-------
741
•a
o>
•H
•p
C
10
.3
-p
rH
n)
w
a
CO
•H
S
eg
CO
10
a>
•rl
43
rH
•H
0
rt
bO
6 T)
43 '=)
CD rH
a> co
(H
H Tl
«H 5
o cd
>
CD tH
a 43
>» o
IK «<
^
o -d
Er^
feid
c uo t--
bO rH
•rl O
CQ O
m CD
P H
•
t^
•§
•§
CO
•
$
3
C, CD
0 rH
•rt H
43 -pt
cd y
rH t*
rH 0)
rt &
43 0)
n x:
c u
M W
«H H
•rt H
•rt
•d M
CD b
•d ^3
•rtg
0 0
(H 43
0.
CD
CD T)
.O cd
£
S«
g»
•rt G
43 0
ct) -H
C 43
•rt 0
tt CD O
^GrH
58-0
jy
« ja
CD O
tl 43
O -rt
>.«
U W
II
CD
bO
•d
S
rH
CO
•d
CD
43
cd
>
•rt
43
U
«<
€
rH
•
>
•d
•§
to
CO
^
o
1
S
i;
CD
£
t
*4
^
(0
CD
•rl
43
•rt
rrt
•rt
O
cd
«H
c
o
3
n
•rt
(4
O
d
u
•d
i
jd
fn U
^^
S°
CO
^^ ci
0) ^
« J?
C-5 (M
CD
S)
•d
3
H
CO
•d
$
rt
>
^
-P
o
•<
CM
o\
«
4?
TJ
J3
^
CO
3
a>
43
rH
(X,
0)
bO
I-.
o
cS
rS
to
CD
•rt
43
•rt
rH
•rt
0
rt
', i
C
O
4^
cd
C
•H
(4
O
d
O
•d
CD
(U
S SS
si si
(H U Jn 0
23 25
S° S^Q
CO CO
CX G P. G
a) ^ a> fj
CD cd o
43 q 43
cd >rt rt
> M t>
•rt O iH
43 rH 43
0 2 0
< O «<
CM
UN
C
0
•rt
W
•f!
C -rt
o -d
•rt fl
w 3
•H CO
•p
•rt 0)
TD hO
43 rt
3 H
CO H
•rt
rH r*
d M
•rt
•8 3
» >
si
u
43
3
n
I
"g
n)
o>
•p
H
•rl W
C i-l
•H -H
O TJ
H C
fn 3
£-1 CO
CM
•d
cd
c?
•rl
•d
43
jjj
rH
0)
O
CD
rH
43
43
•rl
>J
X.
cd
eS
u
•H
43
§•
CO
Os
A
t>
S
to
1
1
rl
0)
>
•H
«
43
cj
9
rH
0)
O
CD
H
4>
43
a
rH
H
jn
u
CO
a
•rt
j=
>. n
•*3 P
c 5
3 O
0 EH
O
>,
t-i 43
CD t-i
43 CD
^ ^
£ a
J2
0
43
•H
Q
D)
§
1
CM
0)
43
rH
•rl
fx,
•d
ij
r-l
43
43
•H
.-)
AJ
C
cd
EH
O
•H
43
P,
0)
CO
>o
rH
i-H
O
O
JC
o
CO
(0
£t
o
•H
ti
43
Od
P*
•
43
CO
si
u
43
•rl
a
en
E
£
SH
3
i-H
•H
f**
T3
9
CO
X
CD
CO
l<
U
43
rH
rt
cn
CD
bO
"§
,J
r-l
CO
•d
a>
43
rt
•H
43
O
<
\f\
CM
i-H
G
O
•rt
W
•rl
t>
•H
•d
J2
3
CO
w
CD
43
rt
43
tn
W
r-t
O
•v*^
•H
C.
U
J2
O
-p
•rl
n
w
£
5
c
o
•H
-P
cd
c
•rl
U
0
d
o
4
-------
742
_J
^^
rH
'c
H
rH
•rl
Li
£
O
-p
o
C
2
o
u
i-H
H
rH
r~1
rH
">
rH
rH
•rl
Ll
Ll
A
Q
43
•U
O
(1)
2
O
t)
§
Q)
|™1
H
"f>
H
rH
•H
Li
O
43
jj
O
rj
£j
O
U
rH
a
CD
rH
•H
>
rH
H
•H
ft
iS
O
+>
CJ
C
C
o
o
rH
w
CD
•H
43
•H
H
•rl
O
rt
Ci_l
R
0
•rl
+»
rt
C
C
T)
V)
c
rt a>
rH H
(X, rH
•H
•a
0)
+>
o
e
+>
10
c
0
o
-p
o
c
n
OJ
tl
o
•d
0)
+> C H
rt O -
•rl
+i
CJ
rt
«H
C
O
•H
4^ C
rt
c
•H
x: ft
u o
CO
Recei
CD x:
Q) U
L, +i
(1) XI
2 °
£»
CD X!
-P C
•P tj
•H 9
HH »
CD X!
