INDIANA PESTICIDE PROFILE
E.P.A. REGION V
PESTICIDES BRANCH
August 1973
Compiled & Edited by
John H, Jordan, Ph.D.
Technical Support Section
Tele. 312/353-6861
-------
-------
-------
-------
Acknowledgement
Appreciation is gratefully extended to the Lead Agencies, State
Departments of Agriculture, State FPA, Departments of Natural
Resources, and other State and Federal Agencies for providing
information in this (first) draft of the Pestin'de Profile.
The individuals included in this Profile, and others, also con-
tributed valuable information for which gratitude is sincerely
extended.
In some cases the situation analyses in Section III were made
by the various State and Federal contributors, in others the
evaluations are the Technical Services Coordinator's or staff.
We are circulating a limited number of the Pesticide Profile
for your review; we want your comments, corrections, and
additions.
-------
-------
INDIANA PESTICIDE PROFILE
August 1973
TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NO.
PART I
Synopsis State Pesticide Authorities 1
Legislative deficiencies 3
Timetable for enabling legislation 4
Index of State Agencies with Pesticide 5
Responsibilities
Key Contacts
Manpower and Funding
Operational Programs & Commitments
Index Other Federal Agencies 12
Index Other State Agencies 14
PART II
Index Intrastate Registered Products &
Experimental Permi ts 24
Index Producers, Manufacturers, Formulators 27
Use Data on Pesticides, (Cropland) 32
Information on Registration & Classification ... 34
1
-------
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NO.
PART III
Regional/State Special Problems on
Program Operations 38
Special Local Needs on Pesticide Use ^2
Regional/State Problems on Policies,
Program Strategies, etc. 43
Summary ^
Appendix
Meeting Indiana's Environmental Protection Needs
Interpretation of the "Commercial Fertilizer Law
of 1953" by the Indiana Attorney General
Indiana Pesticide Review Board
Regulation No. 1
Regulation No. 2
Regulation No. 3
Suggested Interim Guidelines on the Use of
Aldrin & Dieldrin in Indiana
~Environmental Directory - Indiana
Poison Control Centers - Indiana
n
-------
-------
Attachments
Senate Enrolled Act No. 559
House Enrolled Act No. 65 (Commercial
Fertilizer Law, 1953)
Refuse Disposal Act, 1972
Indiana Hazardous Household Product Act, 1959
(a) Application for Exemption of a Household Product
Registered Under FIFRA
(b) Hazardous Household Product Formulation Data
111
-------
-------
INDIANA PESTICIDE PROFILE
PART I
August 1973
-------
-------
A. SYNOPSIS STATE PESTICIDE AUTHORITIES - INDIANA
"Indiana Pesticide Law"
(Senate Enrolled Act No. 559 (1971) Amendment to Sec. 1
I.C. 1971, 15-3 by adding Chapter 3.5 Pesticides) The
new law regulates the distribution, sale, and use of
pesticides and provides for appointing a Pesticide. Review.
Board; Indiana's first pesticide act.
"Indiana Environmental Management Board Act"
(Senate Bill Ho. 100 (1972), new Article added to Indiana
Code (I.C. 1971,)Title 13, Article 7) that "provides for
evaluating policies for comprehensive environmental develop-
ment and control on a state-wide basis; and to unify,
coordinate, and implement (environmental) programs..."
(Chapter 5, Sec. 1, (e) has a provision that the Board
shall have power to "...act for the state in the adoption
of standards pursuant to any federal law regarding environ-
mental protecti on..."
"Indiana Herbicide Law"
(Burns Ind. Stat. Ann. (1969), s 15-2401 to 15-2416)
This is primarily a "registration and labeling" law relating
to herbicides.
"Indiana Hazardous Household Product Act"
-1-
-------
-------
(Burns Ind. Stat. Ann. (1969), s 35-4214 to 35-4228)
Exempts pesticides registered under the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide and Rodenticide Act of 1947.
"Uniform Indiana Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act"
(Burns Ind. Stat. Ann. (1969), s 35-3101 et seq.)
Regulations (14-109) of the Indiana Aeronautics Commission
require "aerial applicators" of chemical? (including
pesticides) to register with the Commission and to furnish
reports upon request.
-2-
-------
-------
B. LEGISLATIVE DEFICIENCIES
Indiana does not have a law regulating commercial or private
pesticide applicators or operators. Senate Enrolled Act
No. 559 (passed in 1971) mentions pesticide use and
disposal as a Board responsibility but does not specify
how it is to be accomplished.
Indiana (Pesticide Review Board) plans tc submit enabling
legislation to the 1974 General Assembly on (1) an applicator
law and (2) disposal.
The Board believes that clarification of the definition of a
"private applicator" is needed before enabling legislation
is submitted.
-3-
-------
-------
C. TIMETABLE FOR ENABLING LEGISLATION
The Pesticide Review Board Indicated that EPA guidelines
and a model enabling act are needed by September 1973 so
that legislation can be drafted, cleared by committee, and
introduced to the 1974 legislative short sersion.
The chairman of the Indiana Pesticide Review Board was
notified by the Governor's Office that proposed 1974
applicator legislation should be submitted by September 15.
The Board will probably request an extension of the
September 15 deadline.
A review of needed enabling legislation is being conducted
Uy (.(1C UUCU U ^OpcClUl ui'ui u'Tiy CCmio"! t,i.CC/. it dTd . w V','1 , ,
be sent to the Governor's Office by September 15 if time
permits adequate draft preparation and prior approval by
important state groups (e.g., Farm Bureau and others)
-4-
-------
-------
D. INDEX OF STATE AGENCIES
1. Department of Natural Resources
State Office Building
Indianapolis, Indiana
a. Scope of Responsibilities
The Department of Natural Resources is charged with
the responsibility of using Indiana's natural
resources wisely. Objectives related to pesticides
are:
(1) Prevention and control of plant diseases
and psst3 of agricultural and horticultural
crops. (Division of Entomology)
(2) Investigation of sites proposed for solid and
hazardous waste materials - Certification of
sites.
b. Key Contact
(1) S. Donald Durfee, Director
(2) Richard (Gene) Bass, Director
Fish & Wildlife Division
317/633-5587
-5-
-------
-------
(3) John J. Favinger
State Entomologist
Division of Entomology
317/633-6993
(4) Edwin J. Hartke
Environmental Geologist
Geological Survey Division
Bloomington, Indiana 47401
812/337-7428
c. Manpower and Funding
^ \
i i
(a) The Division of Fish and Wildlife has
a total of 124 full-time and 96 seasonal
employees. Sixty of the 124 are professional
biologists.
(b) The Division of Entomology employees 6
entomologists, two plant pathologists,
one horticulturist and one agriculturist.
Six aides are employed during the summer.
(c) The Geological Survey Division employs 44
full-time professionals and 12 temporary
assistants. There are 20 geologists, 3
geophysicist, 3 geochemists and other
-6-
-------
-------
(2) Funding
(a) Fish and Wildlife Division
Approximately $2,000 is spent annually
for labor, salaries, equipment, per diem, etc.
for application of herbicides, and about
$7,000 for materials.
(b) Division of Entomology
The annual budget is approximately
$150,000. Only about $2,500 is spent
annually for pesticide purchase and
application.
(c) Geological Survey Division
No specific portion of the budget is
earmarked for location of landfills for
obsolete or excess pesticides.
d. Operational Programs and Commitments
(1) Fish and Wildlife Division
Pesticide programs consist primarily of
regulation of herbicides for use on aquatic
vegetation (Sec. 5-10) Indiana Fish and
Wildlife Code 1972.
-7-
-------
-------
(2) Division of Entomology
The Division is the principal plant regulatory
agency of Indiana and has charge of prevention
and control of insect pests and plant diseases
e.g., Japanese beetle, gypsy moth and other
programs.
(3) Geological Survey Division
Programs designed to assist in the certification
of landfills capable of receiving hazardous
wastes, including excess or out dated pesticides,
are the principal pesticide related activities.
-8-
-------
-------
2. Indiana State Board of Health
1330 W. Michigan Street
Indianapolis, Indiana 46206
a. Scope of Responsibilities
(1) General Sanitation Branch is responsible for
sanitary landfills and is also involved in
hazardous wastes.
(2) Hazardous Products Section
The Hazardous Products Act is administered!
by this group. Indiana is the only state
( cv^u i r c3 i"6y 1 3 i,i~u u" Cn «• iiuZur*.C'w!C
household products. (Refer to Appendix for
details.).
b. Key Contact
(1) Bureau of Food and Drugs
Frank E. Fisher, Director
317/633-4708
(2) Roland P. Dove, Chief
General Sanitation
317/633-4393
-9-
-------
-------
(3) Robert J. Murray, Chief
Hazardous Products Section
317/633-4830
c. Manpower and Funding
(1) General Sanitation Branch
There are ten professional enployees and one
clerk-typist employed. No budget figures are
available now.
(2) Hazardous Products Section
There are three employees in the Section; two
professional and one clerk-typist. The
budget is approximately $30,000 yearly.
d. Operational Programs and Commitments
(1) General Sanitation Branch
Programs are geared to technical assistance to
towns and municipalities in their sanitary
landfill problems. Also, they are assisting
the Indiana Pesticide Board, and others,
with selection of suitable excess pesticide
landfills.
-10-
-------
-------
(2) Hazardous Products Section
Programs are geared to acquiring hazardous
product ingredient information in carrying
out the Hazardous Household Products Act.
The information is sent, monthly, to the
Poison Control Center in Indiana and to the
Food and Drug Administrati OP and National
Clearinghouse for Poison Control Centers
in Washington, D.C. (a complete activities
report is available)
-11-
-------
-------
INDEX OF OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES
Dr. William H. Garman
U.S. AID
Senior Agr. Chemicals Specialist
Washington, D.C.
202/632-7936
Dr. James B. Elder
Bureau Sports Fisheries &
Wildlife
Federal Building
Twin Cities, Minnesota
612/725-3536
Mr. Edward Estkowski
U.S. DOL, O.S.H.A.
300 S. Wacker Drive
Chicago, Illinois
312/353-4717
Dr. Philip C. Kearney, Chief
U.S.D.A., ARS
Pesticide Degradation Laboratory
Agricultural Center West
Beltsville, Md. 20205
301/344-3082
Mr. Gordon Lindquist
Regional Administrator
National Highway Traffic:
Safety Adm.
