise
11 not readily identified as to its original source.
12 As a black, tarry liquid, the sludge is
13 permitted to flow by gravity to the surface of sand-drying
14 beds, where by percolation into the sand and by air
15 drying, most of the moisture is removed. The material which
16 remains on the bed is in the form of a cake, which resembles
17 black soil in appearance.
18 The material, called humus sludge, is used to
19 supply humus to soil and as a fertilizer. Farmers pick up
20 the humus sludge at the plant free. The process for turning
21 the heavy sewage into a usable product is a lengthy one taking
22 from 20 to 40 days to complete.
23 The sewage treatment plant, prior to the
24 expansion program, handled about 28 million gallons of raw
25 sewage per day. However, when construction on new
-------
1377
facilities is completed, the plant will handle up to 38
million gallons of raw sewage per day. Expansion was
necessary to keep up with the ever growing District.
4 instruction
5 In 1959, while recognizing the need for main-
taining a safe drinking water supply in Lake Michigan, the
Sanitary District's Board embarked on a construction program
to improve the environmental health problem of flooded
basements caused by back-up of our combined sewers during
10 storms. The city's rapid growth of the 1950's caused our
il existing sewer system to be inadequate. A substantial
12 amount of relief sewer and pumping station construction
13 became necessary for the prevention of combined sewer
14 flooding.
15 The two-fold purpose of the Board was
16 clearly demonstrated by the 1959 project in the Robertsdale
17 section of Hammond. A stormwater relief sewer was installed
18 in the western half of Robertsdale to handle only the run-off
19 from streets.
20 The project included the erection of a pumping
21 station in Forsyth Park discharging only stormwater into
22 Wolf Lake. In the eastern half a stormwater relief trunk
23 sewer was provided with additions to the existing pumping
24 station at 115th and Atchison Avenue. These relief sewers
25 are designed to permit the eventual complete separation of
-------
1
2
3
10
12
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
1378
Robertsdale sewers by installing branches and laterals to
pick up street drains only.
As soon as money becomes available it is
4 planned to complete the separation of Robertsdale's
sewers by installing branches and laterals to pick up
O
_ street drains only.
6
As soon as money becomes available it is
planned to complete the separation of Robertsdale's sewers
8
in such a manner that only stormwater will be discharged
9
into Lake Michigan and Wolf Lake. The existing combined
sewers will then become separated sanitary sewers flowing
continuously to the District's Sewage Plant. Results since
1959 indicate that the environmental health problem was
13
eliminated and a good start made on the longer range
14
separation plan.
15
The population explosion of the 1950's caused
treatment plant improvement with four new digesters ii the
1959 construction program to handle a greater amount of
organic material coming into the plant. To further improve
the plant effluent discharged into the Grand Calumet River,
the District in 1962 constructed at the plant six new
primary tanks, two aeration basins, two final clarifiers and
shallow lagoons for sludge disposal utilizing the existing
flood plain of the Grand Calumet River. The District received!
a $250,000 Federal grant from the United States Department
25
-------
1379
of Health, Education, and Welfare for its treatment plant
work handled through a $3,100,000 bond issue.
Also, in 1962 a storm relief sewer was
started in the Downtown area with a pumping station on Sohl
Avenue discharging into the Grand Culumet River. This
6 1 relief sewer is also designed to handle future branches
and laterals picking up street drains in the area and thus
eventually leading to a separate sewer system. When money
9 I! is available to complete the separation, the Sohl Avenue
10 station will discharge only stormwater into the Grand
11
12
13
14
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Calumet River.
The last project initiated in 1962 was
the Hessville Munster project. In Hessville the project
was similar to those in Robertsdale and the Downtown section.
15 I It provided storm relief sewers and a pumping station
16 addition to the existing Kennedy Avenue pumping station.
17 Planned eventual separation will again have
the Kennedy Avenue station pumping only stormwater into
the Grand Calumet River. The Munster project provided new
sanitary interceptor sewers to pick up dry weather flow
South of the Little Calumet River and in the Schoon
Ditch area.
The Little Calumet River was improved by
cutting off the sewers discharging directly into the
River and connecting them to the new interceptor carrying the
-------
1380
1 sanitary wastes to the District's Treatment Plant. To
2 further abate the pollution of the Little Calumet River,
3 the Sanitary Board, in 1962, agreed to treat the sanitary
4 wastes of Highland and Griffith. In the following year
5 the first connections to our South Side interceptor were
6 made by both towns. Contracts are in force for eventual
7 treatment of all the dry weather sanitary flow from
8 Highland and Griffith as soon as additional sewers can be
9 constructed.
10 In 1961 the Sanitary Board hired the firm
n of Consoer-Townsend and Associated of Chicago to survey
12 the entire District and advise the Board on what was needed
13 to up-date the sewer system. The engineering report out-
14 lined a complete program for improvements to eliminate the
15 continuing health hazard and property damage due to back-
16 flooding of basements.
17 In December of 1964, the Near North Side
18 storm relief sewer was initiated with the sale of a bond
19 issue for $2,640,000. Construction contracts have been
20 executed and the work will begin in March of 1965. The
21 North Side relief sewer is again planned for eventual separa-
22 tion of existing sewers with the Johnson Avenue pumping
23 station on the north side of the Grand Calumet River some
24 day discharging only stormwater into the river.
25 The Sanitary Board and the Board of Public
-------
13SO-A
Works, on advice of the Indiana State Board of Health
has Insisted since 1957 that all new subdivisions have
separated storm and sanitary sewers wherever possible.
In 1964 the District contracted for a stormwater pumping
station at Calumet and Sheffield Avenue to service the
new storm sewer being constructed on Sheffield avenue.
The pumping station will discharge only stormwater into
Wolf Lake. The Board of Public Works contracted in
February of 19^5 for the storm sewer to be started this
10 spring. The District also contracted for the separate
11 sanitary sewer on Sheffield Avenue since this is an
12 industrial area having no sewers at all.
13 Bond ing Powe r
14 The crux of water pollution control in the
IS final analysis has been and always will be financial. The
16 big problem of the Sanitary Board in the past was lack
17 of £inds to finance needed improvements. Enabling legislation
18 passed by the State Legislature limited the bonding power of
19 the District to a maximum two percent of assessed valuation
20 of the property within the District. In 1955* this was
21 raised to four percent, four years later to six percent
22 and in 1961 to eight percent. A bill raising the bonding powe
23 to ten percent is in the present legislature and has passed
24 the Senate. When passed by the House, the District will
25 again proceed with planned Improvements outlined in their
-------
1380-B
engineer's report of I^6l.
Table I - Bonds Outstanding gives a clear
picture of the financial operations of the District down
through the years. (See Page 138l)
Table II shows that the District has used its
(See Page 1382)
power to the limit in recent years. The present Board is
determined to make every effort to improve conditions in
Hammond as money becomes available. Approximately $670,000
will become available in 1965 as bonding power due to repay-
10 ment of principal on outstanding bond issues. This will be
11 put to use as soon as the final actions of the legislature
12 are known.
13 Federal grants have been received by the
14 District totalling approximately $475,000. More grants
15 will be sought where projects qualify but it appears that
16 'the amount of the grants will have to be increased sub-
17 stantially if Hammond is to achieve ideal water pollution
18 abatement in a short period of time.
19 This becomes evident when we consider that
20 our planned program of sewer separation covers an area of
21 approximately 10 square miles. Estimates of costs, by our
22 engineers, are $8,600 per acre. Other engineers' estimates
23 have been quoted being as high as $15,000 per acre.
24 Using our engineer's cost estimate, the
25 District will need an additional $55,040,000 for separation
-------
1381
H
1
O
bO 0
C1 1TN *
rH ** *
«HVO O
•d ON O
C iH 0
nX I ^
TO 1 **
•p TH vr\
oo en en
•p i
3 CM
O«H
«d
•H 0
CO O
p* »
o
•P 0
OQ vr>
JU .*
0) vr> ON
43 NO
CO
HH
EH
O
H
B
CO O
Hc»n ^
QD *
PRO
•H O
H -dvn o
<3 C3 O CM
EH -PH Jt
H CO 1
*•* i > --*
§ $1
CO OH
VA o
VO 0
ON •
H 0
O
1 O
)UTSTANDING
Amount
Paid
,00 175,
w •
<•-! O
CO O O
g.xr»^
HCMC^HCTNCN-NO^i-^-OO. en H
VA^I-ICN-VACN-ONON^I-CMNO 00
Jj- ^t Jt CMrHNONOVr\CMON CO
r* CM i-l r-IHCN-CMcnH XT>
•k
CM
ooooooooooooo
ooooooooooooo
•'^•••••••••0
ooooooooooooo
ooooooooooooo
OOCMOOOOOOOOOCM
oovn^j-vovn^j-ooNooooco
NOJ*ON vAvrvcMO(>-oo^j-3r
i-t H^J-NOONNOONNOCN-
cn CM en CM CM vo
vH
OOOOOOOOOOO z;
OQOQOQOQOaOOOQCQOQOQGQOQ
rH
«-<
-------
1382
TABLE II
BONDING POWER - 1965 - SANITABY DISTRICT
ASSESSED VALUATION OP HAMMOND $ 181,032,725.00
ASSESSED VALUATION OP MUNSTER......... I 24.313.9^-0.00
TOTAL ASSESSED VALUATION.............. | 205,3^6,665.00
SANITARY DISTRICT BONDING POWER..8^..or.... f 16,^27,733.20
OUTSTANDING BONDS as Of 12-31-65..... $ 16,078,600.00
UNUSED BONDING POWER as of 12-31-65........ f 3^9,133.20
BONDS RETIRED as of 12-31-65 | 669,600.00
January 1, 1965
-------
1383
of the existing combined sewers. Planned improvements
require another $5,000,000 making a total expenditure of
$60,000,000 before total water pollution abatement can
become a reality in Hammond. (Approximately $6,000,000
are required for completing the sewer separation in the
Robertsdale area along Lake Michigan).
The taxpayers of the District are willingly
footing the bill for the planned improvements of the
District. But it will be purely conjecture as to how far and
10 how fast the taxpayers will approve increased bonding powers
11 by action of the State Legislature.
12 Federal grants would be of great help.
13 Interest costs of $2,588*159 on present bond issues are
14 shown on Table I to be compared to bond retirement to-date
15 of $3,599,^00. Thus, Federal grants would speed up the
16 work for pollution abatement and at the same time save the
17 taxpayers the bond interest costs.
18 Re^ommgndatipii for Corre^ctiye^ _Actiori
19 The Hammond Sanitary District has fully
20 cooperated with the Indiana State Board of Health and the
21 Stream Pollution Control Board in the past and will continue
22 to do so. ¥e rely on their recommendations for improving
23 the public waters of the area and have gone so far as to
24 agree to disinfecting our treatment plant effluent as soon
25 as we can.