O
0? 10
i{ C
II
CD X!
fl) O
Li -P
iiE
01 X!
0) O
E-*
TJ
0)
•H
+5
O
O
•p
•H
fa
H
cd
w
o
o
•rl
I
11
•d
•H
CO
£
CM
•d
§
^ J^
§ 4^>
O fri
^TJ
Q}
CO
CO
oo
CM
s,
CO
•d
5
rt
4>
o
o
W)
rH C
CO O
•H
•d -p
CD rt
•P C
rt -H
{» L,
•H O
1
rH
CO
TJ
CD
43
o
•a)
s
rH
a
o
•H
•d
3
rH G
co o
•H
XI 4>
45 S
•8 2
-< o
s
H
O
r*
a
CO
^i
CD
C3
o
•H
4>
rt
Install;
fl)
•H
fa
«
I
o
o
0
co
s^
£^
rt
g
•rl
^
Pl
O
,_J
H
•rl
5
Merrill-
rH
o
o
XI
o
CO
CD
TJ
rt
C^J
CD
f^t
rH
7
b-
MerriU
rH
O
5
0
w
X!
bO
•H
sc
(I)
rH
H
t»
Merrill
CO
i-H
^
bO
C
•rl
H
It
PQ
fl)
rH
*~i
•r-i
s>
MerriU
Li
4?
C
d)
o
txQ
j^
iH
0,
a
0
X!
CO
Li
CD
CO
CO
•H
^
X)
3
CO
CD
O
rt
L!
0)
Er*t
>
CD
Brookvi
c
o
•H
CO
•H
p
vH
TJ
X)
CO
£4
o
Q
crt
)S
rH
s-
.3
u
•d
r^C
CO O
•rl
TJ 4»
Q) nJ
-p g
n3 *H
> Li
•rl O
C
10
3
x>
(0
den
G
bO C
T3 O
3 O
S|
TJ
<0 H
4^ rt
?5
3E
CD
W
•d
o
•oS
CO
•H
4>
8
CM
O
•H
W
•d
^
CO
cu
1
nco
0)
60
T!
3
rH C
CO O
•H
•d 43
CD rt
43 C
rt -r)
> r.
•H O
43 d
o x!
««! O
XA
c^
J8
rt
+3
co
W
•H
Rolling
-------
743
43
a
o
o
(0
(U
•H
-p
a
i
10
a
(0
g
I
1
u
I
II
•O
g
O
S,
&
rt
to
i
H
P.
C
.3
-P
c5
to
^
1
cS
s
S
+5
CO
M
c
•H
•H
CO
U
£
a
•fl
o
rH
« 1
+>
i
3 .fi J3
^0 Jd 0
cd -P co -P
°B S^
1*^ M p~«
o o
i-l to to
•PC -PC
ill -di
*3 f§ to o)
4>
c
ft)
fli
c
£:
Ir^
«H
O
CL
tr
fL?
CO
Sb
•d
d
tO H
J2 co
C
a TJ
4> CO
a 1
O
^ 0
fl <
»fr
O tJ
cl^
*" rt
Su
•fH O
CO Q
CO O
P H
oo r—
H K
a §
O -H
•H CO
CO «H
•d 5
f> T1
•H FQ
T3 f0
C P CO
0 W _
•H *O
•P CO Q
Cd T> P
H -H g
H CO B
cd h i-l
13 P 5
£ 35 £
C
•H
(0
0)
•H
•P
•H
^
O
ft
CM
a
o
iH
•P P-
rd O
.5^
ti cd
0 ^
^&
U 0
ji
X 0
CO +>
£p
o"
to
+= C
iH ^
Cd £3
CO «
CO
W)
•a
3
rH C
CO O
•H
•d -P
co cd
fl
•H O
4> H
o 3
«J U
8
H
d
0
•H
10
1
1
C
O
I
|
c
•H
(0
0)
•r»
+3
•H
d
0
cd
«H
§
•H
-P R
cd o
$3
532
28,
U 0
4>
§
3 £1
-32
og
CO
H W
•P C
•p R
•H 3
!-} A
CO
t>0
•d
3
H n
CO 0
•H
-a +i
co cd
1-8
t> f-l
•H O
+> H
o 2
«u o
^
^-^
•P
to
i
s §
«d >
Q «H
eg rt «
H £ -g
•d < 8
Indiana To
Service
Grand Calur
to
o>
ti
4J
•H
H
•H
O
<«
*-<
c
o
•H
-P
3
(-4
O
H
jB
U
•o
CO
£
t,
8
•H
«
4J
CO
._!
rt
O
T3
§
M
O
?«
oo
*O
3
H
CO
T)
!
•^
•p
o
«<
Vf>
•
1^^
c^
^
§
&
E
0
O
a
H
•P
C
S
Federal Cei
-------
Appendix 30
SEWAREN • NEW JERSEY • MEF.CURY 4-640O VULCAN DETINNING DIVISION
\
VI. .1 C.t ' MATtWlAI. 'I COMPANY
orrici OF THE PUCSIOCNT
January 11, 1965
Mr. B. A. Poole
Technical Secretary
State of Indiana IRl rp/»ra
Stream Pollution Control Board I^E^Efl W P !f^
1330 West Michigan Street ^=»^>u v Ib .i^
Indianapolis, Indiana 46207 JA'»1 2 IQfi1!