Chicago, Illinois
Dr, L. L. Daniel son, Chairman
U.S.D.A., ARS
Agricultural Environmental
Quality Institute
Agricultural Research Center, West
Beltsville, Md.
301/344-3030
-12-
-------
-------
Dr. Charles Walker, Acting Chief
Office of Environmental Quality
U.S.D.I.
Bureau Sport Fisheries
Washington, D.C.
202/343-6394
-13-
-------
E. INDEX OTHER STATE AGENCIES
1. Office of the State Chemist
Department of Biochemistry
Purdue University
West Lafayette, Indiana 47907
a. Scope of Responsibilities
Senate Act 559 assigned registration, inspection,
analysis, enforcement and administration of public
pesticide management to the State Chemist; the
Governor also designated the State Chemist as
"Lead Agency".
Indiana Hazardous Product Act (1959) also requires
registration of certain household pesticide
products with the State Chemist.
b. Key Contact
(1) Dr. E. D. Schall
State Chemist & Seed Commissioner
317/749-2391
(2) Mr. George L. Hutton
Pesticide Administrator
317/749-2391
-14-
-------
-------
c. Manpower and Funding
Six persons full time plus administrative support;
no budget figure available now. Pesticide budget
will be calculated for next report; functions of
personnel are distributed throughout the organiza-
tion on part-time or fractional basis.
d. Operational Programs and Commitments
Programs and commitments are all directed toward
carrying out responsibilities assigned by law in
pesticides and pesticide fertilizer custom mixes
(refer to Appendix for more information on custom
mix fertilizer - pesticides)
The State chemists operates specific programs of
pesticide registration, inspection, analysis,
enforcement and administration.
-15-
-------
-------
2. Cooperative Extension Service
Purdue University
West Lafayette, Indiana 47907
a. Scope of Responsibilities
Responsible for developing and administering a
state-wide informal educational program identifying
and solving problems through a field staff and
technical specialists.
b. Key Contact
(1) Dr. H. G. Diesslin, Director
317/749-2413
(2) Dr. Eldon Ortman, Head
Department of Entomology
317/749-2917
(3) Mr. David L. Matthew, Jr.
Pesticide Coordinator
317/749-2405
(4) Dr. James L. Williams
Pesticide Coordinator
317/749-2948
-16-
-------
-------
(5) Dr. Donald H. Scott
Professor of Plant Pathology
317/749-2948
c. Manpower and Funding
(1) Manpower
(a) Purdue Entomology Extension
There are seven people part-time (four
full-time equivalent) in entomology.
(b) Botany and Plant Pathology
There are six person part-time in plant
pathology.
(2) Funding
Estimates of funding for the various pesticide
programs will be prepared for the next profile
revision or update.
d. Operational Programs and Commitments
(1) Entomology Extension
(a) Fully operative programs in existence for
several years are: educational and
information state-wide. Also, problem
-17-
-------
-------
solving.
(b) Six state Cooperative Extension project
with Ohio, Illinois, Iowa, Missouri
and Nebraska on "Corn Pest Management
Program Procedures."
(2) Botany and Plant Pathology
Fully operative educational and informative
herbicide and plant pathology programs
(including problem solving) state wide for
a number of years.
-18-
-------
-------
3. Indiana Pesticide Review Board
Mr. Richard E. Bass, Chairman
607 State Office Building
Indianapolis, Indiana
a. Scope of Responsibilities
Senate Act 559 established the State Pesticide
Review Board to consult, advise, and recommend
policy on classification, handling and disposal
of pesticides; 13 members, 9 voting.
b. Key Contacts
1 1 ) nr. u i niiaii u
Public Representative on Pesticide
Review Board
Columbus, Indiana
(2) Dr. R. B. Wilson (Board Member)
Deputy Director
Purdue Agricultural
Experiment Station
c. Manpower and Funding
The Senate Act 559 Sec. 12, describes the members
and funding as follows:
-19-
-------
-------
There is created the Indiana Pesticide Review Board,
hereinafter referred to as the Board, and consisting
of one (1) representative of the State Board of
Health; the State Toxicologist; the State Veterinarian;
one (1) representative of the Department of Natural
Resources; one (1) representative of the Purdue
University Agricultural Experiment Station; one (1)
representative of the Indiana Cooperative Extension
Service; two ecologists with earned doctorate degrees,
one (1) a terrestrial ecologist and one (1) an
aquatic ecologist, no more than one (1) of whom may
be from a state supported university or college and
no more than one (1) of whom may be a plant ecologist
and one (1) public representative, each with full
voting power; one (1) representative of the pesticide
industry and one (1) representative of producers of
agricultural crops or products on which pesticides
are applied or which may be affected by the
application of pesticides and two (2) public
representatives from conservation organizations, as
advisory, non-voting members.
Per Diem and Travel Expenses - State officials and
staff members of state offices as well as Purdue
University Agricultural Experiment Station and
-20-
-------
-------
Cooperative Extension Service staff members appointed
to the Board shall serve without compensation but
shall be entitled to receive per diem payments at
rates and under conditions incident to these positions.
Other members shall be paid a per diem of twenty-five
dollars ($25) per day or per part of each day of
actual attendance at called meetings or hearings. In
addition, each Board member shall receive mileage
expense to and from his place of business and the
place where official business is transacted.
-21-
-------
-------
THE INDIANA PESTICIDE REVIEW BOARD
Name
Representing
Address
1. Frank Fisher
2. R. B. Forney
3. D. L. Smith
4. R. E. Bass
5. R. B. Wilson
5. TCI Hnn Ort"m«n
7. Oilman O'Neal
8. Durward Allen
9. William Eberly
10. Glen Klingman
11. Acord Cantwell
12. Arvill Bertsch
State Board of Health
State Toxicologist
State Veterinarian
Dept. Natural Resources
Agric. Experiment Station
Coop. Extension Service
Public Representative
Ecologist
Ecologist
Pesticide Industry
Pesticide User
Conservation Organization
13. Roy B. Crockett Conservation Organization
1330 W. Michigan Street
Indianapolis, Indiana
Indiana University School of
Medicine, 1100 U. Michigan St.
Indianapolis, Indiana
State Office Building
Indianapolis, Indiana
State Office Building
Indianapolis, Indiana
Purdue University
Lafayette, Indiana
Dept. of Entomology, Purdue
University, Lafayette, Indiana
Columbus, Indiana
Dapt. Forestry & Conservation
Purdue University
Lafayette, Indiana
^fanchester College
North Manchester, Indiana
Eli Lilly & Company
Indiananolis, Indiana
Indiana Farm Bureau Coop. Assn.,
Inc., Indianapolis, Indiana
Indiana Assoc. Soil and Water
Concervation Districts,
Connersville, Indiana
Isaac Walton League of America
Marion, Indiana
-------
-------
d. Operational Programs and Commitments
The "Board" meets at least annually and on call
by the Chairman or a majority of the Board.
The "Board" determines the nature and extent of
any restrictions to be imposed on the purchase,
distribution, and use of any pesticide.
The Board operates in three specified areas. It
may adopt regulations restricting or prohibiting
the use of certain types of containers or packages
for specific pesticides. It may adopt rules
providing for the safe handling, transportation,
storage, display, distribution and disposal of
pesticides and their containers. And finally, the
Board may, if it deems it necessary for the pro-
tection of perso.ns, animals, wildlife, crops, or
vegetation, classify specific pesticides either as
"restricted use" or "for use by prescription only".
The Board may include in the regulation the time
and conditions of sale, distribution, or use of
such restricted pesticides and may, if it deems
it necessary to carry out the provisions of this
Chapter, require that any or all such materials
shall be purchased possessed or used only under
-22-
-------
permit of the State Chemist and/or under certain
conditions or in certain quantities or concentra-
tions.
-23-
-------
-------
INDIANA PESTICIDE PROFILE
PART II
August 1973
-------
INDIANA PESTICIDE PROFILE
Part II
*
A. INDEX INTRASTATE REGISTERED PRODUCTS
*••
pesticide Companies with products
Registered for Indiana only
Lime-0-Sol Company
P. O. Box 278, Garrett 46738 ^Federal number may be applied for)
1. Liquid Toilet Bowl Cleaner, 5965
2. industrial & institutional Bowl & Urinal Cleaner, 5965
Albert G. Maas Company
155 E. Maryland St., Indianapolis 46204 (two additional products
federally registered)
»
1; .-. Sudden Death
-" "2. Super Strength
Fest Control Services, inc.
,,2228 N. College Ave., Indianapolis 46205 (all five Intra)
' 1. Pesco, Chlordane insecticide
2. Pesco, 75% E.G., Chlordane for Termite Control
3. Pesco, Pyrethrum Insecticide
4. Pesco, Diazinon-pyrethrin insecticide ,
5. Rat & Kouse Bait with Fumarin !
Reliable Exterminators, inc.
P. O. Box 31, Lafayette 47902 (all three Intra)
1. Reliable Household Spray/Diazinon
2. Reliable Household Spray/Chlordane
3. Reliable Rat & Mouse Bait/Pivalyl
Ulrich Chemicals, inc.
398 Division St., p. o. Box 21156, Indianapolis 46221 (one Intra)
1. Bleach (Sodium Hypochlorite 15%)
Windier pest Control
P. 0. Box 666, Fowler 47944 (three additional products federally
registered)
1. Windier insect Spray
2. Windier Industrial Aerosol Insecticide
-24-
-------
-------
b. Experimental Permits
Dr. George F. Warren, Horticulture Department,
Purdue University is the IR-4 coordinator.