-------
1384
Last year we agreed to install chlorination
equipment to sterilize the effluent at an estimated cost
of $400,000. However, after reading in Recommendation No. 5
for a dam built across the Grand Calumet River east of the
outfall from the East Chicago Municipal Waste Treatment
Plant, we are of the opinion the money for sterilization
equipment would be wasted.
The dam would cause our plant effluent to flow
west continuously in the Grand Calumet and eventually into
10 the Illinois River where natural improvement is found
11 at Peoria. It is our contention that if the City of
12 Chicago does not have to chlorinate their much larger amount
13 of plant effluent it should not be necessary for Hammond
14 to do so since we have comparable treatment.
We agree that the effluent should be improved
16 only if the suggested dam is placed west of our plant
17 outfall. We realize that natural improvement of the effluent
18 flowing into Lake Michigan through the Indiana Harbor Ship
19 Canal cannot be accomplished. To improve the source of our
2o drinking water supply — Lake Michigan — it would behoove
2i Hammond to chlorinate its plant effluent. But not if
22 natural improvement is found in a westerly flow. Until
23 the dam location is settled we will hesitate and will want
24 to further study the value of chlorination to Hammond.
2s Hammond has been complying with Recommendation
-------
1385
No. 6 since its treatment plant was constructed. We have
secondary treatment and since 1948 have been treating the
municipal wastes of the small town Munster, Indiana. The
towns of Griffith and Highland are likewise under contract
with Hammond for their municipal waste treatment. The
towns, and Hammond have been moving toward integrated sewer
systems as rapidly as money for necessary construction work
became available.
In regard to Recommendation No. 7, the
10 Sanitary District constructed sludge lagoons in the flood
11 plain bordering its plant. Constructing lagoons for further
12 tre^jnent of waste effluents is of questionable value since
13 the building of the Cal-Sag Channel in Hammond will displace
14 the lagoons. It is our understanding that Stage II of the
15 Cal-Sag improvement in our area is in the not too distant
16 future, since Stage I in Illinois is almost completed.
17 Recommendation No. 8 has been discussed
18 above with Recommendation No. 5.
19 In the final analysis, it is obvious that
20 the Sanitary District has worked diligently through the
21 years for the better water pollution control on all of its
22 lakes and rivers. Major steps indicated herein have been
23 taken toward a final solution of the pollution problem.
24 The one remaining hurdle is sufficient funds
25 for a rapid solution. With the District retiring bonds at the
-------
1386
present rate of $670,000 per year and its bonding power ex-
hausted, it will require from 60 to 100 years to complete
its water pollution abatement program. It is apparent that
other new sources of money will have to be found to
expedite the necessary construction in the cities and towns.
Hammond Park District
The City of Hammond Park Board, by ordinance
#2123 (1929) sold to Lever Brothers the land that their
building is now situated on.
10 On March 25, 1936 an agreement was drawn up
11 between Lever Brothers and the Health Department of the City
12 of Hammond regarding the composition of materials proposed to
13 be emptied into Wolf Lake. Prom the above stated date to
14 the present date, there has been contention between Hammond
15 Park Board and Lever Brothers Company as to pollution of
16 Wolf Lake and Wolf River. Our last letter to the Stream
17 Pollution Control Board regarding pollution of Wolf River by
18 Lever Brothers was dated June 14, 1961, requesting prompt
19 consideration to action necessary to terminate pollution and
20 contamination reported in Wolf Lake.
21 Between 1936 and 1965, the Hammond Park
22 Department has lost the use of Wolf River as a swimming
23 area and fishing area due to pollution.
24 From May 6, 1929, until March 22, 1946, the
25 Hammond Park Department was in contention with the American
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
138?
Maize Products Company (Amaizo) regarding their discharge into
the Wolf River. On March 22, 19^6, the Department was
notified that the Amaizo plant no longer pumped any dis-
charge into the Wolf River.
Prom the above mentioned statement, it was
learned that Amaizo pumped their discharge into Lake Michigan.
This discharge has been investigated by the State Streams
Pollution Control Board. It was stated that pollution of
the lake was composed of sugar and starch. Records of this
pollution should be on file at the State Stream Pollution
Control Board Office in Indianapolis.
In 1948 the Hammond Park Board found it
necessary to close the Lake Michigan Beach to swimming upon
the request of the Hammond Board of Health. This beach
has never been reopened. Bacterial counts at Lake Michigan
Beach vary from 4600/ to too many to count. Pollution is
said to be the result of industrial wastes and raw sewage
being discharged from the Whiting pumping station on
Atchison Avenue.
John N. Higgins, Administrator.
MR. GIANNINI: The first chapter is introduction to the
Hammond Sanitary District. We have a history here. The
only thing I want to say about this history, in 1938 when
the Sanitary District of Hammond was formed, the sentence here
says, "Of greatest concern to the City fathers was the fact
-------
that dumping raw sewage into Lake Michigan increased the
problem of supplying safe drinking water to the residents
of the area, since Hammond and other Calumet region Cities
all obtain their water from the lake."
I assure you that that is the same feeling
that exists today and has existed throughout the City of
Hammond's Sanitary District.
Skipping over to page 4, we have a summary
of the treatment plants and its operation.
10 This is only put in here to answer any
ll questions the conferees may have and if there are any
12 further questions beyond what we explained here, we would
13 be glad to answer them.
14 I am skipping over to chapter 2, page 6,
15 which is the improvements.
16 I don't think I will read them off as they
17 are here because Mr. Perry Miller has covered them pretty
18 ivell in his statement.
19 I do want to point out though, that we have
20 a twofold purpose of the Board in trying to complete these
21 projects. Since 1957> eight, nine years — eight years of
22 the present administration - we have spent some 12 million
23 dollars in putting in improvements to improve the pollution
24 of the waters around Hammond.
25 One of the major projects that Perry Miller
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1389
mentioned was the three million six hundred thousand dollar
($3,600,000) improvement to our treatment plant.
Then, we have three major sewer projects that
have been completed, all of them with the express purpose
of relieving, first of all, an environmental health
situation that exists in Hammond due to the backing of the
combined sewers in the basement, but while we were putting
in these relief sewers to relieve this condition, we have
always kept in mind to eliminate all pollution around
Hammond, in its rivers, and its lakes and that it would one
day be necessary to separate our sewers. So, all of the
storm relief sewers we have put in would be with the idea
that some day we would eventually be able to separate our
sewers and have a separate system.
While doing this, as an example of separating,
we have taken the west side of Robertsdale, which is up on
the lake front, and separated that with a relief sewer and
a pumping station that discharges nothing but stormwater into
Wolf Lake channel.
We separated and relieved the sewers there
and we think we did the job properly.
It is an example of the job we intend to do
all over the whole city, whenever the money becomes available.
On the other side of Robertsdale, we put in
the relief sewers and added to the relief pump at Robertsdale
-------
1390
with the idea eventually of one day completing the separation
there.
We have installed relief sewers in our
downtown section of Hammond. They are all operating with
a new pumping station, stormwater relief station, discharging
from the new sewers which also will one day contribute to
the eventual separation of our system. In Hessville, the
same thing holds, with a pumping station discharging into
the Grand Calumet River.
10 Vie moved into Munster at the same time
11 we did the work in Hessvllle. We moved into Munster with
12 a sanitary interceptor to remove the pollution of the outfall
13 source from the Munster area that were draining constantly
14 in to the Little Calumet River.
15 We want to see the Little Calumet River
16 cleaned up. We have an interest in that to do that. We
17 cooperated with Munster.
18 We took them into the Sanitary District in
19 19^8. We have since taken in by contract, Highland and
20 Griffith, all with the eventual and with the definite Idea
21 of eliminating Calumet River.
22 We haven't completed this in Munster. This is
23 a program in the last two or three years, it is progressing
24 as fast as those towns can get money to tie into our
25 system and as fast as we can add interceptors to this system,
-------
1
1391
8
14
15
16
17
18
21
22
23
24
25
this will proceed.
I would like to skip over from that to the
3 (I finances because the crux of water pollution control in the
4 I final analysis has been and always will be finance.
The big problem of the Sanitary Board in the
past was lack of funds to finance needed improvements.
Enabling legislation passed by the otate
Legislature limited the bonding power of the District to a
9 maximum two percent of assessed valuation of the property
10 within the District.
11 In 1955* this was raised to four percent,
12 four years later to six percent and in 1961, to eight
13 percent.
You will notice that for many years, from
1938 to 1955* industry accelerated at a two percent rate.
Since this administration has been in, we have been
successful in working with other sanitary districts in
the State of Indiana in getting this bonding power increased
19 so we could proceed toward eventual elimination of pollution.
20 A bill raising the bonding power to ten
percent is in the present legislature and has passed the
Senate. When passed by the House, the District will again
proceed with planned improvements outlined in their
engineer's report of 1961.
Bonds outstanding on Table I in this report
-------
1392
gives a clear picture of the financial operations of the
District down through the years.
Table II shows that the District has used its
bonding power to the limit in recent years. The present
Board is determined to make every effort to improve
conditions in Hammond as money becomes available.
Approximately $670,000 will become available
in 1965 as bonding power due to repayment of principal on
9 outstanding bond issues. 1his will be put to use as soon
10 as the final actions of the legislature are known.
11 Federal grants have been received by the
12 District totalling approximately $475,000.
13 More grants will be sought as projects
14 qualify, but it appears that the amount of the grants will
IS have to be increased substantially if Hammond is to
16 achieve ideal water pollution abatement in a short period
17 of time.
18 This becomes evident when we consider that
19 our planned program of sewer separation covers an area
20 of approximately ten square miles. Estimates of costs, by
21 our engineers are $8,600 per acre. Other engineers'
22 estimates have been quoted as being as high as $15,000
23 per acre.
24 Using our engineer's cost estimate, the
25 District will need an additional $55,040,000 for separation
-------
1393
1 of the existing combined sewers.
2 Planned improvements require another
3 $5,000,000, making a total expenditure of $60,000,000 before
4 total water pollution abatement can become a reality in
5 Hammond.
6 The taxpayers of the District are wilKa^ly
7 footing the bill for the planned improvement of the District,
8 but it will be purely conjecture as to how far and how fast
9 the taxpayers will approve increased bonding powers by
10 action of the State Legislature.
11 Federal grants that will save the taxpayers
12 substantial interest costs for bond issues would be of
13 great help. Interest costs of $2,588,159 on present bond
14 issues are shown on Table I, to be compared to bond retirement
15 to date of $3,599,^00.
16 Thus, Federal grants would speed up the work
17 for pollution abatement and at the same time, save the
18 taxpayers the bond interest costs.
19 Moving on to the conclusions. We have heard
20 remarks based on the recommendation of the Health, Education,
21 and Welfare report, recommendations for corrective action.
22 The Hammond Sanitary District has fully
23 cooperated with the Indiana State Board of Health and the
24 Stream Pollution Control Board in the past and will continue
25 to do so.