STATE OF INDIANA
Dear Mr. Poole: STREAM ^W CONTROL
I write with reference to your letter of December 29,
1964, addressed to Mr. S. J. Alston, Jr., Plant Manager of our Gary,
Indiana plant. In this letter, you advised us that we had been
designated as a participant in a conference on interstate stream
pollution to be held in Chicago on March 2, 1965.
On January 8, 1965, in a telephone conversation, we dis-
cussed what contribution our representative could make at this
conference. I requested our name be omitted from the list and you
acquiesced subject to receipt of information from us relevant to
the matter in question. We offer the following summation.
Our Gary plant commenced operations in 1955 and since that
date detinning tin plate scrap has been the principal function. We
employ on an average approximately 45 employees. Sanitary waste is
handled by a modern septic tank system with outfall to an extensive
filter bed system. We do generate some process waste which to date
has been discharged into the Grand Calumet River from an outlet on
our property.
The approximate analysis of the solution is as follows:
(as free caustic soda) 25 gms/liter
(combined as sodium carbonate and other compounds
containing carbon) 110 gms/liter
Na20 Total .............. 135 gms/liter
Calculated as all sodium carbonate, the amount is
230 gms/liter or approximately 2 Ibs per gallon of
solution.
The volume of solution is estimated to be approximately
2,800 gallons per day.
-------
745
-2-
Mr. B. A. Foole January 11, 1965
We have recently executed a contract to sell all of this
waste material, deliveries to commence on or before March 1, 1965.
It appears this waste with its alkaline content has a value for
acid neutralization.
With the commencement of deliveries, the discharge of
waste into the Grand Calumet will cease. It is for this reason we
feel our participation in the conference would serve no useful purpose.
If there is additional information you may require, please
do not hesitate to call on us.
Yours very truly,
VULCAN DETINNING DIVISION
Vulcan Materials Company
^^^fx-^,
E. W. YoiWg SJ
PresidenV \J
EWY/hb
-------
746
Appendix 31.
STATE- ^ INDIANA
«ggggaiM> /£^l£^£4P^
INDIANAPOLIS 4620?
STREAM POLLUTION CONTROL BOASD 5S 133° West M'1*1*"1 street
^Bi^^ MElrose 3-4420
COPY September 18, 1962
Department of Health, Education
and Welfare
Public Health Service
U33 West Van Buren Street
Chicago 7, Illinois
Attention* Mr. H. W. Poston
Regional Program Director
Water Pollution Control
Gentlemen:
Be: Industrial Wastes
E. I. duPont de Nemours & Co., Inc,
and Inland Steel Company
East Chicago, Indiana
On August 8, 1962, E. I. duPont de Nemours & Co., Inc., East Chicago,
submitted a preliminary proposal for the disposal of hydrochloric acid into
the Grand Calumet River. On July 12, 1962, Inland Steel Company, East
Chicago, submitted a preliminary proposal for the treatment of wastes from a
new 80-inch Hot Strip Mill. The Inland proposal was considered satisfactory
at the July meeting of the Stream Pollution Control Board, and it is antici-
pated that the Board will consider the duPont proposal during its September
25, 1962, meeting.
Both of these proposals were discussed with you with the understanding
that the Board would be informed of your opinion as to the compatibility of
these proposals with the long range planning of the Public Health Service in
the Great Lakes basin. We provided you with a copy of the Inland proposal.
It is requested that your comments on both proposals be available for
the September 25, 1962, meeting of the Board. It would be appreciated if
you would submit separate letters, original and carbon, for each proposal;
the original typing for our files and a carbon copy for the Company files.
Also, the Inland proposal should be returned for retention in our files.
Very truly yours,
B. A. Poole
Technical Secretary
RAW/nOw
copied 2/65
-------
747
MR. MILLER: The State of Indiana has been working
for many years to improve and maintain the water quality
3- in this area, in such condition that all users, present
and future, have acceptable water. In an effort to
overcome pollution problems in the south end of
Lake Michigan and to collect data on which to base
water quality criteria, the State of Indiana prepared
in 1953 an outline of a proposed survey for the south
end of Lake Michigan.
10 The survey was to be undertaken and
financed by Indiana, Illinois, Department of Water and
12 Sewers of the City of Chicago, the Metropolitan Sanitary
13 District of Chicago, Public Health Service, and munlci-
14 pal and industrial interests. This survey was to be
15 conducted over a two-year period at a cost of about
$250,000. The survey was not undertaken because of the
17 failure to reach an agreement with all parties concerned.
19 In 1935* the first comprehensive stream
19 pollution abatement law was passed, and under the pro-
20 visions of the law, the Cities of Chicago, Gary, Hammond,
21 and Whiting were ordered, in 1937, to abate pollution of
22 the Grand Calumet River, the Indiana Harbor Canal, and
23 Lake Michigan.
24 East Chicago, Gary, and Hammond complied
25 by formation of Sanitary Districts and the construction
-------
748
i of sewage treatment works.
2 The Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board
3 policies are defined as existing pollution must be
4 eliminated as soon as possible.
5 All wastes, from new outlets to state
6 waters must be adequately treated prior to discharge,
7 and adequate waste treatment must be included as part
8 of the industrial expansion or sanitary sewer system
9 enlargement where proposed and where adequate facilities
10 were not available.
11 The Board has been constantly active
12 in pursuing its objectives in the Indiana-Calumet area.