The State Chemist's Office has listed some fifteen
experimental permits. The list is included on the
following page:
-25-
-------
-------
Monitor
Matthew
0)
o«
(1)
JC
o
QJ
0
O
4J
4J
0
4J
4-1
O
O
w
"I '
(U
U
01
01
O G)
-H 01
4J D
ro
Vi
4J
«
-H
en
0)
*o
c
ro
4J Vi
•"g c
•H 0
•4 0
o
in
r-l
£
Vl O
0) N
4-> ro
C 4J
3 C
O 0)
U 03
•O
-rl
g
ro o
ro 33
>i O
O 13
C
C ro
ro >,
U &
•rl 1
Vl fg|
G) CO
e <
< «
•H cv
01
G
ro
o
.Q
>,
o
tn
i-i
ro
Vi
0)
G
G)
G
ro
Vl
ro
tn
ro
m
c:
4J
o
-a
ro
^i
*2
i
tn
rt
ffl
m
1 01
01 01
G 0
ro 4-1
a) ro
•Q 4-1
>i O
O ft
tn
r-l
ro
t •
3
c
G)
13
5
in
^4
o
u
G
G)
tn
o
Vl
ro
g
.£*
U
•^
01
G
ro
0)
rj
^i
0
i-l
ro
<_t
G)
G
0
O
G>
Vl
01
g
G)
VI
U
o
a
in
01
3
VI
fr.
G)
g
o
04
*o
0)
4J
•rl
•rl
l4
0)
ro
i-i
G
O
ff^
1 \
c
O
cu
a
*
01
G
ro
4)
^Q
^
o
tn
,_{
ro
^_i
G)
C
G>
U
18
C Vl
ro o
rH U
G) 0)
vi tn
Cn
O
u
G
ro
H
w
r-
01
01
ro
Vl
0
TJ
01
•1-1
g
-rl
1-3
4J
a
tn
0 C
U 01
a G)
•H r-l
C"! S^
o
ro
-rl
Q
rf
S
*
CO
01
rj
ro
01
^Q
^1
o
tn
i-i
ro
Vl
01
G
0)
o
o
01
01
ro
t4
13
a
ro
C
ro
j>^
Q
H
Q
>i
O
VI
•rl
G
D
(*"
01
C
ro
01
£,
^
0
to
r-l
ro
Vl
0)
G
Q)
O
in
^
S
G)
C
ro
ft
4-1
*H
Q
01
ra
ro
a
t?J
E
X!
Q
«
o
rH
01
S
CJ
^J
O
3
Vl
E-i
•O
Gl
4J
•tH
6
(-3
X
0)
n
o
o
r-l
O
u
•H
01
r-4
G)
>
r-l
t-J
01
8-
M
U
^
O
£j
Vl
E~*
-a
0)
4J
-H
e
K?
r-l
{£)
^
01
o
a.
H
O
0
•rl
in
1— {
(U
.rj
r-<
JS
O
Vl
0)
01
(U
OS
^•^
01
c
o
•rl
4_)
ro
o
*r-i
r-l
D<
a
•-i
iu
•P
G
q
^
•ri
VI
0)
p— »,
w
*o
G)
i-l
H
O
Vl
4J
C
0
O
t-l
IM
ro
4J
to
G
Vl
o
u
4-i
0
Q)
CO
•o
G)
4J
•H
g
I—I
^
Vj
J>
in
S
o
c
ro
..c
4-J
•r)
Q
0}
ra
ro
EG
td
S
J"]|
Q
K
PI
i-H
Vl
0
u
P
0)
o
5
tn
TG
O
^J
-1-*
E
•H
t_3
.^
rt
^>
C*1
Q
01
C
4~)
ro
N
G
Tj
s;
4->
G
O
pj
3
Q
&*
r-l <
«
a
X
w
o
-<~!
ro
a
V.'
<
0)
J^
-r-l
M
ro
g
tc
^^
&>
•H
01
'J
in
.H
-26-
-------
-------
B. INDEX PRODUCERS, MANUFACTURERS, FORMULATORS THAT REGISTER
(FEDERAL) IN INDIANA
Company Id.
Number
TZ15
106
10300
9902
8291
5011
2332
2078-
271
8822
.7960
1183
9972
7283
A0.Nr>TT CHfMICAL £ EXTF^M COMPANY INCO.~ P1KA TED
333 MASSACHUSETTS AVENUE
INHI ANJAPJL IS, INDIANA 4^;: }4
8P.ULIN f. COMPANY
P.O. BOX 270-8
INDIANAPOLIS, IN ^6206
B'JO ZIEGLER'S AL3ERT G MAAS CO.
155 E. MARYLAND SrRFET
INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46204 ;
C L ALEXANDER CO INC
P 0 BOX 444
FORT dAYNE INDIANA 46301
CALCO PiOUSTA' ITS, INC.
1624 W All0 MA STREET
ELKHA^T, INDIANA 45514
CARMEL CHEMICAL CORPORATION
P.O. -3 OX 4-K
WESTFIELD, INDIANA 46074
CA3 SON CHEMICALS INC.
p n Q n v /. c, t.
NErt' CASTLE, INDIANA 47362
CHEMICAL S°ECIALTIES CORP.
P. 0. SOX 4036
EVANSVILLE, IN 47711
COMMERICAL SOLVENTS CORP '
1331 S FIRST ST
TEP.RE HAUTE INDIANA 4730S
CONSOLIDATED CHEMICAL CORPORATION
1020 SIXTEENTH STREET
BEDFORD, INDIANA 47421
CONTINENTAL CHEMICAL COR?
1439 ASH STREET
TEPRE HAUTE, IN 47303
CORVEL DIVISION ELI LILLY CO.
INDIANAPOLIS IN 46206
CURTIS DYNA-PRODUCTS CORPORATION
P 0 BOX 297
WESTFIELD INDIANA 46074
OESCO CHEM. DIV. DEISCH-3ENHAM, INC.
P. 0. BOX 109
NAPPANEE, INDIANA 46550
-27-
-------
-------
2528
654
9281
142
10061
12461
10304
5602
2700
303
1222
1761
1174
FLANCO PPOD DIV ELI LILLY RALPH HILL
P. 0. BOX 1750
INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46206
ERBRICH PCOO CO. FOOD £ CHEM PROD
P. 0. BOX 55134
INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46205
FEDERAL CHEMICAL COMPANY INC
2530 WINTHR3P AVENU2 \
INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46205
H G S EQUIPMENT £ SUPPLY CO.
926 N. HAMPTON STREET
SHEL3YVILLE, INDIANA 46176
H B MEYER £ SON INC C/0 HUNT LA3-P FRANKE
P. 0. SOX 710
HUNTINGTQN, IN 46750
HAYNFS MILLING CO INC
PORTLAND INDIANA 47371
HEAT POWCR. ENGINEERING COMPANY, INC.
2709 BROOKLYN AVENUE
FORT WAYNE, IN 46304
HOOSIER VETERINARY LABS., INC.
P. 0. BOX 38
THORNTOWN, INDIANA 46071
HUB STATES CORPORATION
2002 NORTH ILLINOIS STREET
INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA 46202
:
HULMAN £ COMPANY
900 WABASH AVE.
TERRE HAUTE, INDIANA 47801
HUNTINGTON LA3S. INC.
P. 0. BOX 710
HUNTINGTON, INDIANA 46750
INDIANA FARM BUREAU COOP ASSO. INC.
47 SO. PENNSYLVANIA ST.
INDIANAPOLIS, IND. 46204
INDIANAPOLIS PAINT & COLOR CO.
640 NORTH CAPITOL AVE.
INDIANAPOLIS, IND. 46204
INDUSTRIAL SANITATION CO.
P.O. BOX 471
EAST CHICAGO, IN 46312
-28-
-------
-------
10032
1947
2695
2144
8043
110
5402
9364
7537
9341
9503
1455
2192
10794
INTET, MANUFACTURING COMPANY
BARTH £ PALMFR
INDIANAPOLIS IN 46203
JOHN SEXTON & COMPANY
P.O. BCX 1531
INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46206
KINNEY £ COMPANY
1327 CALIFORNIA STREET
.COLUMBUS INDIANA 47201
KOR-X-ALL COMPANY INC
216 N W 10TH STREET
EVANSVILLE INDIANA 47701
LOWMAN COMPANY
PCI BOX 265
WATERLOO IN 46793
MADISON CHFMICAL COMPANY
P 0 BOX 382
MADISON INDIANA 47250
MARIAH RCDENTICIDE CO., INC.
RFD 1 HGHWY ^L N.
VINCENNES, INDIANA 47591
MARVFL CHEMICAL COMPANY
P 'J »UA o45
LQGANSPORTt INDIANA 46947
MONROE GRAIN & SUPPLY INC.
BOX 300
MONROE, INDIANA 46772
NEW PLANT LIFE DIV., CHAS. FINLEY & CO,
P.O. 30X 45
LAPQPTE, IN 46350
PERFECTION PATNT & COLOR COMPANY
715 CAST MARYLAND STREET
INDIANAPOLIS IN 46202
PRO TEX ALL COMPANY INC
223 N W SECOND STREET
EVANSVILLE INDIANA 47708
RED SPOT PAINT AND VARNISH CO., INC.
ONE TEN MAIN STREET
EVANSVILLE, IN 47708
PEDBUD PRODUCTS COMPANY INC.
3812 FERNWAY DRIVE
ANDERSON, IN 46014
-29-
-------
-------
1456
70
9675
5145
9739
11509
9294
3146
7874
8719
2230
13812
2458
REP. CREOSOTIN5 CO. OIV. ^EILLY TAR £ CHEM,
11 STJTH MCRIDIAN ST.
INDlVNAPQLISf IN 46204
RIGO CHEMICAL COMPANY
1200 PORT WAYNE NATIONAL RANK BLDG
FORT WAYNE, IN 46802
S. R. WILSON & ASSOCIATES
P. 0. BOX 556
NEWBURGH, IN 47630
SAFETY PRODUCTS COMPANY
1180 WEST 23TH ST
INDIANAPOLIS INDIANA 46208
STANDARD BRUSH & BROOM CO
BOX 1027
PORTLAND, IN 47371
THE DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY
POST OFFICE BOX 1656
INDIANAPOLISf IN 46206
THE DUKE LABS
301 ELKS COUNTRY CLUB RO
RICHMOND IN 47374
THE WORLD'S BEST PRODUCTS, INC.
800 SOUTH-UNION CENTER AVE.
UNION MILLS, IN 46382
TRI STATE SCHOOL SUPPLY CO.
901 NORTH GOVERNOR STREET
EVANSVILLE, INDIANA 47711
UNIROYAL INC
312 N. HILL ST.
MISHAWAKA IN 46544
VEPSATEK CHEMICAL IND. INC.