-------
1394
We rely on the recommendations for improving
the public waters of the area and have gone so far as to
agree to disinfecting our treatment plant effluent as soon
as we can.
Last year we agreed to install chlorination
equipment to sterilize the effluent at an estimated cost of
$400,000. However, after reading a recommendation, #5, for
a dam built across the Grand Calumet River east of the outfall
from East Chicago Municipal Waste Treatment Plant, we are
10 of the opinion the money for sterilization equipment would be
n wasted, — this is a first glance.
12 The dam would cause our plant effluent to
13 flow west continuously in the Grand Calumet and eventually
14 into the Illinois Hiver where natural improvement is found
15 at Peoria. It is our contention that if the City of Chicago
16 does not have to chlorinate their much larger amount of
17 plant effluent, it should not be necessary for Hammond to do
18 so since we have comparable treatment.
19 We agree that the effluent should be improved
2o only if the suggested dam is placed west of our plant outfall.
21 v/e realize that natural improvement of the effluent flowing
22 into Lake Michigan through the Indiana Harbor Ship Canal
23 cannot be accomplished. To improve the source of our
24 drinking water supply — Lake Michigan — it would behoove
25 Hammond to chlorinate its plant effluent. But, not if
-------
1
2
3
1395
n
12
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
natural improvement is found in a westerly flow.
Until the dam location is settled, we will
hesitate and will want further studies of the value of
chlorination to Hammond.
Hammond has been complying with the recommenda-
tion #6 since its treatment plant was constructed. We have
secondary treatment and since 19^8* have been treating the
8 I municipal wastes of the small town Munster, Indiana.
The towns of Griffith and Highland are
10 II likewise under contract with Hammond for their municipal
waste treatment. The towns, and Hammond, have been moving
toward integrated sewer systems as rapidly as money for
13 necessary construction work became available.
In regard to recommendation -#7> the Sanitary
District constructed sludge lagoons in the flood plain
bordering its plant. Constructing lagoons for further
treatment of waste effluents is of questionable value since
the building of the Cal-Sag channel in Hammond will dis-
place the lagoons. It is our understanding that stage 2
of the Cal-Sag improvement in our area is in the not too
distant future, since stage 1 in Illinois is almost
completed.
Recommendation #8 has been discussed with
recommendation #5.
In the final analysis, it is obvious that the
-------
1396
Sanitary District has worked diligently through the years
for better water pollution control on all of its lakes
and rivers.
Major steps indicated herein have been taken
toward a final solution of the pollution problem.
The one remaining hurdle is sufficient funds
for a rapid solution. With the District retiring bonds at
the present rate of $670,000 per year and its bonding power
exhausted, it will require from 60 to 100 years to complete
10 its water pollution abatement program. It is apparent that
11 other new sources of money will have to be found to expedite
12 the necessary construction in the city and towns.
13 That is the extent of it, Mr. Chairman.
14 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Well, thank you very much, sir.
15 Are there any comments or questions?
16 MR. POSTON: I note that Mr. Giannina — you would like
17 to improve the source of your drinking water supply, Lake
18 Michigan, and it would behoove Hammond to chlorinate its
19 plant effluent if, as I understand, if they put the dam
20 in there, to my understanding, from Mr. Miller's statement,
21 that the normal direction of flow of Hammond sewage, under
22 normal lake level conditions, that the flow is toward
23 the west.
24 Do you then propose to put Hammond sewage
25 treatment plant effluents back into the lake and chlorinte
it?
-------
1397
Is that the purpose of your chlorination there then?
MR. GIANNINA: I was going to ask you some of these
questions along this line. Maybe we can arrive at a
solution. At least give me some understanding. Apparently,
which I haven't gotten from your report thus far, I want
to make it clear if the dam - this temporary dam the Army
Engineers are proposing as a controlling device for this
Cal-Sag channel - if it is placed to the west of our effluent
there, there will be no chance for our effluent to get to
10 the west. It will have to go to the east and it will go out
11 the Indiana Harbor Ship Canal to Lake Michigan.
12 Under those conditions, it would behoove us to
13 chlorinate, but I see no reason to chlorinate if the dam is
14 placed east of us and then we are forced to send our effluent
15 to the west. It would be of necessity. It would have to
16 go there. There would be no place else for it to go.
17 I want to ask, why are you recommending that
18 we chlorinate going to the west into the Illinois water
19 waste and so forth and we will enter the Cal-Sag channel and
20 then so on and so forth where the Calumet Treatment Plant
21 from Chicago empties their effluent, why are we just a few
22 miles away required to chlorinate and not the Chicago
23 Sanitary District?
24 MR. POSTON: I am kind of like Mr. Klassen. I came
25 to ask questions, not to answer them.
-------
1398
MR. GIANNINA: I am asking you regarding the report,
furthermore.
MR. POSTON: My point here has been that Hammond's
effluent normally flows to the west and I find it difficult
why you want to reverse it back to the source of your
water supply. I had —
MR. GIANNINI: I don't care where we go. I want to see
we get clean water. If we are forced to go to the east,
the Army Engineers are forcing, we are not Interested in
10 where the dam is placed.
li We are interested in doing the job. If it
12 is placed to the west by the Army Engineers, we will chlorinate
13 but if, by your suggestion and it is in your report, not
14 mine, it be placed east of us and we have to ship our
15 effluent to the west, why are we required to chlorinate
16 and not Chicago? Why is Lansing, Lansing, Illinois, who
17 buys Hammond water, the same water we treat, they buy it from
18 us, most of the people work in Hammond and East Chicago
19 industry, why are they not asked to chlorinate?
20 They go through the same system, the same
21 that Hammond does. Why not Bloom Township, they will
22 eventually end up at the Cal-Sag?
23 I don't understand the report. Why have you
24 singled out Hammond for sterilization and not the other
25 towns and cities?
-------
1399
MR. KLASSEN: I think, Mr. Giannina has a good
practical point there of why we would like to see chlorinated
effluent come from Indiana.
I would say that in all fairness and I may
be — I don't agree with this report then that I understand
that, if your effluent goes to the lake, you will chlorinate,
there is no question. If it goes to the west, you will
chlorinate if everybody else has to chlorinate?
MR. GIANNINI: Exactly, right. When you set the
10 standards, Mr. Klassen —
11 MR. POSTON: I —
12 MR. GIANNINI: I found you to be a very reasonable
13 man.
14 I have known you from my waterworks days. Of
15 course, these people haven't had much chance to talk.
16 I have been disappointed in the whole hearing.
17 It's been a wonderful thing, Mr. Stein, I am not wanting
18 to degrade it.
19 I think you are doing a great public service
20 and I mean, the general public, talking to them, the
21 conditions that are prevailing in our region, I do want to
22 see — it's become, even though the melodious voice of Mr.
23 Klassen has been a wonderful thing, it's been monotonous
24 hearing him talk and asking the questions.
25 It is a nice hearing, I have enjoyed it, but --
-------
1
2
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1400
(Applause)
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Sir, I appreciate your comments but
you can't have two things. That is, you can't expect to
have state rights and have unanimity. I am as much for
states rights as the .next one. Once we have state rights —
and the Congress says that the states should Invite their
people to the conference — if two states adopt a different
policy, this is the price we pay for democracy in America.
MR. GIANNINI: It is a fair price.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: If it bores you, I am sorry.
MR. GIANNINI: It hasn't bored me one bit. It has made
me tiresome. It has not bored me at all. I learned some-
thing. As Mr. Klassen said, I am glad he said he is
learning from us,
I am disappointed that Mr. Klassen hasn't seen
fit to invite the people from the Purity League, this lily
white section. Why didn't he invite the industry and give
them a chance to extol their version?
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Mr. Klassen has answered that.
I think I will answer again.
Mr. Klassen and I were puzzling a little bit
about your integrated treatment works and I would have
expected we would have heard about the Purity League.
MR. POSTON: I would like to ask one further question
and that is, Mr. Gerstein gave some water quality goals for
-------
1401
his waterworks intake, water supply.
I wondered, do you think that you should have
that same kind of water down in Hammond?
MR. GIANNINI: Yes. And now that you mention Hy
Gerstein, I would like to say if I may, Mr. Chairman, he is
an old friend, a fine friend. I say, I spent seven years with
the Water Department before I got kicked upstairs. I got
8 to know the people. They are the finest in the world.
9 When Hy Gerstein gives you a set of criteria,
10 you can follow them and not go wrong.
11 When I was Superintendent of the Water Depart-
12 ment, in Hammond, I was a member of the Sanitary District in
13 East Chicago. This was in the early 1950's up to about 1957.
14 I was sitting over there as a member of the Sanitary Board
15 in East Chicago and hearing of this case, that Mr. Chesrow
16 mentioned sometime earlier in the meeting, about the suit
17 that the Supreme Court had. The Master in Chancery was in
18 St. Louis and constantly sending us notices that various
19 Indiana industries were being excused from the suit.
2o All this time I was sitting in Hammond, trying
21 to filter and clean up the vrater that was coming out of the
22 Grand Calumet River and finding that we were having just as
23 tough a time as they are today, and I would like to point
24 this out.
25 We used to make trips and I can give you eye
witness reports — eye witnesses to testify of this and I am
-------
1402
1 We used to make trips and I can give you eye
2 witness reports — eye witnesses to testify of this and I am
3 sure, as a lawyer you would appreciate —
4 CHAIRMAN STEIN: We haven't had much of it here.
5 MR. GIANNINI: I know you would appreciate it. We have
6 an intake crib there a mile out in the lake and every spring
7 and fall we have to go out and replenish the gas for the
8 light on the crib.
9 Innumerable times we would go out there and,
10 when the wind is from the south or southwest, because the
11 wave action was less and easier for us poor sailors to navi-
12 gate, when we got through taking care of the gas, we would
13 swing around Calumet Harbor. You heard, when the wind is off
14 shore the lake immediately drops a foot. On those days and
15 that happened for days at a time whenever the south wind was
lg there, here would come the red discolored water out of the
17 river. This is eye witness testimony. If you want it, I
18 will give it to you.
19 I saw it innumerable times. We saw the red
20 discharge that would come out and get behind the breakwater
21 and it would swing out toward the Hammond intake and would
22 sit there and when the north wind came, that would bring us
23 phenol in the winter time. We attributed that strictly to
24 the Calumet River.
25 Now, our State Board of Health people can
-------
1 remember that while I am sitting there on the Sanitary
2 Board seeing our industry being excused from the suit, we are
3 having all of these difficulties with taste and odors coming
4 out of the Calumet River.
5 I am asking our Sanitary Board people at water-
6 works meetings, "Well, why don't we institute a suit against
7 the Illinois industries, let's get this thing straightened
8 out."
9 They said that they wanted to cooperate, they
10 felt they could accomplish more.