13 This statement is emphasized by the fact that the Board
14 issued 15 industrial waste treatment facility approvals
15 during the period of 1961-62, '63, and '64.
16 The estimated expenditures for these
i? facilities is $48,285,000. Two of these projects were
18 submitted to the Public Health Service for comment in
is 1962.
20 Both Inland Steel Company and E. I. duPont
21 de Nemours and Company, East Chicago, planned extensive
22 water pollution control works, and the Board requested
23 the Public Health Service to comment on the compatability
24 of these projects with the long-range for pollution
25 control in Lake Michigan. The Public Health Service did
-------
7^9
not comment on either project.
Final determinations of the additional
3- treatment that will be required for industrial wastes
must await completion of the Great Lakes River Basin
Survey now being conducted by the Public Health Service.
The report of this survey is expected to contain water
quality criteria which are needed to determine additional'
treatment needs for each waste discharge.
Indiana recognizes its obligation to provide
10 improved water to the neighboring state of Illinois.
11 Water quality monitoring data from Indiana Harbor Canal
12 and Burns Ditch show water quality has not deteriorated.
13 Samples at these stations are collected
u twice each month and the result of these samples
is are Included in the appendix of the report.
16 The water of Lake Michigan is usable for
17 public water supply and there is no threat to the health
18 of the people by this use. The Board, even with Increased
19 industrial activity and population growth, has not lost
20 ground in making and maintaining water quality in Lake
21 Michigan.
22 The Indiana portion of this area is
23 included in two counties, Lake County and Porter County.
24 Since the turn of the century, Lake County, Indiana,
25 has experienced a tremendous rate of growth.
-------
10
11
750
In 1900, the county had 37,892 inhabitants,
while the 1960 census showed a population of 513,269
persons, an increase of 1,250 percent.
It should be noted that 84 percent of
the Lake County population is located in the upper third
of the county, along the shores of Lake Michigan, and
the major watercourses of the Calumet Basin.
Porter County has also experienced ac-
celerated growth since 19^0. The increase between 19^0
and 1960 was 117 percent as Compared at or to an in-
crease of only 45 percent between 1900 and 19^0.
12 The growth of Porter County is expected
13 to increase at even a greater rate due to the recently
14 completed Midwest Steel Division, National Steel Corpora-
15 tion plant, located at Burns Ditch and Lake Michigan;
16 the Bethlehem Steel Corporation plant now under construction
17 just east of the Midwest plant, and the proposed Burns
18 Ditch port and harbor development.
19 There are 33 industries with separate
20 outfalls to Calumet-Lake Michigan Basin. The attached
21 map shows the location of these industries, the cities
22 and towns, and the major watercourses or the Indiana-
23 Calumet region.
24 More than 83 percent of Lake and Porter
25 County population is located in 20 incorporated
-------
751
municipalities within the Calumet River Basin. Five of
2' these with a I960 population of 18,398 have new sewer systems.
Twelve, representing 98 percent of the sewered urban
population, provide sewage treatment. The remaining
three are under Board order to abate pollution of receding
waters and two now have projects under construction.
The last municipality has engaged an engineer to study
its sewage works needs.
Fifteen municipalities in the Calumet
10 River Basin have invested approximately $72,400,000
11 In sewerage and sewage treatment facilities during the
12 past 30 years.
13 Approximately $61,000,000 of this has
14 been spent since 1950. Eight sewage treatment plants
15 serve 12 municipalities. Two plants are under construc-
16 tion. The remaining one with sewers has a project under
17 construction to connect to an existing plant.
IB These plants provide secondary treatment
19 and five have chlorlnatlon facilities. Of the five
20 towns without a sewer system, Portage submitted a preliminary
21 engineering report on sewers and sewage treatment to
22 the Board in 1962.
23 The East Chicago, Gary, and Hammond Sani-
24 tary districts account for more than 82 percent,
25 $59.4 million of the $72.4 million invested cost noted
-------
752
above.
East Chicago, completed major sewage
treatment plant improvements in I960; the Hammond plant
improvements were completed in 1964, and the Gary improve-
ments were placed under construction late in 1962.
Hammond has completed storm sewer separation
projects with discharge of storm water to Wolf Lake,
and Gary has completed separation in one area and has
one project under construction.
10 Both cities are planning additional storm
n sewer separation. In addition, Highland, Hobart, Munster,
12 and Schererville are providing separate sewers in new
13 development areas and other communities have been ad-
14 vised of the necessity of planning for separate storm
is and sanitary sewers.
16 There are 37 semi-public installations
i? in the Calumet River Basin with sewage treatment facilities
is discharging to receding waters. As municipal sewers
19 become available, many of these plants will be abandoned.
20 Industry has expended or committed approxi-
21 mately $73,200,000 for treatment facilities in the Basin.
22 Approximately $50,000,000 has been spent or committed
23 since 1950.
24 Approximately $53,500,000 have been expended
25 or committed by eight major steel plants. Currently, the
-------
753
steel industry is experiencing a period of major plant
renovations and considerable sums are being spent and
will be spent for adequate industrial waste treatment
facilities.
One of the outstanding industrial waste
treatment facilities of the country is at the new
plant of the Midwest Steel Division, National Steel
Corporation, Portage.