4301 HULL ST.
INDIANAPOLIS, IND. 46226
W .CHEMICAL COMPANY INC
P 0 BOX 163
WARSAW INDIANA 46580
>4ATCON INCORPORATED
2215 MAIN STREET
SOUTH BEND, IN 46613
WESTERN TAR PRODUCTS CORP
P 0 BOX 6C5
TERRE HAUTE INDIANA 47803
-30-
-------
-------
5836 WINDIER PFST CONTROL IMC
116 FAST FIFTH STREET
FOWLER IN
4414 YARGER SUPPLY CO
BOX 136
_ WARSAW IN 46530
-31-
-------
-------
C. USE DATA ON PESTICIDES (CROPLAND)
(Continued on next page)
-32-
-------
-------
FIELD CROPS TREATED WITH INSECTICIDES:
ESTIMATED ACRES TREATED AND RATE OF APPLICATION
INDIANA, 1969-1971
CROP AND INSECTICIDE
Corn, preemergence, All
Aldrin
Bux
Diazinon
Heptachlor
Phorate
Corn, postemergence, All
Carfaaryl
Diazinon
Soybeans, All
Small grains, All
Carbaryl
Malathion
Hay, All
Diazinon & methoxychlor
Malathion
Malathion & metho-
xychlor
UNIT
Wp-lb.
Gp-lb.
Lc-qt.
Wp-lb.
Gp-lb.
Lc-qt.
Gp-lb.
Wp-lb.
Gp-lb.
Gp-lb.
Wp-lb.
Gp-lb.
Wp-lb.
Gp-lb.
Gp-lb.
Wp-lb.
Lc-qt.
Wp-lb.
Wp-lb.
Lc-at.
Wp-lb.
Lc-qt.
Lc-qt.
Lc-qt.
Lc-qt.
AVERAGE RATE OF
APPLICATION PER ACRE
1969
7.4
5.6
1.2
7.4
5.6
1.2
8.7
—
5.1
7.0
1.9
7.0
—
—
7.4
1.7
1.0
1.7
2.0
1.0
1.8
1.4
1.6
1.0
1.0
1970
5.2
5.7
1.7
5.1
5.7
1.7
6.8
6.6
5.0
5.0
2.0
8.1
2.2
8.0
—
1.8
1.9
..__
—
—
2.2
1.4
1.8
— — •
1971
ESTIMATED ACRES
TREATED (THOUSANDS)
1969
1,780
1,424
39
—
232
14
49
--
21
29
19
10
109
55
31
15
1970 1971
1,946
1,689
35
43
274
14
47
12
—
22
30
__
—
55
12
—
— —
WP=Wettable powder (in pounds
LC=Liquid concentrate (in quarts)
GP=Granular product (in pounds)
-33-
-------
-------
D. REGISTRATION AND CLASSIFICATION INFORMATION
1. Registration Information
a. A review of registrations during 1972 revealed a
few areas where some confusion was indicated re-
garding registration procedures. The following
guidelines were issued by the State Chemist:
(1) The 1961 Herbicide Law of Indiana was cancelled
when the 1971 Pesticide Law became effective.
Herbicides are registered on the application
(form) for registration of pesticides. The
GI ui 3 i,r" uii 1,1 CP| GI wi.c
volatile herbicides remain prohibited in
Indiana.
(2) The initial registration fee covers the reg-
istration of one through four products.
(3) Discontinued products are those which have been
discontinued within the last two years.
Registration is requested until a two-year
period has lapsed during which no further
manufacture or distribution by the producer
has occurred. Obsolete items are those for
which production and distribution has ceased
-34-
-------
-------
for a period of more than two years.
Registration is not required for obsolete
items. Dealers will be instructed to remove
obsolete items from sale and eliminate
stocks.
(4) Current labels giving active ingredients,
claims, use directions and safety precautions
are required for all products to be registered.
If current labels were submitted for the same
product during the previous registration.
and there have been no changes, resubmittal
nf thp lahpls will not be reauired unless
specifically requested.
(5) If an item registered for 1972 was dropped
from 1973 registration, it should be noted as
a newly discontinued or obsolete item (as
outlined in 3, above).
b. The Indiana Pesticide Act of 1971 includes insecticides,
rodenticides, fungicides, germicides, nematocides
and plant regulators, defoliants and dessicants.
The Indiana Pesticide Review Board has approved
a regulation (included in Appendix) to extend this
-35-
-------
-------
coverage to bird, fish, reptile and other small
animal control agents including dog and cat
repellents.
These items are to be included in all 1973 registra-
tion submissions. The general use or sale of
pesticide compounds containing thallium sulfate,
alkyl mercury, or any mercury compounds, for aquatic
uses in Indiana, are now prohibited (See Regulations
in Appendix)
(1) Number of companies registered 1972 - 483; 4,220 products
(2) Number of companies registered 1973 - 522 (as of
1-1.1 -i r\-7i \ . n
UUlJf I, I J/ o y , T , u w
-36-
-------
-------
2. Classification Information
There are three pesticide classifications:
a. General use - (no list available)
b. Restricted use - (no list available)
c. Prescription only
(1) There are two state regulations in effect
for pesticide use by prescription only.
(a) Alkyl mercury products and all mercury
products for aquatic uses are placed in
a "prescription only" category without
further guidelines Tor use (bee Appendix
for regulations).
(b) Thallium sulfate used as a rodenticide
is also placed in a"prescription only"
category - without further guidelines
for use.(See Senate Enrolled Act 559 p. 11
Sec. 10 item (1) for details on Restricted
Use of Pesticides)
-37-
-------
-------
INDIANA PESTICIDE PROFILE
PART III
August 1973
-------
-------
A. REGIONAL/STATE SPECIAL PROBLEMS ON PROGRAM OPERATIONS
1. Problems - Limitation on minor crop uses of Federally
registered pesticides -
Several truck crops and small acreage crops are not
covered by currently federally registered uses for those
crops. lR-4 Programs efforts can only meet a small
number of these needs. Additional authority is needed
for state registration of pesticides to be used on
minor crops that parallel major approved uses.
2. EPA actions on proposed standards (drafts) involving
Sidle interebl ur aCtlui'iS a'fc Stri'ining I'lultCd GtCitC
administrative and technical facilities. Longer
action lead times on proposed actions are necessary.
3. Pesticide disposal assistance is needed in providing
states with approved EPA incinerator design plans,
chemical deactivation programs, and site selection
criteria.
4. Private applicator training requirements remain one of
the principal concerns. How can State resources
accommodate a large demand? - i.e., a statement made
by an EPA official to the National Farm Editors
Association Meeting that nearly every farmer will be
-38-
-------
-------
"a certified private applicator."
5. PASS. The Indiana State Chemist has reported a number
of verified pesticide accidents, but the Indiana State
Board of Health has reported only one or two accidents.
Generally, Indiana personnel do not want to report
unverified pesticide incidents.
We expect better cooperation with the Indiana Health
Board if only verified incidents are to be reported,
and some other changes are made according to suggestions
forwarded to headquarters.
6. Indiana has no Department of Agriculture; this situation
creates a shift in responsibility to other agencies,
e.g., to the State Chemist, Extension, or Board of
Health.
The Indiana State Board of Health does not seem to have
the personnel nor the experience with which to assist
in implementation of FEPCA. Consequently, we have
received very little response from them.
The Abt Associates, Inc. study (included in Appendix)
recommended that environmental protection activities
in the Health Board be transferred to a separate agency.
-39-
-------
-------
An adequately staffed State EPA would soeed up our
implementation efforts in Indiana.
7. Excess and Obsolete Pesticide Disposal in Indiana
The situation in Indiana is similar to chat in most States
of Region V with respect to pesticides disposal programs;
there are none in operation. However, Purdue University
is anxious to set up a workable State-wide system to
collect and eliminate waste pesticides. The extension
services of Purdue receive many inquires from farmers
and homeowners about what to do with excess and recently-
banned pesticides; they distribute disposal publications.
in neu of unavaiiaoie incineration, the university
generally recommends that these chemicals to be used
according to package directions and sometimes suggest
that small containers of pesticides be wrapped thickly
in newspaper and placed with other solid waste for
collection. Purdue disposes of its own pesticides by
placing them in fiber barrels for quarterly shipment
to a permanent storage site in Illinois.
The Indiana Pesticide Review Board, at the 28 June 1973
meeting, requested the Indiana Geological Survey and the
General Sanitation Division to re-examine a number of
sanitary landfills. The purpose of re-evaluation would
be for possible disposal of excess or obsolete pesticides
-40-
-------
-------
and other hazardous wastes. This is a first step
toward locating State Certified Landfills.
There are 140 Sanitary landfills approved by the Stream
Pollution Control Board but only 84 are operational.
Public Health estimated that approximately one-third
of these could be used for pesticide disposal. Some
sanitary landfills have refused to accept wastes from
outside the county, e.g. the contracted sites. Most
of the better sites are located in Southern Indiana;
eight to ten existing landfills could possibly be
designated for pesticides, some of which are county
operations and some contracted. (The Department of
Health estimated that landfill cost average about
$7.00 per person per year in Indiana.)
The State Geological Survey indicated that about 20
feet of clay bank (in depth) is needed for establishing
a sanitary landfill. Each site is evaluated individually
for suitability. Underground water resource data is
not available for Indiana, however, it is doubtful if
the "no hydraulic connection" portion of the EPA
disposal procedures can be met.
-41-
-------
-------
B. SPECIAL LOCAL NEEDS ( PESTICIDES)
1. Custom Blending and Tanks Mixes
Custom mixing (blending) of commercial fertilizers
with pesticides and tank mixing of liquid (nitrogen)
fertilizers with pesticide is state approved in Indiana,
without registration. However, all fertilizer and
pesticide materials have received prior registration.
(Please refer to Appendix page for more details
in Interpretation of the "Commercial Fertilizer Law
of_ 1953" b^_ the Indiana Attorney General )
Custom mixing, or blending and tanks mixes are serving
a very useful purpose in Indiana and should be considered
as a Special Local Need.
2. Experimental Permits
A list of experimental permits is included under
Part II, A and is also considered as a Special Local
Need.