11 CHAIRMAN STEIN: That is right and I think you have an
12 important point. We expect that we will consider the whole
13 area. I think this has been the point of the enforcement
14 provisions of the Federal Act— the recognition of diffi-
15 culties and possible inequities that you put out in the
16 fortuitousness of who brings the suit against who. When
17 we cover the area, we cover the whole area.
18 I think if you follow at least the Federal
19 program or at least our record, if we haven't done anything
20 else, I think we have treated everyone alike.
21 Our main operation, our main intent is the even
22 handling of the administration of the law, and we try to
23 deal with big discharges, small discharges, upstream and
24 downstream states rights. When you come to chlorination or
25 any discharge of any other lakes, particularly where a stream
-------
1404
does not run right between two states, but goes from one
state to another, UP have always maintained that the state
g.i
downstream had to have at least a clean-hands doctrine.
3
Personally, I see no reason for one state to
4
clean up water and send it across the state line and when the
5
other state gets it, it is going to clobber it to pieces.
6
But,, as I read the recommendations here on
sanitary wastes, I am sure I quite understand the sensitive-
8
ness of the Hammond people .
9
It says "all sanitary wastes" and I guess this
13
14
lo
16
18
iy
20
21
22
23
24
25
is the phrase you use for that out here.
I think I tnow what you mean, "all sanitary
waste be disinfected before discharge. Disinfection should
be practiced in the manner prescribed by state pollution
control agencies. This is mutually agreed upon between the
two states."
Now, if this is the recommendation, I don't
see anything in that that is going to say who is going to
sell your interests down the river and that Hammond is going
to be required to do something that other communities are not
going to be required to do.
MR. GIANNINI: I object that, if that is the case.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Well, we are all citizens of the Unitec
States, and you are a representative of the State of Indiana.
We don't want to be made neither fish nor fowl out of one or
-------
1405
the other. We want to be treated equally.
MR. GIANNINI: I think, Mr. Stein, I want to offer this
constructively to you. If you were to conduct a hearing
again of this kind, you would have a much better response —
we from the audience — there's been some very bad feelings
and I have built them up myself in constantly seeing a drumm-
ing by one person.
You conduct the hearings, I womt suggest any-
thing — I think you know best about this, but in a case
10 where you have them from across the state lines, one of
Illinois, one Indiana, have our Mr. Poole — let him say
12 something. He sat here for three days. He is an intelligent
13 man.
14 A fellow like Mr. Klassen, I respect both
15 equally. If you do that, I think your audience will be more
16 interested.
17 This is Just smack-too-much of one-sidedness
19 and you excuse the fact the Illinois industries aren't on the
19 agenda because you left it to Mr. Klassen.
20 MR. CHESROW: That is fine, we accept that.
21 MR. GIANNINI: In all fairness and equality, we haven't
22 had a chance to learn anything from Illinois industries. I
23 would like to learn as I go.
24 CHAIRMAN STEIN: You may, this is going to be still open
25 I Let me make this point. As I see this, and I
-------
1406
1 guess we sit here differently and look at things differently.
2 I don't look at this business of Industry
3 testifying from a particular state at all as a disadvantage.
4 I look at it as a distinct advantage. You are right, I have
5 conducted every one of the conferences we have had under the
6 Federal law, there is quite a considerable number, now
7 involving about 700 industries. The most successful confer-
8 ences we have had have been where industry has come up, been
9 invited to come up and tell their story. The ones where they
10 haven't created, at least psychological problems with the
11 industry.
12 But, I believe, as I said the other day, that
13 no one can tell the story as well as the industries or the
14 murlcipalities themselves.
15 It is the same as you can tell your Hammond
15 story and give your feelings. I don't at all see that the
17 Indiana Industries have a disadvantage. As a matter of fact,
19 I think their story came through. Each one will be evaluated
19 on its individual merits.
20 I don't think that I am making any judgements
21 here, but there are obvious examples of industry in Indiana
22 which have done an outstanding Job and availed themselves
23 of the opportunity to say it here.
24 I don't think they are whipping boys or anything
25 of that kind. Despite the fact that you have heard Mr.
-------
1407
Klassen's dulcet voice most of the time, I think your
Indiana industrialists can handle themselves and answer
questions.
4 MR. GIANNINI: I agree. I would like to make this
5 statement.
I felt proud when we had Midwest Steel and
National Steel proudly come out and tell what they have done.
I am afraid the Illinois industries are not
proud, that is why they are staying away.
j0 They are maintaining we might do a better job
if we learned from them. That is the attitude that is taking
12 place.
13 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Mr. Klassen is the man who is advocat-
14 ing open files.
15 MR. GIANNINI: How do you like that — but Mr. Stein,
16 I want to point out one other thing, why some of the feelings
17 develop in Indiana.
ia This is a peculiar situation but the industry
ig from this area are communities^ We are known as coming from
2Q the region, and, no doubt, to Indianapolis "the region" is
21 a derogatory remark. What you are doing by conducting a
22 hearing of this nature? You are not only giving us what is
known as a region in Indiana, we are going to become a region
and nationally it will be that we are a bunch of culprits and!
25 we are looking at it that way.
-------
1406
l You are mganifying our problem. You make it
2 tougher for us to live it down.
3 CHAIRMAN STEIN: That is what everyone says when we
4 come in. But in about a year or six months afterwards, they
5 say, pretty generally — this is the pattern — "this is
6 the best thing that ever happened." This may be like a
7 tough medicine at first to take but you will like it.
8 You know, in Sioux City, when we came in —
9 and Mr. Poole was up there — we not only had a conference,
10 but we had to go to a hearing and there was the most acri-
11 monious discussion of this Sioux City. It had not
12 grown since the '20s in population — no new industry. After
13 they put their treatment plant in, they got the All American
14 City Award. They began growing in population, for the first
15 time attracting new industry, and we kind of get a love
16 letter each month from the City Manager and members of the
17 City Council.
18 MR. GIANNINI: We could use some of that in Hammond.
lg We hope something like that will come about.
2o CHAIRMAN STEIN: Well, we will give you the idea how
21 to do it to start.
22 MR. GIANNINI: One more suggestion that I have.
23 I would like to make a suggestion. You asked,
24 or you asked for someone here to offer the information that
25 the Calumet River, along somewhere in this hearing, only does
-------
1409
1 not, the Little Calumet River does not flow in Indiana.
2 Again, I would like to give eye witness testimony that in the
3 flood of 1954, and again in the flood of 1957, on the Little
4 Calumet River, I saw the Little Calumet River entering into
5 Hammond, proceeding west, and I followed it all the way out
6 to Lake Michigan through the Burns Ditch.
7 Now, that is eye witness, and I don't care what
8 anybody else may say. I want to point out, it is documented.
9 The Army Engineers'Preliminary report on the flood control
10 that they are proposing here will state that also. The
n Indiana Flood Control System and Water Resources Commission
12 has documented it in their studies on the Little Calumet River
13 Whatever anyone else may tell you, you can find
14 it in documents.
15 That is all I have.
16 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you.
17 MR. KLASSEN: Could I readjust my halo here and ask
18 you a question?
19 MR. GIANNINI: This is the way to do it, with coopera-
20 tion in a friendly spirit. We used to do it with the water-
21 works.
22 MR. KLASSEN: Wait until you hear my question.
23 I —
24 MR. GIANNINI: Mr. Klassen, from you it will be
25 wonderful.
-------
1410
MR. KLASSEN: Seriously, I had this here that I wanted
to ask you concerning Hammond's policy on sewer extensions
on the combined basis.
Do you extend sewers on the combined basis or is
this part of a very commendable program of separating sewers?
MR. GIANNINI: Mr. Poole might have told you, in 1957 I
took my Mayor down to see Mr. Poole and he explained to us
from here on they would request and require we put in
separated sewer systems in all new subdivisions and we have
10 taken Mr. Poole's suggestion and lived up to it since 1957.
n In fact, in this report, if you will read it,
12 I skipped over it, I am sorry, we would have precluded this
13 question. You will note in the report we mentioned this
14 improvement. There is a sanitary sewer being constructed by
15 the Sanitary District on Sheffield Avenue. The citizens,
16 taxpayers, are going — this was an industrial area, we are
17 now about to start it in the next 30 days and that is along
18 the line you are asking.
19 I am sorry I didn't go into it.
20 MR. KLASSEN: That is all right. As you know, Mr. Poole
21 and I both highly respect each other, but we do check on each
22 other.
23 He told me this, but I wanted to ask you.
24 MR. GIANNINI: Are you keeping the Illinois industries
25 away?
-------
1411
MR. KLASSEN: I am not.
MR. GIANNINI: They may help us learn. We all learn
from these questions.
MR. KLASSEN: I am not keeping them away. The
opportunity has been given to the Chicago Sanitary District
to invite the industries and we are told they were invited.
They were invited for next week.
8 MR. GIANNINI: They are not on the agenda.
9 I would like to have a reason to come back, Mr.
10 Stein. Is it possible we will hear something?
11 CHAIRMAN STEIN: We are not keeping them off.
12 MR. GIANNINI: Well, this is your agenda. You don't
13 have it on the agenda.
14 CHAIRMAN STEIN: The agenda is tentative. I know
15 you have been here most of the time and you have seen how
16 closely we followed the agenda. You know it is available for
17 adjustment. Any time that Indiana industry shows up here, at
18 any time Colonel Chesrow or Mr. Klassen designate them to
19 speak, they will be up right where you are now and I will be
20 all ears and most attentive.
21 MR. GIANNINI: Very good, and I will Join you.
22 That is all I have.
23 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you, sir.
24 VOICE: May I ask a question from the floor?
25 CHAIRMAN STEIN: I said at the beginning that we cannot
-------
1412
i accept questions from the floor.
2 We have been here a week and this has beoa the
3 pattern. Once we do that, afford this to one person, we
4 have to do it to all.
5 MR. POOLE: Time is getting late, we had better move
6 on to Lever Brothers, who will be represented by R. D.
7 Tinkham, Counsel for Lever Brothers.
8 MR. TINKHAM: Mr. Chairman, it is now ^:30. Perhaps
9 if I give my name and address I can sit down, but I will skip
10 a lot of our prepared report and not read at all.
jj My name is Richard D. Tinkham; I am a lawyer
12 practicing in Hammond, Indiana.
13 The facts in the statement which has been sub-
.. mitted to the conferees are based on a lengthy hearing, the
15 transcript of the evidence of a lengthy hearing held before
16 the Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board in 1962.
17 The reason I am presenting the report is I
18 happen to be the one most familiar with the facts contained
in that transcript of evidence which is quite lengthy.
i y
2Q I ask that the complete statement together with
exhibits be made a part of the record, Mr. Chairman.
£tl
22 CHAIRMAN STEIN: It will be included. Without objection
it will be done.
23
STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY LEVER BROTHERS COMPANY
24
25 Lever Brothers Company, Hammond, Indiana, Plant
-------
("Lever") does not discharge any water or other material to
Lake Michigan. It draws raw water from Lake Michigan, uses
it in plant cooling processes and discharges it to Wolf Lake.