The facilities include an activated
10 sludge plant with chlorination of the effluent*
n Industrial waste treatment consists of acid-alkali
12 neutralization, oil emulsion breaking with terminal
13 coagulation and settling, and deep-well injection of
14 waste pickle liquor.
15 The approved sewage and industrial waste
16 facilities which are under construction at the Burns
17 Harbor plant, Bethlehem Steel Company, Chesterton,
18 will be equally extensive and, further, a terminal lagoon
19 will be included.
20 All oil refineries in the Basin provide
21 API oil separators. Approximately $15,000,000 of the
22 $73,200,000 total has been expended by four major oil
23 companies.
24 Sinclair Refining Company, East Chicago,
25 is an excellent example of water reuse. The Company
-------
utilizes cooling tiers with a total in-water recircula-
tlon of 168,000 gallons per minute and a waste discharge
of 3,500 gallons per minute.
American Oil Company, Whiting, provides
biological treatment for oxidation of dissolved organics
and removal of oils.
These accomplishments by municipalities
and industries have been possible in many cases with
no legal action necessary. The Board operates on a
10 basic policy of education and persuasion rather than
11 compulsion. However, legal action is undertaken, if
12 necessary, in cases where improvements are not made
13 within a reasonable time. This policy has been success-
14 f ul.
is Since 1943, it has been necessary to
16 take 13 enforcement actions in the Basin.
17 The following list shows these munici-
18 palities and industries.
19 We will summarize it in here. There
20 have been ten orders issued to municipalities and these
21 are Highland, Munster, Valparaiso, Crown Point, Hobart,
22 Griffith, Dyer, Hammond Sanitary District, Schererville,
23 and Porter.
24 The other three cases involve Whiting and
25 two cases with Lever Brothers Company, and these were
-------
3-
755
ended by stipulation.
In April 1964, the Technical Secretary of
the Board requested those public and semi-public sewage
treatment plants needing effluent chlorination facilities
to submit a timetable for provision of the necessary
facilities.
The following list shows the status of
the municipal chlorination facilities,
Chesterton has facilities in operation.
10 Crown Point has facilities in operation. East Chicago
11 is chlorinating in the effluent channel. East Gary,
12 Miller District, no facilities, considering connection
13 to Gary's main sewage treatment plant.
14 Gary, under construction; Hammond, sub-
is mltted preliminary report for chlorination facilities.
16 Hobart, facilities in operation; Valparaiso,
17 facilities in operation; Dyer, under construction;
18 Schererville, under construction.
19 Of the 37 semi-public sewage works instal-
20 lations in the Basin at least eight plan to connect to
21 municipal sewers in the near future. Twelve of the
22 remaining 29 provide effluent chlorination facilities;
23 one provides a terminal lagoon; five have sand filters,
24 and four have plans for acquiring chlorination facilities
25 approved and/or are planning construction of facilities
-------
756
i in 1965.
2 Efforts will be continued to obtain
3 effluent chlorination facilities at the seven other
4 installations.
5 Surface water is used by 13 Indiana
B communities. Lake Michigan water in the area under
7 consideration, even with the existing local pollution,
8 is, in general, of good quality. The water purification
9 plants, with a minimum of treatment, produce a safe and
10 excellent quality of water at all times.
11 The water east of the Indiana Harbor break-
12 water is generally very good. This is borne out by the
13 remarks of Mr. Leo Louis, President of the Gary-Hbbart
14 Water Corporation, to Senator Birch Bayh in a letter dated
15 February 10, 1965:
16 "The second filtration plant, now under
17 construction, is being built in the southwest corner of
18 the Town of Ogden Dunes adjacent to the Inland Steel
19 Company property. The primary reason we moved that far
20 east was because we were unable to obtain other property
21 and access to the lake closer to Gary. Water quality
22 had nothing to do with our decision to move to the Porter
23 County site.
*
24 "In general, our raw water supply is very
25 good, and, while we do have some periods of unsatisfactory
-------
757
water which results in some increased chemical costs and
increased technical supervision techniques, we have never
complained too much about these problems.
"We are anxious, of course, to keep pollu-
tion in the lake to a minimum, but we have been willing
to undertake some increased treatment costs realizing
that Lake Michigan water is so very much better than many
other utilities in other parts of the country have to
deal with. We are also cognizant of the fact that we
10 are located in an industrial area, we serve large industries
11 with at least part of their water supply, and we are
12 anxious to have other industries locate in our area to
13 promote the growth of the area and our water system."
14 The water north of the Calumet Harbor break-
is water is generally very good. The Department of Health,
16 Education, and Welfare report for this conference shows
17 in a table summary of raw water problems, table VIII-1
18 for the Chicago South District Filtration Plant, 1963-64.
19 This table included 23 days in 1963 and 12 days in 1964
20 of hydrocarbon odors, indicating a relatively few days of
21 problems of this type.
22 I might say that Mr. LeBosquet increased
23 the number of days in 1964 to 20 and yesterday Mr. Gerstein
24 used the figure of 8 and we did not have this report
25 when we were writing this one.
-------
758
It is believed that the water supplied
Chicago citizens on these days was safe and of excellent
quality, and I am happy to say that I was sure of this
when this was written, but since we did not have the
reports, this is the best we thought we could do, and
Mr. Jardine and Mr. Gerstein assured all of you yes-
terday that at no time had there been occasions when
the water was not safe that was furnished the consumers
in Chicago.