-42-
-------
-------
C. REGIONAL/STATE PROBLEMS ON POLICIES, PROGRAM STRATEGIES
1. Indiana and some of the other states in the Region V are
voicing the opinion that some guideline drafts from Wash-
ington (EPA) are not designed for field implementation. Sev-
eral State regulatory personnel (including Indiana) have in-
dicated that in order to facilitate implementation, the states,
Region, Washington EPA (headquarters) should confer before a
draft is circulated for general comment; a longer lead time
for comment would also be desirable.
State staff and financial inadequaces seem to be the main
rnnr.ern about imolementation of FEPCA, especially implementation
certification and training of applicators.
-43-
-------
-------
INDIANA PESTICIDE PROFILE SUMMARY
Indiana will submit enabling legislation to the Indiana General
Assembly in January 1974 on pesticide use and application and
disposal of excess pesticides and containers. Senate enrolled Act
No. 559 (1972) mentions that use and disposal is a Pesticide Review
Board responsibility but does not specify the agency or procedures.
Legislation has been delayed until the Federal Act was passed and
interpreted.
The Indiana pesticide law requires registration of pesticides that
control insects, weeds, rodents, nematocides, fungi, algae, bacteria,
viruses and animal repllents, plant regulators, defoliants, and
dessicants are also registered. The Indiana State Chemist registers
most of the above classes of chemicals, but the Indiana State Board
of Health registers hazardous household products. Approximately
4,500 pesticides were registered in 1972; about 15 of these did not
carry an EPA registration number, and were not registered for
specific local needs. The State Chemist prefers to continue regis-
tration of all pesticides used in the state and a charge of $25.00
per product ($100.00 minimum for four products) is made. The complete
budget for the pesticide control program comes from registration
fees.
-44-
-------
-------
Present Indiana law gives authority for restricted use and class-
ification of pesticides by licensed or certified applicators or by
"user permits." Sale of pesticides can also be restricted to
dealers with a permit or licence or by "prescription" only. How-
ever, Indiana does not certify or licence pesticide applicators at
present, and no provision has been made for reciprocity.
Experimental permits are now issued and the State Chemist is
interested in EPA authorization in a cooperative experimental permit
program. Authority to suspend registration of a pesticide is granted
to the State Chemist when a pesticide presents an imminent hazard
to the environment. Producers and dealers are not required to
w%*-*/"t4^4~yM/* »"\v» Krt li^/Mnr-rtH Kti-f~ nv»r\rJii/^ov*c a r*^ Hoal ov*c /"an Ko v»om i l v»o •*. IIWS«ttW^.X« Ut«W |- . W ^ U. w •» . *~ «%..» .. v « . v . v v » . . — _. . |»,..
to maintain books and records. Pesticides are sampled from the
manufacturers labeled containers being offered for sale at establish-
ments, dealers or at the users site of storage or application. Tank
samples are not analyzed. Approximately 300 samples are analyzed
each year; the target is 1,000.
The Tndiana law provides authority to require private applicators
to maintain records, but it is not enforced and pesticide use incon-
sistent with labeling is illegal. Stop sale and civil penalties
are also provided as well as authority to promulgate regulations
controlling pesticide transportation, storage, and disposal.
-45-
-------
-------
Purdue University monitors pesticide residues in soils and the
Stream Pollution Control Board monitors water. The State Vet-
erinarian also monitors pesticides in animals. Research in the
development, analysis and evaluation of pesticides is conducted by
Purdue, and Manchester College is involved in evaluating the
aquatic effects of herbicides.
The pesticide act of 1972 gives authority to enter into cooper-
ative enforcement programs with the Federal Government, other states,
state agencies and county or municipal districts. Training and cer-
tification programs will be prepared jointly by the Extension Service,
and Indiana State Chemist.
-46-
-------
-------
INDIANA PESTICIDE PROFILE
APPENDIX
AUGUST, 1973
-------
-------
MEETING INDIANA'S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION NEEDS:
ORGANIZATIONAL AND STAFFING REQUIREMENTS
(A Study By Abt Associates, Inc.)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Background of the Study
In January, 1972, Governor Edgar Whitcomb of Indiana and Francis Mayo,
Regional Administrator for Region V of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, agreed that a study of Indiana'a environmental protection programs
should be undertaken. The objectives of the study were:
• determine the manpower staffing requirements for the
State of Indiana's environmental protection functions
• determine the most efficient and effective organizational
structure for the state's environmental protection programs
• review and comment on the adequacy of Indiana's current
legislative authority for comprehensive environmental pro-
tection
resulting from the study.
The study was jointly funded by the Region V Office of EPA; the Man-
power Development Staff of the Office of Water Programs, EPA; and the
Control Agency Procedures Branch of the Office of Air Programs, EPA.
Governor Whitcomb also announced the formation of a bipartisan Steering
Committee composed of state legislators and representatives from state
agencies which would be instrumental in implementing the results of the
study. The Steering Committee was to provide advice and direction
during the course of the study.
On June 16, 1972, a contract to conduct the study was awarded to Abt
Associates Inc. of Cambridge, Massachusetts. As the contractor began
work, three important features of the study became evident:
• There were strict time constraints on the period of
performance of the study. In order that it be com-
pleted in time for consideration by members of the
Indiana Legislature before the 1973 legislative session,
the study was to be completed in sixteen weeks.
• Because of these time constraints, it was necessary to
confine the scope of the study to water pollution con-
trol, air pollution control, solid waste management, and
the protection of public water supplies.
-------
-------
• Although the study would be of value to other states
in the examination of their own capabilities to meet
environmental protection needs, the focus of the study
was on the specific needs of the State of Indiana.
This was reflected in the approach and methodology of the
contractor, both of which were designed to produce recom-
mendations which would be most relevant to Indiana.
Methodology
In meeting the objectives of the study, the contractor utilized the
following approach. First, there was a thorough review of relevant
state and federal statutes and administrative regulations. In addition
to providing the basis for a review of the adequacy of Indiana's legis-
lative authority, this task also provided a basic understanding of the
nature and scope of Indiana's environmental programs. Second, the con-
tractor developed and implemented a methodology for determining the man-
power needs of Indiana; this methodology consisted of a task review of
the functions involved in Indiana's environmental protection programs.
Data were collected from interviews with employees currently responsible
for those functions in Indiana, and these data were reviewed by Indiana
supervisory employees and technical staff in the Region V Office of the
EPA. Third, the contractor conducted extensive interviews with administra-
tive officials, legislators, and client and interest groups in order to
gatner data tor the analysis ot the organizational structure or Indiana's
environmental protection programs.
Summary of Findings and Recommendations
Manpower
Findings;
1. We found that current staffing levels were' inadequate to
perform the work required by Indiana's environmental protection
statutes and administrative regulations. The most significant
manpower needs derived from the passage of the Environmental
Management Act which provided for a permit program for the
operation of pollution control facilities. The activities in-
volved in reviewing applications for permits, issuing permits,
inspecting control facilities and reviewing operations reports
to assure that these facilities are in conformity with the permit
requirements, will require substantial increases in manpower.
2. We found that certain staff functions — notably planning
and evaluation, provision of legal services to program staff,
technical information systems, public information, and man-
power planning and development — were being performed inade-
quately because of staff shortages. In a related finding, we
found a serious shortage of various types of professionals who
-------
-------
are needed for effective implementation of environmental pro-
grams, particularly lawyers and planners.
Recommendations;
1. Increase staff responsible for water pollution control,
air pollution control, solid waste management, protection of
public water supplies, and related staff services, from 93 to
289.
2. In order to attract capable and qualified personnel, imple-
ment the proposed salary and grade recommendations proposed by
the Board of Health.
Implementation of these recommendations will bring the estimated
annual cost of these environmental protection programs to $4.8
million. Of this total, approximately $1.9 million is attribu-
table to the costs of operation of the new permit system for the
construction and operation of pollution control facilities; the
Environmental Management Act provides that these costs can be
covered by permit fees. Also, the state can expect more than
$1.3 million in federal assistance in FY 1973.
Note that the salary levels used in estimating these costs were
levels which have been proposed by the State Board of Health, but
not yet adopted by the State Personnel Division or the Legislature.
Note also that the cost estimates include overhead and travel, but
that overhead rates were calculated on the basis of overhead rates
from previous years. Such rates may not be sufficient to cover the
costs (in terms of equipment or building space) of significantly
expanded programs. Indeed, the State Board of Health has requested,
for 1973, the construction of an additional 46,000 square feet of
space to house anticipated personnel increases. The total capital
cost for the construction of this space is $1,845,000, and estimated
annual operating expenses will amount to $51,122. Increases in the
environmental protection area will account for approximately one-
third of this space.
Organizational Structure
Findings
1. Under the current structure, there are three policy-making
boards (the Stream Pollution Control Board, Air Pollution Con-
trol Board, and the Environmental Management Board). In carrying
out their powers and duties, these boards rely on personnel and
services of the State Board of Health, particularly the Bureau of
Engineering. The Bureau of Engineering reports to an Assistant
Commissioner for Environmental Health who also has responsibility
for the Bureau of Food and Drugs.
-------
-------
2. Environmental protection is the fastest-growing function in
the State Board of Health. Its concerns and operations have
become increasingly differentiated from the traditional public
health operations of the Board of Health.
3. The expected increase in environmental protection staff will
create serious management problems for the Assistant Commissioner
of Environmental Health if he continues to be responsible for
both environmental programs and also the Bureau of Food and Drugs,
one of the largest Bureaus in the Board of Health.
4. The current structure of the Bureau of Engineering is around
program Divisions. There is no provision for staff organizations.
This inhibits the development of certain functions which are not
part of the routine operations of these program Divisions, or
which cut across Divisions. These functions include: planning
and evaluation, the provision of legal services to program staff,
technical information systems, standards development, public in-
formation, and manpower planning and development.
5. There are certain related environmental functions located in
the Department of Natural Resources. These support, but do not
overlap, the environmental functions of the Board of Health. Co-
operation between the two agencies is satisfactory.
6. There is some ambiguity in the Environmental Management Act
regarding tne division ul ^u^^j.^ ami duties bc±-.;ccr. the three
Boards responsible for environmental protection policy. This
ambiguity is a serious potential problem.