All sanitary sewage and the maximum permitted amount of
industrial wastes are sent directly to the Hammond Sewage
Treatment Plant. The following subjects will be discussed
7 in this statement:
8 1. There is no pollution of waters endangering
the health or welfare of persons in a state other than that
10 in which the discharge originates.
2. The effect of the pollution on the legitimat<
12 uses of the water is not of sufficient significance to
13 warrant the exercise of Federal Jurisdiction.
14 3. All necessary remedial action has been taken
15 by the Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board.
j6 4. Adequate measures have been and are being
17 taken toward abatement of pollution.
18 The facts stated herein are taken from the
ig transcript of a hearing held before the Indiana Stream
20 Pollution Control Board ("Indiana Board") in February, 1962.
21 Effort has been made to make an unbiased statement of the
22 facts. As a result of the hearing, the Indiana Board and
23 Lever entered into a Stipulation (Exhibit B attached hereto),
(See pages
24 and the Indiana Board has had the right since September 30,
25 1964, to ent~r such rinal order as it deemed appropriate,
-------
1414
1 subject to Lever's right of appeal, if the order were adverse
2 to Lever.
3 References to the "Report on Pollution of the
4 Waters of the Grand Calumet River, Little Calumet River,
5 Calumet River, Lake Michigan, Wolf Lake and Their Tribu-
6 taries," dated February 1965, will be designated as
7 "H.E.W. Report."
8 1. There is no pollution of waters endangering
9 the health or welfare of persons in a state other than that
10 in which the discharge originates.
11 Lever operates a plant in the City of Hammond,
12 Indiana, for the manufacture of soaps, detergents, refined
13 glycerine, shortening, margarine and fatty acids. The plant
14 Is located in the northwest corner of the City of Hammond
15 between Lake Michigan and Wolf Lake.
16 Wolf Lake is an interstate body of water, with
17 565 acres in Indiana and 485 acres in Illinois. (See a map
18 of Wolf Lake showing the location of the plant and other
19 locations, attached hereto, made a part hereof and marked
20 "Exhibit A."
(See Page l4l7)
21 Lever draws raw Lake Michigan water from its
22 own intake in the lake, and after use in the plant cooling
23 processes, discharges it into a pond at the north extremity
24 of Wolf Lake from which the effluent passes under Indianapolis
25 Boulevard and down Wolf Lake Channel. This channel is 6,800
(continued on Page l4l6-A)
-------
EXHIBIT "B"
1415
j At 1:30 p.m. a discussion regarding the Lever
2 Brothers Company, Hammond hearing was held. Messrs. Richard
3 P. Tinkham and Oliver W. Koester, representing Lever Brothers
4 Company, were present. Mr. Witham informed the Board that
5 Mr. Perry Miller, Mr. Tinkham, Mr. Koester, and himself had
6 worked out a tentative agreement, for consideration by the
7 Board, complying with Mr. Finch's letter of June 27, 1963, and
0 Mr. Tinkham's letter to the Board of July 29, 1963.
o
On the suggestion of Board members and with the
y
concurrence of Lever Brothers representatives two minor
changes to the proposed agreement were incorporated as part of
the agreement. It was moved by Mr. Finch and seconded by Mayc
\.£t
Mitten that th^ BocrC ratify the following agreement between
u
the Stream Pollution Control Board and Lever Brothers Company
14
to wit:
15
"Lever Brothers Company will employ an industrial
16
waste treatment expert for an indefinite period on a retainer
basis, who initially will be Dr. C. Fred Gurnham, to direct
18
applied research for the purpose of attempting to develop
jiy
methods:
20
(a) by which existing waste treatment processes
A!
can be rendered more effective, and (b) which singly or com-
22
bined with the existing facilities, will accomplish a signifi-
23
cantly higher degree of treatment than is being obtained
24
through the use of existing equipment, all for the purpose
25
of improving the quality of the effluent to the channel portio
-------
EXHIBIT "B"
1416
of Wolf Lake, or the elimination of the effluent therefrom.
Lever Brothers Company will submit reports to the Board; the
first report will be a six (6) months status report to be
submitted on or before March 31, 196^, and semi-annual report
5 thereafter.
6 Following receipt of each of the reports, the
Board will review the status of the case and after the receip
of the first two (2) reports the Board may, upon notification
to Lever Brothers Company, render a judgment or order in this
10 case in accordance with the requirements, powers, duties and
H procedures as are established in Chapter 2l4, Acts of 1943,
12 and Chapter 365, Acts of 1947, of the General Assembly of
13 Indiana. In the event any Judgment or order is adverse to
14 Lever Brothers Company, it will have and may exercise any and
15 all rights to Judicial review, or other relief as provided
16 by the law." The motion carried unanimously.
17 Mr. Koester and Mr. Tinkham acting on behalf
18 of Lever Brothers Company accepted the conditions as set forth
}g in the preceding agreement.
20 This is to certify that the preceding is an exact
21 record of the minutes of the Stream Pollution Control Board
22 meeting of September 24, 1963, insofar as they record action
23 taken in the case of Lever Brothers Company, Hammond, Indiana.
24 Signed: B. A. Poole, Technical Secretary.
25
-------
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1416-A
feet in length and operates as a purifying agent much as a
river.
The plant began operation in 1930, at which time
a preliminary survey revealed that Wolf Lake Channel was a
stagnant pond, covered with green scum, had a disagreeable
odor and the entire lake had no source of fresh water except
7 drainage from an area of about 6,000 acres of land in
Illinois and Indiana.
-------
LAKE
MICHIGAN
LOCATION]
DESCRIPTIOM
JT - 20' WIDE: OPEWIJUQ UWDER P R TRACKS
p~ — 4 OVALS THRU DIKE
Q - 24-' WIDE CHAKJMEI_ UNDER TOLL Row
MAP OF WOLF LAKE
TRACED FROM PK5TOGRA.PHS BY
CHICAGO AERIAL IIOUSTRIES , IMC.
AERIAL SURVa DiVlSIOM
10265 fRMIILIM AVE.
FRANKLIN PAIK, ILLIWOI-5
PHOTOGRAPHS DATID APRIL 15,1959
"THIS TRACIWQ BY C J.Mlu.ER,JR. ON NOV. 3,1961
LEVER BP«S. CO.
fJDIANA
-------
1418
Analyses of water in the channel showed total
solids of 635 parts per million, and similar sampling in the
ft
lake proper showed 415 parts per million. Lever presently
3
discharges eight to ten million gallons per day of effluent iijito
4
the northern terminus of the channel.
O
This discharge provides a current in the channel
o
and the lake, and is primarily responsible for maintaining
the level of Wolfe Lake some two feet higher than the level
8
of the Lake Michigan. Lever believes its effluent actually
9
improves the condition of the channel. Analyses of plant eff^u-
ent in June, 1964, showed total solids of 204 parts per
million.
12
It was clear at the hearing before the Indiana
13
Board, above referred to, that all of the contaminating
14
material in the Lever waste water was settled out or oxidized
15
by the time the water reached the end of the channel.
16
Following are the latest figures as to B.O.D
17
of the plant effluent as reported to the Indiana Board:
18
February, 1964 68 ppm.
19 March, 1964 139 ppm.
June, 1964 36 ppm.
20
We are informed that similar samplings by the
21
Indiana Board revealed better results than these.
22
As appears on Exhibit A, there is a bathing
23
beach on the east side of Wolf Lake proper. The City of
24
Hammond maintains a constant check on the quality of the
25
-------
1419
water at this beach during the swimming season, and it has nev^er
been closed due to contamination.
2
It should also be observed from Exhibit A
3
that there are two barriers to the free flow of water from the
Indiana side of the lake into Illinois, consisting of the
O
Indiana Toll Road and a dyke constructed on the Indlana-
6
Illinois state line. These barriers provide openings for the
7
passage of water from east to west of about 24 feet in width.
8
There also appears on Exhibit A further impediment to the
9
free flow of water on the Illinois side, consisting of a
10
railroad causeway, which provides one 20-foot opening for the
n
passage of water.
12
Surveys and samplings admitted in evidence at
13
the hearing above referred to before the Indiana Board indi-
14
cate that no contaminating materials reach the opening under
15
the Toll Road appearing as Letter"G" on Exhibit A. It thus
16
must be concluded that none of the contaminating materials
17
in the Lever effluent find their way across the state line
18
into Illinois.
19
This was confirmed by the H.E.W. report, which
20
stated on page 4: "....investigation by the Public Health
21
Service has not disclosed significant Interstate pollution
22
on Wolfe Lake." This was deleted in the Addenda and Errata
23
section of the report. This same statement appeared on page
24
22 of the report, but this was likewise deleted. The absence
25
-------
1420
of interstate bacterial pollution in Wolf Lake is noted on
page 32 of the report. This was not deleted.
2
References to the clean condition of the water
3
of Wolf Lake are also found on page 14 of the report.
2. The effect of the pollution on the legitimate
5
uses of the water is not of sufficient significance to warrant
6
the exercise of Federal Jurisdiction.
The waters of Wolf Lake are not used by the
O
public or any governmental agency for any purpose other than
9
boating, fishing and swimming. There is no industrial or
agricultural use of the waters. Even though it be conceded,
and Lever does not so concede, that the channel is unfit for
12
all of these uses, it should be observed that the channel
13
consists of approximately 40 acres of the body of water or
14
four percent of the Lake.
15
Thus, under the evidence adduced at the hearing,
16
above described, 96 percent of Wolf Lake (1,008 acres of
17
1,050) remains open and available for all the uses to which
18
the lake is put.
19
The evidence at the hearing, above described,
20
shows that the dissolved oxygen in the channel is more than
21
sufficient to support fish life, except for a short distance
22
about half-way down stream. The dissolved oxygen in Wolf
23
Lake itself approaches the saturation point.
24
In the Addenda and Errata section of the H.E.W.
25
report, reference is made to the Lever waste as "causing fish
-------
1421
kills in a portion of the Lake, and tainting the flesh of
game fish in Wolf Lake." At the hearing before the Indiana
Board there was evidence of one fish kill in the spring of
1962. Samples of water taken at the site by the State reveal*
sufficient dissolved oxygen to support fish life. The only
specific evidence as to the cause of the kill was given by
Dr. Arthur D. Hasler of the University of Wisconsin, who is
an expert in the field of zoology and limnology. He gave his
opinion that under the facts the kill was due to a natural
10 winter kill, which also occurred at the same time in other
u lakes in the area.
12 The Addenda and Errata section of the H.E.W.
13 report also refers to "tainting the flesh of game fish,"
14 There was some evidence in the record of the 1962 hearing
15 that fish caught in the channel "tasted like soap". Since
16 no waste waters from soap or detergent manufacturers are
17 discharged to Wolf Lake, it is believed that this testimony
18 was psychogenetic. The word "Lever" is synonymous with "soap
19 therefore, the fish taste like soap.