10 The water quality between Calumet Harbor
11 and Indiana Harbor breakwaters is poor. The report of
12 Health, Education, and Welfare indicates there are
13 flow reversals in the Calumet River resulting in pollu-
14 tion of Lake Michigan in Indiana.
15 Officials of the Hammond water purification
16 plant have reported high threshold odors with accompanying
17 high carbon dosage to remove the odor when winds are from
is the north and northwest indicating water movement from
19 Calumet Harbor to the Hammond intake.
20 Popcorn slag has been found on all beaches
21 between the two breakwaters and the sources of this slag
22 are U. S. Steel, South Works, and Wisconsin Steel Works
23 in Chicago, indicating water movement from Calumet Har-
24 bor to Indiana.
25 Water movement is also from Indiana
-------
759
north when winds are from the south. Hammond and Whiting
water purification plants report more days of high threshold
odor than the other water plants in the south end of
Lake Michigan; however, water supplied by Hammond and
Whiting is safe and does not jeopardize the health of the
consumers.
On June 12, 1964, the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare submitted a report entitled, "Pre-
liminary Draft, Report on Sampling of Industrial Wastes,
10 Indiana Portion-Calumet Area," to the Board.
11 The report listed analyses of samples collected
12 by Great Lakes-Illinois River Basin personnel from indus-
13 trial waste sources in Indiana. Based upon information
u contained in the report, the Board in June and September
is 1964 requested the following companies to develop com-
16 prehensive industrial waste programs with timetables:
17 U. S. Steel Corporation, Gary Steel Works, Gary: U. S.
18 Steel Corporation, Gary Sheet and Tin Mill, Gary; Youngstown
19 Sheet and Tube Company, East Chicago; Inland Steel Company,
20 East Chicago; Mobil Oil Company, East Chicago.
21 All responded and submitted information on
22 what was being done and planned for the future to reduce
23 pollution.
24 Water quality in the southern end of
25 Lake Michigan is of utmost concern to the Board. On
-------
760
December 14 and 15, 1964, after studying the operating
records of the Hammond, Whiting, and East Chicago and
the Gary-Hobart water treatment plants and noting the
amount of activated carbon which was used to remove tastes
and odors, the Board requested ten companies to redouble
efforts to improve housekeeping by eliminating or holding
to an absolute minimum the wastes discharged to plant
sewers; to eliminate the dumping of wastes of non-saleable
compounds to the sewers and watercourses, and to im-
10 prove, where possible, the operation of existing treatment
works.
12 In April of 1957, a state-wide water quality
13 monitoring program was established. Samples are collected
14 by State Board of Health personnel and cooperating
15 agencies at each station on a bi-weekly schedule; the
16 results of analyses at these stations are published each
17 year on a calendar-year basis; and they are included in
18 the appendix of this report.
19 We started with three stations. One of
20 these was on the Grand Calumet River at Hohman Avenue;
21 the Little Calumet River at Hohman Avenue and Lake Michi-
22 gan raw water intake of the Whiting water works.
23 Since that time, we have added ten addi-
24 tional stations including Burns Ditch at Dickey Road
25 on the Indiana Harbor Canal.
-------
761
In order to make a final determination of
the treatment requirements for some of the industries in
the Indiana Calumet region, water quality criteria must
be established. Without the necessary data on water
quality in the area and on the sources of waste discharges,
criteria cannot be easily determined.
It is understood that the Great Lakes-
Illinois River Basin project now in the final phases of
its Lake Michigan activities, will provide these data.
10 Therefore, establishment of water quality criteria should
11 be one of the objectives of this conference.
12 The present problems of water quality in
13 the Calumet-Lake Michigan area can be summed up in the
14 following paragraphs which were a part of the State of
15 Indiana's testimony at a Public Hearing concerning the
16 Nation's Water Pollution Problems for the House Natural
17 Resources and Power Subcommittee of the Committee on
Government Operations, held in Chicago September 6,
1963.
20 "While much has been accomplished by the
21 treatment of sewage and industrial wastes in the Indiana
22 Calumet region, there are still problems. Some of these
23 are extremely complex and there are always dangers of
24 over-simplification.
25 "Notwithstanding this and the lack of the
-------
762
Great Lakes-Illinois River Drainage Basin Report of the
Public Health Service, the following general statements
can be made as to the water quality needs of this area:
"Tastes and Odors: Organics in the
waters of the Indiana Harbor Canal and in effluents going
directly to the Lake contribute to the taste and odor
problems of some of the cities that use water from the
south end of Lake Michigan. Better housekeeping and
more careful operation of existing treatment works will
10 resolve some of these problems. However, removal of a
n higher percentage of these organics at their source is
12 essential if the water supplies are to have a continuously
13 satisfactory raw water.
14 "'Coliforms: Coliform bacteria counts
15 are too high in all streams. These, unlike tastes and
16 odors which are due almost entirely to industrial wastes,
17 have their origin in city sewage. They are of particular
18 significance in the Indiana Harbor Canal and in Burns
19 Ditch since these waters outlet into Lake Michigan.
20 "'Significant reduction will take place
21 in the Little Calumet and Grand Calumet Rivers on comple-
22 tion of the construction work at Hammond, Griffith, Munster,
23 Highland, Dyer, and Schererville. The work under way
24 at Gary will reduce counts in the Indiana Harbor Canal.