7. Local health and pollution control agencies play an important
role in protecting the state's environment. The Board of Health
currently cooperates with these agencies, but there has been
little systematic division of responsibilities between the state
and local governments.
Short-Range Recommendations:
1. The Assistant Commissioner for Environmental Health should
be retitled Assistant Commissioner for Environmental Protection.
2. The radiological health, industrial hygiene and food and drug
programs should be removed from his jurisdiction.
3. The new Assistant Commissioner should have the following
organizational units reporting to him:
• three Bureaus, for Air Pollution Control, Water
Pollution Control and Water Supply, and Sanitary
Engineering.
-------
-------
• an Office of Special Services to perform required staff
functions.
We recognize that there are potential difficulties inherent in the
combination of water pollution control and water supply functions.
We believe that these difficulties can be overcome, but recommend
further study of this question during implementation of these re-
commendations .
Long-Range Recommendations;
1. A separate environmental protection organization should be
established outside the Board of Health.
2. The powers and duties of the Stream Pollution Control Board
and Air Pollution Control Board should be transferred to the
Environmental Management Board. The EMB should be empowered to
hire its own staff, and purchase supplies and services, apart
from the budget of the Board of Health. When these changes are
made, the EMB will constitute the separate environmental protec-
tion organization recommended above. It will have a Board and
Commissioner and be similar in form to the current Board of Health.
3. An environmental protection regional field office should be
established in northwest Indiana. Consideration should be aiven
to the possible creation of a larger regional field office structure.
Implementati on
Short-Range Recommendations:
1. A Special Committee on Manpower Staffing should be created.
The most pressing concern in the short-range is the implementation
of the recommended manpower increases. These involve a tripling
of the number of environmental protection staff, and therefore
must be carefully planned and executed.
2. The Director of the proposed Office of Special Services should
be hired immediately, and should be designated as Secretary of
the Special Committee.
3. Operating procedures, establishing reporting requirements
and lines of communication, should be developed for the new organ-
izational structure.
Long-Range Recommendations;
1. Legislation should be introduced to amend the Environmental
Management Act, transferring to the Environmental Management
Board all powers and duties vested in the Stream Pollution Control
Board and Air Pollution Control Board, and authorizing the EMB to
-------
-------
hire staff, purchase supplies and services separate from the
Board of Health appropriations.
2. A committee should be appointed by the Governor to plan and
supervise the separation of environmental protection functions
from the Board of Health. This committee should also consider
the timing of the implementation of all long-range recommendations.
3. After the environmental protection functions have been located
in a separate agency, the executive of that agency should appoint
a committee to study the questions of regional field offices and
further internal reorganization.
Adequacy of Legislation
Findings;
1. We found that there is generally sufficient authority to exer-
cise the following powers necessary for a comprehensive and ef-
fective environmental protection program:
• Pnwer t-n establish and enforce envirnnmenta 1 quality
standards.
• Power to prescribe and regulate the use of pollution
control facilities.
• Power to secure detailed information on sources and
effects of pollution.
• Power to enforce regulations against violators, through
administrative orders and judicial remedies.
• Power to meet requirements of, and to secure benefits
available under, federal law.
2. The following powers are not as fully realized as they should
be in existing statutes:
• Power to override failures of local governments to
exercise their responsibilities.
• Power to secure joint or regional action for environmental
protection.
• Power to coordinate strategies for all media.
Recommendations;
Legislation should be introduced to provide additional authority
to the Environmental Management Board to meet these needs.
-------
-------
C
3
(0
(U
01
4J
U
3
M
4J
tn
s
o
w
W Ctf
< P
Cu
O 4J
D rH
C rH O
O rH H
•H O -P
W fit C
•H O
> M U
-H (U
Q 4J
U-l tr>
0 C
O HJ OJ
-H 4-1 0)
01 -H C
•H C -H
m CP
-H to
w
MH ttf
O U
O O 4->
•H rH i-t
W O it!
•H -.H Q;
> -0 K
•r-t [fl
Q K
14-1
O rH
ttj a)
C -H C
O M 0)
•H 4J -H
u) w (TI
3 >,
-H
•H C
Q W
rH
m
H
^ 0)
•M -P
Ul Ul
3 dj
Tl S
c
HI
r-l
0) (X)
en tn
(t! O
? Oi
1) CO
W -H
P
i
>
M
3
W
1 --.
Ul
i-t U
i
e o
Q) >
U H
J^l 0
O 10
c ^a
W
rH 0)
Ifl U
U C
•H fu
C 4->
U -H
d) in
E-i w
<
^
J^
0
4-1
(fl
M
0
•a
•^
-------
-------
01
0)
-H
-P
•H
4J
O
C
o
-H
4J
O
0)
-P
o
k
a<
t
id t-t
w to id 04 M
2 *1 -H 3 O
>i O 10 M CO -P
^ M >, co 4J to M ^
1 * f f f I 1
p
g
O
M-l C
O
<0 -H
C -P
O (0
•H t-l
10 Ol
-H -a
> -H
•H U)
Q C
O
0) O
r-l
xi a)
•H fc
CO O
(0 -P
O 3
-------
-------
INTERPRETATION OF THE "COMMERCIAL FERTILIZER LAW
OF 1953" BY THE INDIANA ATTORNEY GENERAL
Custom Mixing, Labeling, and Registration o£ Fertilizers and Pesticides
"Custom mixed fertilizer is defined as a mixture of two or more
fertilizer materials at the specific request of a consumer. Mixtures of
this type, by their very nature, are of small batch size, and result in
a multitude of analyses. Their purpose is to satisfy the specific
requirements for a soil and crop as determined by the farmer.
Custom mixed fertilizer is not required to be registered. However,
all fertilizer materials used to prepare the mixture must have received
prior registration and the analysis of this mixture must be guaranteed
upon the delivery statement or label.
The buyer must have actual possession before the fertilizer can be
custom mixed without registering and labeling. A custom mixed fertilizer
can be resold only when registered and labeled as a mixed fertilizer.
Pesticides such as insecticides and herbicides, may be incorporated
in fertilizer. If they are incorporated, the percentage by weight of
the active ingredient(s) must be stated together with directions for use
and caution or warning statements sufficient to protect the public."
-------
-------
Rule 7 of the Indiana Commercial Fertilizer Law requires the label
(or delivery statement) of a bulk mixture of fertilizer with pesticide
to guarantee the kind and percentage of each pesticide, and plant
nutrient. Strict compliance with this requirement has appeared to some
dealers as extremely difficult.
The "kind" of each pesticide additive refers to the active pesticide
ingredient. This means that the pesticide must be noted upon the delivery
statement, or label, in the form of the chemical compound or acceptable
common name. Trade names or brand names are not acceptable for this
purpose unless they coincide with the acceptable common name. This
interpretation is parallel to that used by the Federal Government and
also required by the 1971 Indiana Pesticide Law.
Whenever common names have been approved for use they appear upon
the Federally registered label of the pesticide. Table 1 lists the
common name of the active ingredient of some of the commonly used pesti-
cides in tank mixes along with the trade name of the formulation.
Where common names are not approved, the active ingredient must be
identified by its chemical name, also noted upon the Federally registered
pesticide label. Upon request, the Office of the State Chemist will
provide an abbreviation of a chemical name which may be used for labeling
tank mixes of fertilizers with pesticides in this State. These abbrevia-
tions will be permitted until such time that a common name becomes available,
-------
-------
Percentages of the active pesticide ingredient in the final fertili-
zer mixture can be computed using nomograms.
The indicated common name of the active ingredient of pesticidal
products noted below may be used in Indiana in lieu of the chemical name
upon labels of custom - mixed fertilizer - pesticide mixtures in order
to comply with the requirements of Rule 7 under the Indiana Commercial
Fertilizer Law. Trade names of pesticidal products may not be used to
describe the active ingredient unless it coincides with the common name.
TABLE
(1)
(*)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
(10)
(11)
(12)
(13)
PRODUCT (TRADE NAME)
AAtrex
Alarm
Ami ben
Blaydex
Dowpon
Enide
Eptam
Lasso
Lorox
Maloran
Milogard
Paraquat
Planavin
ACTIVE INGREDIENT (COMMON NAME)
atrazine
aiarin
ami ben
blaydex
dalapon - Na
diphenamid
EPTC
alachlor
linuron
chlorbromuron
propazine
paraquat
nitralin
-------
-------
(14) Pramitol prometone
(15) Preforan fluorodifen
(16) Princep simazine
(17) Ramrod propachlor
(18) Sutan butyl ate
(19) Treflan trifluralin
(20) Vernam vernolate
Situation Proposed and Requirements
A fertilizer/pesticide dealer receives an order for a given fertilizer/
pesticide mixture to be applied by the dealer. The dealer transmits the
fertilizer and pesticide to the farm in separate containers ana men
mixes them in the field prior to application.
a. Fertilizer to be used in mixture must be registered and
labeled in compliance with the Indiana Commercial Ferti-
lizer Law. This labeling requirement persists to the
point of mixing with the pesticide.
b. Pesticide to be used in mixture must be registered and
labeled in compliance with the Indiana Pesticide Law and
applicable Federal statutes.
-------
-------
c. If delivery of the fertilizer and pesticide in separate
containers is made to the purchaser in person, no further
labeling beyond (a) and (b) is required. Delivery will
be considered made when the purchaser is offered a copy
of the delivery statement upon which information required
in (a) and (b) is given. Tank mixing by or for the pur-
chaser after_ de]Jv_ery_ has_ bee_n_ made_ requires no additional
labeling.
d. If tank mixing is performed prior to delivery (as defined
in (c), then labeling of fertilizer/pesticide mixtures
as required by Rule 7 of the Fertilizer Law must be com-
plied with. Of course, such labeling prior to actual mixing
(whether it occurs at the dealer's plant or in the field)
would result in misbranding. Therefore, until the ferti-
lizer and pesticide are.mixed each must be labeled and
registered in accordance with (a) and (b). Following the
mixing operation, the mixture must be labeled in accor-
dance with Rule 7 requiring the percentage by weight
of active pesticidal ingredient and plant food nutrients
in the tank mixture.
-------
-------
Change 1n_ Analysis of_ Fertilizer
Regardless of the amount of pesticide added to the fertilizer, some
change will occur in the plant food nutrient content. The more pesticide
added, the greater the decrease in nutrient content.