2Q It; is common knowledge among fishermen that fish
21 caught in ponds or lakes which have no source of fresh water
22 have a "muddy" taste. There was also evidence at the
23 hearing that fish from the lake tasted "real good", but that
24 fish caught in the channel had a muddy, but not soapy taste.
25 It is submitted that Table VI - 4a of the H.E.W.
-------
1422
report is inaccurate when it states that "soap" is a part of
the waste from the Lever plant.
It must be concluded, therefore, that at least
96 percent of Wolf Lake is wholly adequate for the uses to
which the lake is put, and that the effect of pollution of
the channel is not of sufficient significance to warrant the
exercise of Federal Jurisdiction.
3. All necessary remedial action has been taken
by the Indiana Board.
10 Since 1937, the Lever effluent to Wolf Lake has
11 been subject to surveys and suggestions by the Hammond Park
12 Board, the Hammond Sanitary District and the Indiana Board.
13 Improvements in treatment and the quality of the effluent to
14 Wolf Lake have been made periodically and progressively since
15 that time.
16 Better and more efficient treatment methods have
17 been brought to the attention of Lever from time to time. These
18 have been investigated and, where proved feasible, have been
19 put into use. This will be discussed in the next section of
20 this statement.
21 A survey of Wolf Lake was made by the Hammond
22 Sanitary District in 19^2. Certain recommendations were made
23 at that time, and Lever attempted to follow these. In 1946,
24 the Indiana Board and the Sanitary District of Hammond formall
25 designated standards of quality for the lever effluent. Lever
-------
1423
1 attempted to comply with these standards, and employed a
2 number of industrial waste treatment experts to assist it in
3 doing so.
4 In 1957, the Indiana Board summoned Lever to a
5 hearing concerning Wolf Lake. As a result of the hearing,
6 the parties entered into a Stipulation, under which Lever
7 agreed to study existing and new treatment methods, to adopt
9 such as proved feasible and to make periodic reports to the
3 Indiana Board.
IQ The evidence at the subsequent hearing in 1962
H was undisputed that, except in a few minor particulars, Lever
12 complied with the terms of the Stipulation.
13 On July 19, 19&1, Lever was again summoned to a
14 hearing before the Indiana Board. The hearing was begun on
15 January 30, 1962, and lasted for nine days. The transcript
16 of the oral testimony at the hearing consists of four volumes,
17 totaling 1,378 pages.
18 In addition, 123 exhibits were admitted in evi-
19 dence.
20 AS a result of this hearing, a further Stipula-
21 tion was entered into between the Indiana Board and Lever, a
22 c°Py of which is attached hereto, made a part hereof and marke|d
23 "Exhibit B". Lever is now engaged in the performance of its
24 obligations under this Stipulation, as will be detailed in
25 the next section of this statement.
-------
1424
It will be observed that the Stipulation empowers
the Indiana Board to enter an appropriate final order if the
Board deems that such is indicated. The transcript of this
hearing will be made available to the Public Health Service
should it be desired.
4. Adequate measures have been and are being
taken toward abatement of the pollution.
Beginning as early as 1937, Lever, in conjunctior
9 with the Hammond Sanitary Board, the Hammond Park Board and
10 the state Board of Health engaged in studies, experiments and
11 the installation of improvements in efforts to Improve the
12 quality of the effluent to Wolf Lake. Lever employed, over
13 the intervening years, a number of experts on the treatment oi
14 Industrial wastes to advise the Company, and a number of theix
15 suggestions have been adopted.
16 Continuous chlorlnation of the effluent Lake
17 Michigan water began in 19^3 at the suggestion of the Indiana
18 Board. This water is retained in the plant and in the plant
19 processes for a period of one and one-half to two hours,
20 effectively kills harmful bacteria and reduces the algae
21 contained in the effluent Lake Michigan water. Today,
22 automatic chlorination into the effluent waters is maintained
23 24 hours per day and 365 days per year. The chlorine residual
24 in the effluent water to Wolf Lake is .2 parts per million.
25 Bacteria in the effluent Lake Michigan water are successfully
-------
1425
j eliminated.
The contaminants in the Lever effluent to Wolf
A
Lake consist of suspended solids and dissolved solids.
3
Lever's treatment processes have effectively dealt with the
K former, but the dissolved solids present a difficult problem.
O
. Eighty to 90 percent of the suspended solids in
6
the effluent to Wolf Lake are removed by passing the effluent
water through skim tanks and then through two Colloidair units
8
which separate the solids from the effluent water by air
3
flotation and skimming. The Colloidair units were installed
in 1952 and have been operated continuously since. The
efficiency of these units has been improved from time to time.
l&
However, the dissolved solids in the effluent
13
are not susceptible to effective treatment by any practical
14
method known at this time. Since the dissolved solids are
10
exceedingly dilute, the problem is made more difficult.
16
It will be observed from Exhibit B, the Stipula-
tion entered into between Lever and the Indiana Board
is
on September 26, 1963, that Lever agreed to employ an Indus-
*y
trial waste treatment expert, who initially would be Dr. C.
Fred Gurnham of Illinois Institute of Technology, to direct
21
applied research for the purpose of attempting to develop
««
means to improve the effluent.
23
It will also be observed' that Lever is obligated
24
to make a report each six months on the status of efforts to
25
-------
1426
i improve the effluent. Dr. C. Fred Gurnham has been retained
2 and has been engaged in active research on this matter since
3 October 1, 1963.
4 Two reports have been made under the Stipulation,
5 Studies of the effluent described in the first
6 report reveal that about 90 percent of the foreign material
7 In the effluent (after passing through the present treatment
8 process) consists of dissolved material not susceptible of
g treatment in the existing treatment facilities. Possible
10 methods of treatment were likewise discussed. One of the
u current efforts is to attempt to eliminate these wastes at
12 their sources.
13 The second report was rendered September 30,
14 1964, and the principal sources of dissolved solids in the
15 wastes were then identified. A substantial amount of this is
16 glycerine in solution. Since this glycerine has a substantial
17 market value, Lever is as desirous as anyone to find a method
lg for its recovery. The third report is due March 31, 1965.
19 Lever is now assigning a chemical engineer to
2Q devote full time to conduct experiments with new methods of
21 treatment suggested by Dr. Gurnham. One of these will be to
22 determine the feasibility of chemical oxidation despite the
., fact that recent United States Public Health Service studies
**3
24 have been discouraging.
25 Another will be the use of carbon as a purifier
-------
1427
for the effluent. Efforts will likewise be made to reduce
the volume of flow to the present treatment facilities in an
2
3 attempt to secure more efficient operation. Lever is con-
4 tinuing to eliminate wastes at their sources.
It should be observed that the Stipulation of
September 26, 1963, gives the Indiana Board the right at any
6
time after the receipt of the first two reports (which have
now been received) to enter an appropriate order if the Board
8
determines that such is indicated.
9
Conclusion
It should appear clearly that the Indiana Board
and Lever are doing all that they can at the present time to
solve the problem presented. It is, therefore, respectfully
13
submitted that:
14
1. There is no pollution of waters endangering
the health or welfare of persons in a state other than that
16
in which the discharge originates. The contaminating poten-
tials are confined to Wolf Lake Channel, which is wholly in
18
Indiana.
19
2. The effect of the pollution on the legitimate
20
uses of the water is not of sufficient significance to warrant
exercise of Federal Jurisdiction. Except for 4 percent of
Z2
the lake (the channel), Wolf Lake affords full opportunity
23
for boating, bathing and fishing, the only uses to which the
lake is put,
2o
-------
1428
l 3. All necessary remedial action has been taken
2 by the Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board. The Indiana
3 Stream Pollution Control Board has completed one phase of the
4 action prescribed by the Federal Water Pollution Control Act
5 and is in position to take final action if deemed necessary.
6 4. Adequate measures have been and are being
7 taken toward abatement of the pollution. Present treatment
8 methods now remove the maximum possible amounts of suspended
9 solids under the best known treatment methods. Research and
10 experimentation are now proceeding in efforts to find methods
11 to remove the maximum possible amounts of dissolved solids.
12 Respectfully submitted,
13 Lever Brothers Company, by 0. W. Koester, Plant
14 Manager, Hammond, Indiana.
15 * * * * *
16 MR. TINKHAM: All right, I want to say at the outset
17 that, anticipating a question by Mr. Poston, our records on
18 file and to be filed with the Indiana Stream Pollution Control
19 Board are open to inspection by any authorized person from
20 the Department — from the Service.
21 CHAIRMAN STEIN: May I say, with your company, in
22 other parts of the country, we have always received full
23 cooperation with whatever information we wished, whether it ha|s
24 been a research demonstration, enforcement or any program
25 involved with pollution control.
-------
1429
All we had to do is ask.
2 MR. TINKHAM: I am glad to hear that.
3 Actually, this was a decision made without
knowing what the other plants were doing. So, we are not
going to catch the devil for doing it, I guess.
I might say that our plant is located in the
northwest part of Hammond.
It draws raw water from Lake Michigan and dis-
charges in the Wolf Lake Channel.
10 All sanitary sewage and the maximum permitted
amounts of industrial wastes are sent directly to the Hammond
12 Sewage Treatment plant.
23 We have been told on a number of occasions that
14 the plant cannot take any more of our wastes. We will dis-
15 cuss this subject briefly under four sub-divisions.
16 Number 1, there is no pollution of waters en-
17 dangering the health or welfare of persons in a state other
18 than that in which the discharge originates.
19 Number 2, the effect of the pollution on the
20 legitimate uses of water is not of sufficient significance
2J to warrant the exercise of Federal Jurisdiction.
22 Number 3, all necessary remedial action has
23 been taken by the Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board.
24 Number 4, adequate measures have been and are
25 being taken toward abatement of pollution.
-------
1430
i As I said, the facts stated herein are taken
2 from the transcript of the evidence of a ten-day hearing
3 before the Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board. That
4 evidence is contained in four volumes, thirteen hundred sevent(y
5 eight (1,378) pages with 123 exhibits. I may say that that
6 also is open to inspection by any of the conferees
7 We have attempted to make an unbiased statement
0 of this record. I would ask the members of the conference to
O
Q open the statement of Lever Brothers to Exhibit A which is a
y
10 map of the Wolf Lake area.
n You will observe, if you will unfold the exhibit,
the plant of Lever Brothers Company in the upper right hand
corner and you will observe the channel of Wolf Lake just
I w
across Indianapolis Boulevard and forms a small pool to the
northeast side of Indianapolis Boulevard.
.. What has already been referred to as Wolf Lake
lb
Channel appears running down south on the map. That channel
is 6800 feet long.
18
Our discharges are discharged into the pool
northeast of th3 channel and have the benefits of natural
purification for that more than a mile of channel.