25 Pull control of the high coliform counts cannot be expected
-------
763
until combined sewers are eliminated. Sewer separation
is costly and time consuming. Work has been started in
Gary, Hammond and some of the smaller cities, but this
involves only a small percentage of the total problem.
"'Solids: Upon completion of the municipal
treatment works now under construction the solids getting
to the waterways will be largely of an inert nature.
While they have little bearing on the quality of Lake
Michigan, additional solids removal in the Grand Calumet-
10 Indiana Harbor Canal drainage area is indicated.
11 "'Aesthetic Considerations: It is not
12 reasonable to expect waters draining highly industrialized
13 areas to have the same appearance as waters draining
undeveloped areas. But one can expect them to be rea-
ls sonably free of floating material, sludge banks and
16 color. Accomplishment of the objective outlined above
17 will do much to improve the appearance of the waters
18 of the region.'"
19 The physiography of the entire Calumet
20 Basin is such that gradients of most streams in the area
21 are flat, providing sluggish conditions and poor
22 natural purification capacity, and many low, swampy areas
23 are located in the Basin.
24 Because of these conditions, the Grand
25 Calumet and Little Calumet Rivers normally flow in two
-------
764
i directions. Both flow west into Illinois and east into
*
2 Lake Michigan via the Indiana Harbor Canal and Burns
«
3 Ditch, respectively.
4 However, during periods of heavy storm
s runoff, these two rivers reverse flow and water from
6 Illinois enters Indiana and thence to Lake Michigan.
7 This condition also exists in the Calumet River of
8 Illinois and its waters carrying Industrial wastes and
9 storm water overflow from the Metropolitan Sanitary
10 District enters Lake Michigan, including the Indiana
11 portion of Lake Michigan.
12 In order that the new O'Brien Lock may
13 operate without the diversion of Lake Michigan through
u the Grand Calumet River, a temporary barrier dam must be
15 constructed. Sites under consideration are in the vicinity
16 of Hammond and East Chicago.
17 The Public Health Service wants the dam
18 so located that the effluents from the Hammond and East
19 Chicago sewage treatment plants are diverted into the
20 Illinois River Basin. It is believed that the same
21 degree of treatment may be necessary whether the wastewater
22 effluents flow to the Illinois River Basin or to Lake
23 Michigan.
24 For the remainder of this report, information,
25 data, and discussions will be presented by drainage
-------
765
basins as follows: The Grand Calumet River-Indiana
Harbor Canal-Lake Michigan; the Little Calumet River-
Burns Ditch; Little Calumet River West; Grand Calumet
River West; and Wolf Lake.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Well—
6 MR. BOSTON* May we ask questions here?
7 CHAIRMAN STEIN: I think that would be all right
if you want to. Do you have any questions?
MR. BOSTON: I'd like to clarify one thing here and
1° ask Mr. Miller whether or not normally the effluent,
11 the treated effluent from Hammond sewage treatment plant,
l2 flows to the east or to the west; that is, whether it
13 flows toward Lake Michigan or towards Illinois?
MR. MILLER: It has been my experience and obser-
15 vation that the divide seems to be at the Indianapolis
16 Boulevard and the effluent from the Hammond plant flows
17 west into Illinois.
18 MR. BOSTON: This probably is regulated some by
19 elevations of the lake and the river system but generally
20 it flows towards the west then?
2t MR. MILLER: This Is true. This is based upon U. S.
22 gaugings that I have seen and also observations.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Mr. Chesrow.
MR. CHESROW:, Mr. Miller, will you identify the two
25 rivers by flow—that flow, reverse flow in water from
-------
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
766
Illinois into Indiana and thence to Lake Michigan?
MR. MILLER: We have had at times storm runoff
water in both the Little Calumet and Grand Calumet that
have come back.
MR. CHESROW: Our hydraulic engineer, Mr. Brown—
Are you familiar with this?
MR. BROWN: Yes.
MR. CHESROW: Is the statement correct?
MR. BROWN: No, it is not.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: By the way, I think the way the
conference has to work is that when the Sanitary District
gets this, and you may know the problem here, and I am
sure the issue will be joined when you make your pre-
sentation.
MR. CHESROW: Thank you.
MR. POSTON: I'd like to ask one more question for
clarification purposes.
I notice you talked about housekeeping
here and I wondered if you feel if some immediate
cleanup might not be possible for some of the wastes
which we saw in the film; that is, gross oil pollution,
heavy masses of oil, and solid material, if some of this
might not be cleaned up by housekeeping methods almost
immediately?
MR. MILLER: Well, I would say that I think the first
-------
767
thing you always do in industrial waste treatment is
look after the housekeeping and eliminate the wastes
at the source. This is certainly a thing that
should be done and it would appear from some of the
material that is in the Indiana Harbor Canal, particu-
larly, improvement in housekeeping would reduce these.
MR. POSTON: Well then, I'd like to follow this
up a little bit further in terms of seeing that this
job is done.
10 Do you feel that you have adequate staff-
n ing to provide surveillance so that you can determine
12 whether some of these gross pollution spills—maybe we
13 can call them— can be controlled more adequately?