This office will be obligated to assume the guaranteed analysis
statement on the delivery statement of the tank mix describes the
guarantee of that mixture. No other interpretation is possible.
A dealer should bear in mind that maintaining the nutrient guarantee
of a fertilizer/pesticide tank mix at the same level as the guarantee
of the fertilizer used in the mix increases the possibility of such a
mixture being found deficient by analysis.
Mixtures of fertilizer and pesticides will be considered to be custom
mixes when mixed to a given customer's specification and this particular
mixture has not been advertised for sale before and in any manner. Such
mixtures are permitted to be labeled with guarantees expressed as decimal
quantities, such as 3.9% Nitrogen, 9.8% Available Phosphoric Acid ^205),
etc.
-------
-------
STATE OF INDIANA
INDIANA PESTICIDE REVIEW BOARD
WHEREAS , Certain pesticide uses are present in Indiana and are not included
'or registration in the definitions contained in Section 1-2, Public Law No. 1S9,
,cts of 1971; and,
WHEREAS, it has been determined that these pesticide uses may be unduly
lazardous to persons, animals, wildlife, crops, or vegetation other than the
>ests or vegetation which they are intended to prevent, destroy, control or
litigate or unduly hazardous to lands other than the lands to which they are
3pplied.
NOW, THEREFORE, Pursuant to the1 authority of the Acts of 1961, Chapter 14A
is found in the Indiana Code 15-3 as amended by the Acts of 1971, Public Law No.
99, Sections 1-2-23; and having given notice and held a public hearing as
'equired by the Acts of 19^5, Chapter 120, as found in the Indiana Code 1971,
+-22-2; the Indiana Pesticide Review Board hereby makes the following regulation
;o be known as Reculation No. 1.
REGULATION NO. 1
DECLARATION OF ADDITIONAL
t
1. Each of the following forms of plant and animal life and viruses is
declared to be a pest under the Act when it is detrimental and/or
injurious to man, domestic animals, useful plants, vertebrates,
invertebrates, and other useful articles and substances:
(a) Mammals, including but not limited to dogs, cats, moles, bats,
wild carnivores, and wild herbivores.
(b) Birds, including but not limited to starlings, house sparrows,
wild pigeons and black birds.
(c) Fishes, including but not limited to alewives, sea lampreys,
gizzard shad and carp.
(d) Amphibians and reptiles, including but not limited to poisonous
snakes.
(e) Aquatic and terrestrial invertebrates, including but not limited
to slugs, snails, and crayfish.
(f) Roots and other plant parts growing where not wanted.
(g) Viruses, other than those on or in living man and other animals.
-------
-------
*•'
STATE Cr i;.'DlA?:A
INDIANA PESTICIDE REVIEW BOARD
WHEREAS, Thallium Sulfate is primarily used for rodent control; and,
WHEREAS, The use of this pesticide has been suspended by Federal Regulation
regular application due to the nature of its' toxicity, and,
WHEREAS, The uses of this compound are not essential for rodent control
he State of Indiana.
REGULATION NO. 2
PRESCRIPTION USE ONLY - THALLIUM SULFATE
Thallium Sulfate Is hereby designated as a pesticide for use by prescription
only.
It shall be unlawful, for any person to use Thallium Sulfate as e pesticide
without first obtaining a written permit from the State Chemist.
Thallium Sulfate is prohibited for use for routine pest control. In
accordance with the Acts of 1971, Public Law Mo. 199, Section 2-2^, prescription-
use permits may be granted by the State Chsmist, such action to be t«';en only
when emergency conditions exist and are substantiated to the effect that no
other control measure will provide adequate control.
-------
-------
STATE OF INDIANA
INDIANA PESTICIDE REVIEW BOARD
WHEREAS, It has been established that certain formulations containing
xry compounds are used as pesticides; and,
V.'HE-EAS, It has been determined that mercury compounds are extremely long
•d and that certain plants and animals, particularly fish and other aquatic
inis.T.s, store and accumulate mercury in sufficient quantities to be hazardous
iersons, animals, and wildlife other than the pests which these compounds are
:nded to prevent; and,
WHEREAS, Certain uses of these pesticides have been suspended by Federal
lation for regular application due to the nature of their toxicity; and,
WHEREAS, The uses of these pesticides are not essential for pest control in
ans.
REGULATION NO. 3
PRESCRIPTION USE PESTICIDES r DESIGNATED MERCURY COMPOUNDS
Pesticides containing alkyl mercury compounds and all other mercury products
applied to laundry fabrics and mixed in marine anti-foul ing paints are hereby
designated as pesticides for use by prescription only.
It shall be unlawful for any person to use pesticides containing said mercury
compounds without first obtaining a written permit from the State Chemist.
Said mercury compounds are prohibited for regular pesticide use. In accordance
with the Acts of 1971, Public Lav; No. 199, Sect ion 2-24, prescription-use
permits may be granted by the State Chemist, such cction to be taken only
when emergency conditions exist and are substantiated to the effect that
no other control measures will provide adequate control.
------- OCR error (C:\Conversion\JobRoot\00000B5P\tiff\2000YHCW.tif): Saving image to "C:\Conversion\JobRoot\00000B5P\tiff\2000YHCW.T$F.T$F" failed.
-------
Suggested interim Guidelines on the use of Aldrin and
Dieldrin in Indiana
The Indiana Pesticide Review Board has reviewed the current uses and
potential hazards in the use of alarm and dieldrin. As federal hearings
are now in process concerning the future uses of these compounds, the
Board believes that an advisory position in the form of a guideline for
uses in the immediate future might be most helpful as a preliminary step
in reviewing the need for a State Regulation.
The Board recognizes that there are several uses of aldrin and
dieldrin that remain essential to practical effective and economical
control of certain pests such as termites, wireworms, cutworms, grubs,
corn rootworm and plum curculio. The Board also recognizes that tr.-^sa
pesticides are long lasting and pose severe hazards to wildlife £nc. the
environment when applied in a manner that permits contamination -f aquatic
resources. Certain aquatic microorganisms, some types of fish a.id Certain
birds that depend on aquatic sources of food may as _; result be effected
D\' relatively small amounts of these chemicals- in our ooncLs, streams,
lakes and rivers. The extreme long active life of aldrin and diela::_n in
water makes it imperative for all citizens to take positive steps wac-n
usinc these compounds to prevent contamination of our water resources.
A review of recent data concerning application techniques for aldrin
and dieldrin have resulted in the following interim guidelines:
1. No aerial applications of aldrin or dieldrin should be
advocated either in combination with other pesticides or
with fertilizers.
2. All soil applications should be thoroughly mixed with the
soil at time of or immediately following application.
Granular formulation should be mineral base materials _• other
than particles of corn cobs, tobacco stems, nut hulls, or
similar materials. Current seed treatment practices where
the treated seed is inserted directly into the soil are
acceptable.
3. In correlation with field soil application, good erosion
prevention practices should be simultaneously practiced
to avoid the contamination of aquatic environments.
4. Termite and other wood destroying pest control practices
may continue as presently recommended with the exception
that no topical or soil surface applications are recommended
for exterior soil areas.
-------
-------
5. in those situations, where topical or above ground
applications may be necessary to control pests, such
as plum curculio, peach tree borer, Christmas tree
weevils, selection of aldrin or dieldrin should be
made only after it has been determined:
(a) That no other chemical of short residual
nature will give adequate and less hazardous
control.
(b) That all possibilities of water contamination
have been eliminated or reduced to the minimum.
6. The dipping of roots and tops of non-food plans may be
continued.
7. Mothproofing processes will be permitted when dieldrin
is used in a closed system.
-------
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL DIRECTORY
FIELD TRAIL ASSOCIATION
Paul Jamerson
3633 Columbus Avenue
Anderson, IN 46014
IZAAK WALTON LEAGUE -
DEKALB COUNTY
Karen Griggs
R.R. 1, County Road 35
Ashley, IN 46705
LAKE MICHIGAN REGIONAL
PLANNING COUNCIL
Box 208
Beverly Shore, IN 46301
COMMITTEE TO PUBLICIZE
CRISIS BIOLOGY
205 Morrison
Indiana University
Bloomington, IN 47401
NATURE CONSERVANCY
Mobly
911 Meadow Lane
Bloomington, IN 47401
LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS
Mrs. Donald Meier
1205 Summit
Bluffton, IN 46714
STUFF
St. Joseph's College
Box 772
Collegeville, IN 47978
COLUMBUS WATER § AIR
ASSOCIATION (AWWA)
C. Spear
Box 170
Columbus, IN 47201
INDIANA AUDUBON SOCIETY
C. P. Wise
R.R. #6
Connersville, IN 47331
MAYOR'S COMMISSION ON
ENVIRONMENT
Dr. William Doemel
Wabash College
Crawfordsville, IN 47933
IZAAK WALTON LEAGUE
Poling
8512 E. 101st Avenue
Crown Point, IN 46307
LAKE COUNTY CONSERVATION CLUBS
801 N. Court Street
Crown Point, IN 46307
LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTSRS
Mrs. L. Rocher
10412 Jennings Place
Crown Point, IN 46307
INDIANA CONSERVATION
J. Jankowski
St. Joe College
4721 Indianapolis
East Chicago, IN 46312
GARDEN CLUB
Ms. C. Fisher
1800 Briar Ridge Road
Evansville, IN 47711
TRI-STATE AREA HEALTH PLAN-
NING COUNCIL, INC.