When our wastes submerge from the channel in the
neighborhood of the islands appearing on the map, our wastes
23
are substantially oxidized and, as a matter of fact, there is
no effect upon Wolf Lake proper.
25
-------
1431
l Now, in the beginning when our plant was
established in 1930, the channel was analyzed and the lake
was analyzed by the Columbus Laboratories here in Chicago.
O
Briefly, I won't give you all of the data, but,
4
in 1930, the channel had 635 parts per million of total
Q
. solids. The lake proper had 4l5 parts per million of total
6
solids.
Today, the channel has less than a third of
8
that sum, 200 parts per million of total solids.
y
You will note on the map the Wolf Lake Park and
Beach over in the right or east side. That beach has been a
steady operation and has not been closed due to any contami-
12
nation from any source.
13
As a matter of fact, in our local paper, the
14
Hammond Times, soweone - I forgot who it was now - in connec-
15
tion with the park was quoted as saying that the water was
16
almost good enough for drinking water.
17
Now, you will also observe from the lake or from
18
the map that the Indiana Toll fload running about the center
19
of the map and running off to the southeast divides the lake
20
or forms a barrier for the passage of water from east to west,
21
Point G on the map indicates a 24 foot opening
in the Toll Road.
23
Moving to the left or west, you will find a dike
24
in the middle of the lake on the state line, point F. Point p
25
-------
1432
on that map indicates — indicates four openings of about six
feet each.
Moving further to the west to the Illinois side,
you find Point E on a railroad viaduct or a railroad track
across the lake and Point E affords a 20-foot-wide opening
for the passage of water from east to west.
7 So, you see, the lake is effectively divided
8 into four smaller lakes.
9 The passage of water is restricted from the east
10 to the west by these three barriers.
Now, the lake has 1050 acres, 565 of which are
12 in Indiana and 485 which are in Illinois.
13 We think that our effluent discharged to Wolf
14 Lake Channel has actually improved the quality of water in
Wolf Lake, based not only upon the scientific survey of the
16 lake made before the plant was established, but also upon
17 appearance today.
You v/ill note in the picture and the slides taker
19 by the Public Health Service, the lake has a very good color.
2o If you will go out and inspect it today; you will find it has
21 a very good color
22 Incidentally, it is our opinion that the Hammond
23 Beach would not be open if it weren't for the Lever Brothers
24 discharge of 8 to 10 million gallons per day. That discharge
25 helps to make a current in the lake which has no source of
-------
1433
fresh water whatsoever, except drainage, and discharge from
Lever Brothers Company.
We think the lake level which is two feet higher
than Lake Michigan is maintained or helped to be maintained
by the discharge from Lever Brothers Company.
Now, it was clear at the hearing before the
Indiana Board that all of the contaminating materials in the
8 Lever waste water was settled out or oxidized by the time the
9 water reached the end of the channel.
10 As a matter of fact, the dissolved oxygen in
11 the lake itself approaches the saturation point.
12 There is only one place in the channel and that
13 is about half way down, as I recall it, where the dissolved
14 oxygen is not sufficient to support fish life and fishing is
15 carried on in the channel and in the lake even through the
16 ice in the winter time.
17 The latest figures on the plant B.O.D. effluent,
18 February 1964 and March 1964 and June 1964 were respectively
19 as follows: 68 parts per million, 139 parts per million, and
20 36 parts per million.
21 Although I haven't seen them, we are informed
22 similar analyses made by the Indiana Stream Pollution Control
23 Board at the same time revealed better results than this.
24 I am skipping over part of this.
25 The fact that we contend there is no interstate
-------
1434
l pollution was well borne out by this evidence. It was also
2 borne out by the original Health, Education, and Welfare
3 report, when it said on Page 4, "investigation by the Public
4 Health Service has not disclosed significant interstate
5 pollution."
6 For some reason or other, which we have been
7 unable to find or discover, that part was deleted in the Errat
8 and Addenda section of the report. We don't know why.
9 Likewise, on page 22 of the report, that was
10 repeated, that there was no interstate pollution. That like-
11 wise was deleted.
12 In the Indiana report which was read by Mr.
13 Miller, on page 39, the same contention is made. Fortunately,
14 that has not been deleted as yet that there is no interstate
15 pollution of Wolf Lake.
16 References to cleanliness of the water of
17 Wolf Lake is found in several places in the Health, Education,
18 end Welfare report.
19 There is one place where they say the wild fowl
20 avoid polluted waters, but plenty of them are found on Wolf
21 Lake.
22 In another place, on page 32 of the Health,
23 Education, and Welfare report, it states there is no signi-
24 ficant interstate bacterial pollution of Wolf Lake and this wa
25 not deleted.
-------
My second point is the effect of pollution on
2 the legitimate uses of the water is not of sufficient
3 significance to warrant the exercise of Federal jurisdiction.
4 Now, if you refer to Exhibit A again, this is
the map of Wolf Lake, there are ten hundred and fifty (1050)
6 acres in the old lake itself and some 40 acres, I believe,
7 40 acres in the channel.
8 The channel constitutes almost four percent of
g the total acreage. The only uses to which the lake is put
10 are fishing, boating and bathing.
H Of those 1050 acres, the public can enjoy,
12 without any restriction whatsoever, except as restricted by
13 the Toll Road and Railroad dike, the railroad crossing or
14
the railroad track and the dike, unrestricted use of the water
15 of Wolf Lake for the uses to which it is put.
16 There is no agricultural use of Wolf Lake water
17 whatsoever.
18
It is not used for drinking water so that we say
lg that Wolf Lake is free and open, 96 percent of Wolf Lake is
2Q free and open for all the uses the public wants to put it to
and I have talked about dissolved oxygen.
22 In the Addenda and Errata section of the Health,
Education, and Welfare report, reference is made that the
£3
Lever waste causes fish kills in portions of the lake and kULs
25 game and fish in Wolf Lake.
s
-------
1436
Now, at the hearing, which was a full-dressed
hearing before the Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board, th€
only evidence of a fish kill in Wolf Lake was that in the
spring of 1962 and there was a substantial kill at that time.
The State took samples of the water at the site
of the kill and it was revealed that the water had sufficient
dissolved oxygen in it to support fish life and the only
evidence, absolutely the only evidence as to the cause of the
kill was given by Dr. Arthur D. Hasler of the University of
10 Wisconsin who is an expert in the field of zoology and
11 limnology. He gave his opinion that, under the facts surround
12 ing the kill, the kill was due to — due solely to a natural
13 winter kill and this was further buttressed by the fact that
14 there were winter kills in other lakes in the area at the
15 same time, in which lakes there was no industrial waste
16 deposit whatsoever.
17 Now, the Addenda and Errata section of the Health
18 Education, and Welfare report also referred, and I refer to
19 this, "tainting the flesh of game fish."
20 In the hearing before the Board, the evidence
21 from some witnesses was that the fish tasted like soap.
22 Well, we believe that that was purely psycho-
23 genetic in origin because there is no soap waste or no deter-
24 gent waste whatsoever sent to Wolf Lake or Wolf Lake Channel
25 by Lever Brothers Company.
-------
1437
l The word "Lever" as I say in this report is
2 synonymous with soap and, therefore, naturally, if the fish
3 taste bad, it is soap that causes it.
4 Now, it is common knowledge among fishermen and
5 I am one—I happen to know Blucher Poole is another—that, if
6 you catch fish in a body of water without fresh water inlets,
7 they have a "muddy" taste.
8 That's been true in the many years that I have
9 been fishing and I think every fisherman will admit that.
10 There is evidence in this hearing that fish
n caught in Wolf Lake proper tasted real good. As a matter of
12 fact, I think one witness said he told the people to whom he
13 fed the fish that he caught them up in the north woods some
14 place and they said they were delicious.
15 Later on, he told them that he caught them in
16 Wolf Lake, and they were a little doubtful about the quality
17 of the fish.
18 So, we conclude on this point that at least 96
J9 percent of the lake is as good as any lake in our area and in
20 most areas.
21 3. All necessary remedial action has been taken
22 by the Indiana Board.
23 I won't go into the numerous surveys that have
24 been made and surveys that we have made ourselves, and the
25 experts that we have had employed to tell us what to do or to
-------
1438
advise us. That is all set out in the statement.
We have attempted to comply with the requests
and suggestions made by the Hammond Sanitary District, the
Hammond Water Department, the Hammond Park Board, and the
Stream Pollution Control Board through the years. We had one
hearing in 1957 that ended in a stipulation. We complied
with that stipulation.
In January 1962 we had another hearing. That
is the hearing I referred to where the record is 1378 pages
10 long and at the end of that hearing, we urged these facts
upon the Board that, after all, we were entitled to a reason-
12 able use of the lake and we were only using a part of the
13 channel and that was a reasonable use to support this industry
14 to use only four percent and we don't believe we use even that
15 and that that was a reasonable use of the lake for our pur-
16 poses
17 However, the hearing ended in a stipulation
18 between the Board and Lever under the terms of which we were
19 to agree to employ an industrial waste treatment experiment.
20 Dr. C. Fred Gurnham, of IIT, was agreed upon
21 and he has been employed and we have submitted two reports
22 td the Board.
23 Our initial endeavors have been to try to
24 isolate the wastes and stop them at their points of origin
25 and that is under way now.
-------
1^39
Incidentally, under the terms of the Stipulation,
the Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board has the right to
4*
enter any order in this matter, in this pending matter, which
3
they deem appropriate at any time.
4
Now, we have taken adequate measures, we think,
O
and the measures we feel are the best to accomplish these
6
purposes.
Since 1937, to improve our wastes to Wolf Lake,
8
we continuously chlorinate the effluent 24 hours a day, so
y
if there is a .2 parts per million residual in the waste,
there is no bacteria in the waste and the chlorination helps
to kill the algae.
12
The chlorination is in the effluent water so that
13
the chlorine remains in the water, well, it goes to the plant
14
and the detention period is one and one-half to two hours.
15
That is automaticchlorination.
16
Now, the contaminants to Wolf Lake are suspended
solids and dissolved solids. Present treatment process, which
18
consists of two skim tanks and two colloidair units separates
*y
the solids from the effluent water by air flotation and
20
skimming process. It takes about 90 to — 80 to 90 percent
«1
of the suspended solids out of the effluent. We think that
22
is good performance.
23
However, the dissolved solids present a more
24
difficult problem, as all of you here will recognize.
25
-------
1440
! Now, unfortunately, this is not in the
2 written statement — we don't add very much by way of sus-
3 pended solids to our effluents.
4 I was glad to hear, I think it was Mr. LeBosquet
5 say, the other day, that some company couldn't be blamed
e for the oil they were putting into the effluent because they
b
were taking it in in their water supply intake pipe. That
is the case with Lever Brothers.
8
I have some figures here which are not in the
9
figures in the statement. They are for three days and in
March, July, September and December of 1964.
In March, our effluent water contained 166 parts
12
per million of dissolved solids or effluent water contained
1*5
180 parts per million of dissolved solids or we added 14
14
parts per million.
Id
In July, we had - we took in 169 parts per
16
million of dissolved solids. We put out 208 parts per
million, so we added 39 parts per million.
18
The September figures were 177 in, 195 out or
19
we put in 18.
20
In December, we took in 201 and put out 193 or
21
we took out less than we took in.
22
We don't know of any methods, any practical
23
and feasible methods at this time to eliminate these
24
dissolved solids from the effluent. They are exceedingly
25
-------
1 diluted in some 8 to 10 million gallons of water.
2 We are, however, investigating various methods
3 and we have investigated, as was revealed in our evidence
4 before the Stream Pollution Control Board, many methods
5 including all of the methods that have been suggested through
6 the years.
7 Our efforts are continuing to improve the
8 operation of our system for the elimination or reduction of
9 suspended solids and to find some means of reducing or elimi-
10 nating the dissolved solids.
n Incidentally, a substantial part of our dissolved
12 solids is glycerine.
13 Now, glycerine has a very high price and we
14 would be delighted to discover some method of recovering the
15 glycerine that goes out with our waste.
16 Our third report, under our stipulation, is
17 due the end of this month and will be filed at that time.
18 And the Public Health Service is welcome to a copy of it.
19 We are now assigning and as soon as we can clear
20 it with the Union, a chemical engineer to devote full time to
21 conduct experiments with new methods of treatment suggested
22 by Dr. Gurnham. One of these will be to determine the
23 feasibility of chemical oxidation, despite the fact that
24 recently United States Public Health Service studies have been
25 discouraging this.
-------
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1442
Another will be the use of carbon as a purifier
for the effluent.
Efforts will likewise be made to reduce the
volume of flow to the present treatment facilities in an
attempt to secure more efficient operation.
We are continuing — incidentally, we have made
substantial progress in this field to eliminate wastes at
their sources.
Oh, someone mentioned here the other day about
education of personnel to avoid spills and to operate the
equipment efficiently. That has been done for a number of
years at Lever Brothers Company.
Every two weeks there is a meeting with the
operating personnel at which a subject is discussed and kept
constantly in front of the operating personnel.
In conclusion, we say there is no interstate
pollution of water. The only contaminants are confined to
Wolf Lake Channel.
The effect of the pollution on the legitimate
uses of water is not of sufficient significance to warrant
exercise of Federal jurisdiction. Wolf Lake affords the
opportunity for boating, bathing and fishing, the only uses
to which the lake is put.
All necessary remedial action has been taken by
the Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board.
-------
Now, the question may be asked, "Well, why
didn't you act before they got after you?"
Well, we thought that what we were doing was the
best we could do at that time.
They got after us nevertheless. They got after
us and that was our part of our evidence in the case, that we
were doing all we knew how to do and all that present
science was capable of telling us what to do. We say that
adequate measures have been taken by the Stream Pollution
10 Control Board, I mean, adequate measures have been taken or
11 are being taken presently for the abatement of pollution and
12 are trying to attack our dissolved solids programs at the
13 same time.
14 In closing, I want to say that somebody mentioned
15 tax help by the State of Indiana. One of the things that I
16 think that could give great impetus to that in this area is
17 to secure some kind of Federal income tax assistance.
18 Now, I was in this case that Al Meserow was
19 talking about, the State of Illinois against the State of
20 Indiana, in the Supreme Court.
21 We went to Washington, a group of us at that
22 time, and tried to get some legislation giving rapid
23 depreciation for everything to aid in clearing up pollution.
24 I would suggest that the conferees might discuss
25 that problem, too. I think a lot of people would be more
-------
1444
anxious to proceed immediately with it.
2 Thank you very much.
3 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Well, as you may know, on your last
point, our basic legislation goes before the Public Works
Committee of the House and Senate, I think the members of thai
Committee, both parties, have indicated they favored legisla-
tion of the kind you speak of and possibly others. But the
substantive legislation of tax measures goes before other
committees and they have not been very receptive as far as I
10 know in any administration.
11 These proposals have been around since the
12 Truman Administration and the Democratic or Republican
13 administrations and the Treasury Department never have given
14 this legislation a favorable report.
15 So, I don't know that this group is your best
16 avenue here, although this is being considered again and I
17 think it's become more active. As a matter of fact, Senator
18 Ribicoff put some legislation in the last Session which was
19 somewhat different and kind of a little more modern than the
20 depreciation.
21 He is taking a tax right off the top and making
22 it more attractive than the five-year depreciation.
23 MR. TINKHAM: It would be better.
24 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Are there any questions or comments?
25 (No response)
-------
1445
1 Mr. Poole?
2 MR. POOLE: If I may have your indulgence, I am told
3 for five minutes more, I want to introduce to you one of the
4 most patient ladies. She has sat here from the very beginning
5 of this conference to make a very short presentation on behalf
6 of the South Lake County Stream and Pollution Council. Mrs.
7 G. Hansen, Secretary-Treasurer.
8 MRS. HANSEN: Mr. Chairman, Honorable conferees, ladies
9 and gentlemen:
10 I am Geraldine Hansen, Secretary-Treasurer of
11 the South Lake County Stream and Pollution Council.
12 The South Lake County Stream and Pollution
13 Council realizes that out community is contributing to
14 your pollution problem in the Chicago-Calumet region. We
15 also are aware of the extreme danger to the health and
16 welfare of the whole community. We have been hacking through
17 a Jungle of bureaucracy and legislative formalities to no
18 avail; therefore, our appeal at this time is for your help
19 and assistance.
20 The pollution problem, as expressed by the
21 President of the United States in his recent State of the
22 Union and Inaugural Address, are very serious.
23 Scope: Local and state authorities have either
24 been unwilling or unable to help with these problems. At the
25 present, untreated or inadequately treated sewerage is being
-------
1446
permitted to be discharged into streams which eventually flow
into the Little Calumet River (West).
Summary: All Lake County citizens, and specifi-
cally those interested in conservation, are extremely concern
with this pollution problem. Lake County is 28,000 acres sho:
for Park Land. These Park Lands would include lakes and/or
streams which would be used for boating, fishing and swimming
The Little Calumet River (West) is now being
polluted by improper and inoperative septic tanks, by plant
10 waste and improperly operating municipal and private sewerage
H treatment plants. This polluted water is reaching the Little
12 Calumet River (West) by the following contributing streams:
13 || The Beezer Ditch, which along with the #1 Spur,
14 || Graper Ditch and Niles Ditch all flow into the Beaver Dam
15 I Ditch, which in turn flows into Deep River, which empties int
.j6 j| Lake George in Hobart, Indiana, which again flows into Deep
1? I River, which empties into the Little Calumet River (West).
18 Turkey Creek also picks up Kaiser Ditch, and then flows into
19 Deep River ahead of Lake George in Hobart.
20 Conclusion: if the laws we now have on the
21 County and State level were properly enforced and new Federal
22 pollution laws were to be enacted with stiff penalties for
23 violators, this would be the solution to the pollution problem!
24 But, no law is any better than its enforcement 1
Thank you.
-------
1447
1 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you, Mrs. Hansen.
2 It is groups like yours that keep us on the ball
3 Without you we might deteriorate.
4 MRS. HANSEN: Never underestimate the powers of a woman
5 Thank you.
6 CHAIRMAN STEIN: I never have. I am surrounded by them
7 at home.
8 (Laughter)
9 MR. POOLE: I am not going to make any closing speech
10 on behalf of Indiana. I think you heard enough from Hoosiers
11 in the last few days, notwithstanding the fact that I want
12 the rest of the conferees to know the State of Indiana recog-
13 nizes that there is still problems and particularly with
14 respect to the south end of Lake Michigan. We will keep
15 working at that problem at an accelerated rate and within the
16 limits of our resources.
17 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you, we have two statements here
18 which have been submitted for the record by Mr. Poole.
19 One is from the Town of Chesterton Utilities,
2o by order of Mr. James R. Harrington, P.E.
21 At this point, it will be included in the record.
22 STATEMENT OF CHESTERTON TOWN UTILITIES
23 At the direction of the Chesterton, Indiana Town
24 Board, i, Mr. James R. Harrington, Professional Engineer, and
25 Superintendent of the Chesterton Sewage Disposal Plant, presen
-------
1448
l the following statement to the Department of Health, Education
2 and welfare at the Water Pollution Conference held March 2,
3 through 6, at McCormick Place, Chicago, Illinois.
4 Part I. Recitation of the facts as to the
5 financial obligation assumed by the citizens of Chesterton,
6 Indiana, to abate their pollution of the Little Calumet River,
7 1. A revenue bond has been issued in the amount
8 of $720,000.
9 2. Interest plus operational expenses raise
10 the total obligation to $2,440,000 over the next 30 years.
11 3. This is $1,740 per household user; or $542
12 per capita. (Population 4,500).
13 Part II. Recitation of the facts as to the
14 sewage plant constructed with the above money.
15 1. One twin unit 750,000 gpd (each half) 1.5 mgd
16 total treatment capacity plant.
17 2. Including 2 aerated primary tanks, 2 aerator
18 2 final tanks, 1 chlorine chamber, 2 digesters, 1 vacuum
19 filter unit; plus structure, pumps, compressors, and all
20 sanitary equipment.
21 Part III. Recitation of the facts concerning
22 operation of the plant.
23 1. The plant has been in operation since June 1
24 1963.
25 2. 'The plant processes 400,000 gpd, or 146 mgy.
3. We give primary treatment, secondary treat-
ment and chlorination..
-------
1449
1 4. Based on design we are using 20 percent of
2 capacity. Based on volume we are using 25 percent for future
3 users.
4 Part IV. Recitation of results obtained. The
5 citizens of Chesterton, Indiana, have eliminated their
6 pollution of the Little Calumet River. Test results show -
7 treated sewage discharged into the River 400,000 gpd, having
8 the following analysis. Temperature 45 to 75 degrees Fahrenhe
9 pH 6.8, dissolved oxygen 2-3 ppm. relative stability test
10 greater than 30 days. BOD removal without chlorination 90
11 percent. BOD with chlorination, nil. Note: we carry 3-4
12 ppm. free chlorine to compensate for additional pollution due
13 to raw sewage being dumped into our final effluent.
14 Suspended solids: oil, grease, etc., nil.
15 By order of the Chesterton, Indiana Town Board.
16 Signed, James B. Barrington, P.E.
17 CHAIRMAN STEIN: At this point we will stand recessed
18 until 9:30 a.m., Tuesday, in room 11 of this building, and
19 don't get confused with the boat show.
20 Come back to MeCormick Place.
21 We stand recessed until Tuesday, thank you.
22 (Whereupon the Conference in the above
23 entitled matter was adjourned until March 9, 1965 at 9:30 a.m.
24
25
* U S GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1966 O—799-414
it
-------
------- |