210 Locust Street
Evansville, IN 47708
IZAAK WALTON LEAGUE
ALPHA CHAPTER PRESIDENT
Purdue Campus
2101 Coliseum Boulevard
Ft. Wayne, IN 46805
LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS
Mrs. B. Knight
6505 Stonybrook
Ft. Wayne, IN 46815
SPIRE
Concordia Senior College
Ft. Wayne, IN 46805
-------
-------
COMMUNITY ACTION TO REVERSE
POLLUTION (CARP)
8720 Oak Avenue
Gary, IN 46403
INFO NEWSPAPER
1649 Broadway
Gary, IN 46402
IZAAK WALTON LEAGUE INDE-
PENDENCE HILL CHAPTER
3937 Jackson
Gary, IN 46408
IZAAK WALTON LEAGUE INDIANA
5808 E. 10th Avenue
Gary, IN 46403
LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF
GARY
E. Q. Committee
6045 Birch
Gary, IN 46403
LITTLE CALUMET RIVER
ASSOCIATION
6800 W. 25th Street
Gary, IN 46406
PLANNED PARENTHOOD
Mrs. S. Larmee
625 Washington
Gary, IN 46402
IZAAK WALTON LEAGUE
GRIFFITH CHAPTER
R. Frost
542 Arbogast Street
Griffith, IN 46319
INDIANA AUDUBON SOCIETY
D. Buck
R.R. #1, Box 332
Hamlet, IN 46532
CALUMET COMMUNITY COUNCIL
S. M. Olszanski
3930 170th Street
Hammond, IN 46323
HAMMOND ACTION COMMITTEE
608 Highland Street
Hammond, IN 46320
INDIANA CITIZENS WATER
POLLUTION
Mrs. R. McMinpsen
7616 New Hampshire
Hammond, IN 46323
LAKE MICHIGAN INTER-LEAGUE
GROUP
Mrs. N. Doyal Yaney
7412 Magoun
Hammond, IN 46324
NORTHWEST INDIANA COMPREHENSIVE
HEALTH PLANNING COUNCIL, INC.
8145 Kennedy
Highland, IN 46323
GARDEN CLUB
Ms. E. Aldrin
108 N. Guyer Street
Hobart, IN 46342
IZAAK WALTON LEAGUE
Swallow
1224 W. 44th Place
Hobart, IN 45342
ACRES INC.
1802 Chapman Road
Huntertown, IN 46748
IZAAK WALTON LEAGUE
T. Dustin
1802 Chapman Road
Huntertown, IN 46748
HUNTINGTON ZERO POPULATION
GROWTH
0. Dan Killen
R.R. 7
Huntington, IN 46750
ENVIRONMENTAL COALITION OF
METRO INDIANAPOLIS
Room 401
30 E, Georgia Street
Indianapolis, IN 46204
-------
-------
GARDEN CLUB OF INDIANA, INC.
Mrs. Thorn
530 Carlyle Place
Indianapolis, IN 46201
INDIANA CONSERVATION COUN-
CIL INC.
2128 East 46th Street
Indianapolis, IN 46205
LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS
Mrs. Thomas Head
17 W. Market Street
Room 619
Indianapolis, IN 46204
NATIONAL COUNCIL OF WOMEN
Becker
5621 Beechwood Avenue
Indianapolis, IN 46219
H. Kohnke, President
Agronomy, Purdue University
Lafayette, IN 47907
LIVINGSTON HILLS ASSOCIATION
P.O. Box 225
Lafayette, IN 47902
PLANNED PARENTHOOD
P.O. Box 1114
Lafayette, IN 47902
AMERICAN CAMPING ASSOCIATION
E. F. Schmidt
Bradford Woods
Martinsville, IN 46151
IZAAK WALTON LEAGUE
Wiseman
327 Johnson Road
Michigan City, IN 46403
PLANNED PARENTHOOD
261 Johnson Building
Muncie, IN 47305
AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF
UNIVERSITY WOMEN (AAUW)
"This Beleaguered Earth"
Calumet Area Branch
Mrs. R. Herlocker, Chairman
8528 Schreiber Drive
Munster, IN 46321
SAVE THE DUNES COUNCIL
Mrs. S. Troy
1512 Park Drive
Munster, IN 46321
SOCIETY FOR PRESERVATION 5
USE OF RESOURCES (SPUR)
801 Elks Road
Richmond, IN 47374
AREA PLANNING COMMISSION
City-County Building
Room 1219
227 IV. Jefferson
South Bend, IN 46601
INDIANA PUBLIC INTEREST
BPQPaRPH r,ROHP fTMPTRrn
- -- - s -•
Rose-Hulman Institute
Box 618
Terre Haute, IN 47803
WABASH VALLEY INT CON
24 South 7th Street
Terre Haute, IN 47808
ZERO POPULATION GROWTH
L. Eaton
Department of Life
Science Institute
Terre Haute, IN 47809
ECHO
Taylor University
Upland, IN 46989
INDIANA CONSERVATION COUNCIL
Arthur R. Bair
R.R. 7 - Box 22
Valparaiso, IN 46383
-------
-------
INDIANA LEAGUE OF WOMEN
VOTERS
E. Q. Committee
Mrs. D. Trump
Route 7, Box 34
Valparaiso, IN 46383
LIFE
Karin Griebel
Valparaiso University Union
Valparaiso, IN 46383
IZAAK WALTON LEAGUE
INDIANA DIVISION
Mr. Ted Falls
Wheeler, IN 46393
MICHIANA FOR ENVIRONMENT
I. Walters
P.O. Box 82
Wyatt, IN 46595
-------
Poison Control Centers
City
Anderson
Angola
East Chicago
Elkhart
Evansville
FcrtW— e
Frankfort
Gary
Goshen
Hammond
Name and Address
INDIANA
Poison Control Center
Hickey Memorial Hospital
2015 Jackson St. 46014
Poison Control Center
Cameron Memorial Hospital, Inc.
416 E. Maumee Street 46703
Poison Control Center
St. Catherine Hospital
4321 Fir Street 463 12
Poison Control Center
Elkhart General Hospital
600 East Blvd. 46518
Poison Control Center
Deaconess Hospital
600 Mary Street 477 10
Poison Control Center
St. Mary's Hospital
3700 Washington Avenue 47715
Poison Control Center
Welborn Memorial Baptist
Hospital
412 S.E. 4th Street 47713
Pr>i<:nn Control Center
St. Joseph Hospital
700 Broadway 46805
Poison Control Center
Parkview Memorial Hospital
2200 Randalia Drive 46805
Poison Control Center
Clinton County Hospital
1300 Jackson Street 46041
Poison Control Center
Methodist Hospital of Gary, Inc.
1600 W. 6th Avenue 46402
Poison Control Center
Goshen General Hospital
200 High Park Avenue 46526
Poison Control Center
St. Margaret Hospital
Telephone
(317)694-2511
Ext. 251
(219) 665-2141
(219) 397-3080
(219) 523-5350
Ext. 215
(812) 426-3405
(812) 477-6261
(812) 423-3103
Ext. 336 or 337
Night Ext. 253 or 254
m9) 742-4121
Ext. 211
(219) 484-6636
Ext. 530
(317) 654-4451
Ext. 22
Night Ext 25
(219) 882-9461
Ext. 709
(219) 533-2141
Ext. 356
(219) 932-2300
Ext. 700
Director and
Assistant Director
William L. Stephens
Irene F. Kenyon, R.N.
Max White
S. G. Zallen, M.D.
E. L. Broomes, M.D.
C. R. Yoder, M.D.
Forest M. Kendall, M.D
Robert Arendell, M.D.
Julian Present, M.D.
Richard F. Emig
Till Beatty. R.N.
William O. Wissman.R.Ph.
Grace Kammeyer, R.N.
Frederick W. Flora, M .D.
Virginia Jasperson, R.N.
Gordon J. Rowan, R.N.
Marvin Marquardt, D.O.
Caro Yoder, MD.
Arthur Branco, M.D.
Indianapolis
Kokomo
25 Douglas St. 46320
Poison Control Center
Marion County General Hospital
960 Locke Street 46202
Poison Control Center
Methodist Hospital of Ind., Inc.
1604 N. Capitol Avenue 46202
Poison Control Center
Howard Community Hospital
3500 S. Lafountain 46902
(317)630-7351
John Miller, M.D.
(317) 924-8355 Maxine Bush, R.N.
(317) 453-0702 William M. Graff, R.Ph.
Ext. 233 or 232
-------
-------
oison Control Centers (continued)
Name and Address
Telephone
Director and
Assistant Director
ifayette
Grange
janon
idison
irion
shawaka
mcie
tland
iunond
Ibyville
thBend
INDIANA
Poison Control Center
St. Elizabeth Hospital
1501 Hartford Street 47904
Poison Control Center
Purdue University
Student Health Center 47907
Poison Control Center
La Grange County Hospital
Route 1 46761
Poison Control Center
Witham Memorial Hospital
1 124 N. Lebanon Street 46052
Poison Control Center
Kings Daughter Hospital
112 Presbyterian Avenue 47250
Poison Control Center
re Haute
Wabash and Euclid Ave. 46952
Poison Control Center
St. Joseph Hospital
•^ 1 C TV7 X-1 O . /./'fit
- --
Poison Control Center
Ball Memorial Hospital
2401 University Avenue 47303
Poison Control Center
Jay County Hospital
505 W. Arch Street 47371
Poison Control Center
Reid Memorial Hospital
1401 Chester Blvd. 47374
Poison Control Center
William S. Major Hospital
150 W. Washington Street 46176
Poison Control Center
Memorial Hospital of South Bend
615 N. Michigan Street 46601
Poison Control Center
St. Joseph's Hospital
811 E. Madison Street 46622
Poison Control Center
Union Hospital, Inc
1606 N. 7th Street 47804
(317) 742-0221
Ext421
(317) 749-2441
Ext 245 or
743-3494
(219) 463-2144
(317)482-2700
Ext. 44
(812)265-5211
(317) 664-5453
(219) 259-2431
(317) 284-3371
Ext. 241,242
(317) 726-7260
or 726-4440
Ext, 67
(317) 962-4545
Ext. 222
(317) 392-3211
(219) 284-7458
(219) 234-2151
Ext. 264
(812) 232-0361
Ext. 397 or 398
Sister M. Laurine
Paul Hess, Associate
L. W. Combs, M.D.
W. H. Altier, M.D.
D. L Mattox, M.D.
T. L. Dillon, D.O.
B. Martz, R.N.
Jean Grimsley, R.N.
Betty Jeffrey, R.N.
R. M. Hummel, M.D.
H. A. Staunton, M.D.
Dorothy Downing, R.N.
F. E. Keeling, M.D.
Raymond Minch
Olin K. Wiland, M.D.
Carolyn Rosenfeld, RJN.
Phillip Myers, M.D.
Bernard S. Vagner, M.D.
William W. Krieble, M.D.
-------
------- |