14 MR. MILLER: Go ahead.
15 MR. POOLE: That is a loaded question.
16 (Laughter.)
17 I think an honest-to-goodness answer to that
is question would be no. That is, I am sure practically
is everybody in this audience knows, we, like any other
20 state, have limitations on personnel, personnel limlta-
21 tions. As far as our having adequate staffing to
22 prevent spills in industry, I don't know how any regu-
23 latory agency can do that sort of thing having a man
24 stationed in the industry all the time.
25 This we can't do. I think we do have
-------
768
adequate staffing, and bearing In mind the importance of
the problem in this particular area to do a reasonable
amount of surveillance.
We hope, when we move into our next
fiscal year which begins in July, if the Legislature
which is closing up this week isn't too rough on us,
we will have the money for a fairly sizeable expansion
in our staff, and we can do a better job after that than
we can now.
10 I am not trying to duck your question,
11 Mr. Boston, but you realize that—
12 MR. POSTON: That is a satisfactory answer.
13 I have one other question.
u I noticed that a chlorination is indicated,
is that you have a number of plants chlorinated. Is your
16 requirement on municipal wastes or those wastes that
17 possibly carry bacteria and pathogens to the streams,
18 is it your requirement that you chlorinate all municipal
19 wastes?
20 MR. MILLER: I think I read to you in the report,
21 and the reports indicated that in April 1964, we requested
22 all of the municipalities, the semi-public installations
23 that would be treating sanitary sewage to provide chlorina-
24 tion facilities or to give us the timetable for construc-
25 tion of these facilities so we are on record with all of
-------
769
these as requiring chlorinations of their effluents.
2 MR. POSTON: Thank you. That is all I have.
3 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Mr. Klassen.
4 MR. KLASSEN: I am going to reserve most of my
questions, Mr. Miller, on the details when tne cities
and the industries speak. I'd like some firsthand
information from them. You probably have it, but I'd
like to get their answers.
But referring to your report, at the top
10 of page two, coming back to this question of cyanide
n again, you refer to SPC-2 which is the regulation in
12 Indiana for the discharge of cyanide.
13 What maximum effluent strength charge of
14 cyanide is permitted to Lake Michigan?
is MR. MILLER: Well, I'd say to you that regulation
16 SPC-2 is specifically designed for the containment of
17 concentrated cyanide solutions so these cannot be
is accidentally or intentionally discharged into a stream.
19 Each discharge is considered by the Board on its
20 own merits — the downstream water use made of the
21 receding waters — and we have no effluent requirements
22 that have been established for discharge in the Lake
23 Michigan Basin.
24 MR. KLASSEN: Does this apply to other
25
-------
770
i waterways other than Lake Michigan In this area?
2 MR. MILLER: This is true.
3 MR. KLASSEN: And then, the top of page 3, Just a
4 question of interest only because I am—I may be passing
5 through there and drinking the water some day—
6 (Laughter.)
? —There is a statement and this is the
8 next question. This is the top of page 3, the second
9 sentence, the second paragraph, concerning the water
10 quality monitoring.
11 It said, "It shows that the water quality
12 in the Indiana Harbor Canal aid in Burns Ditch had
13 not deteriorated."
14 Can you give us a date of comparison
is since the day before or two years ago or 1960 or just
16 some date there?
17 MR. MILLER: Actually, the monitoring data for
is Lake Michigan is for an 8-year period, and the date
19 for Dickey Road is a 5-year period.
20 MR. KLASSEN: It could be that it hasn't gotten
21 any worse, because—I am not trying to be facetious,
22 that it was bad to start with and it didn't get any
23 worse because it's still bad, could this be?
24 MR. MILLER: This is a question that—in the period
25 covered, this is what the date shows.
-------
771
i (Laughter and applause.)
2* MR. KLASSEN: Also on the top of page 4, this
does concern me. I presume that all of the studies
of information which have gone into this—that the
injection, apparently, of wastes underground into wells
inasmuch as possibly Illinois groundwater might be
involved, and certainly groundwater, and I know you
have gone into this, but what is the final conclusion
in the thinking, the study, that went into the injection
10 of pickle liquor underground so far as the underground
n water resources are concerned?
12 MR. MILLER: I might say that the Board conferred
13 with the State Geological Department—I worked Very
14 closely with them—and the Department of Conservation.
15 It, too, has geologists, and we were very cognizant of
16 the protection or the need to protect the groundwater
i? resource. These disposal wells are all in waters called
18 the Mount Sinon formation and the Lake County area.
19 This is somewhere around 2,400 feet on
20 down to about 4,200 or 4,500 feet. In all of these
21 wells; we have required that they put down at least a
22 double casing and a grot from the bottom up and the
23 annular space between the two spacings, the grots between
24 the outer casing and the ground. The wastes are put in
25 through an injection and the water is in the inner
-------
772
casing and is monitored, also; and in this way, we are
endeavoring to protect all the fresh water acquirers in
the area.
MR. KLASSEN: Then, on page 9—I say this concerns
me, from a public health standpoint. You quoted a letter
from Mr. Leo Louis of the Gary-Hobart Water Corporation
on the top of page 9.
I sense in here what he has said, and if
9 I am incorrect, please correct me, that they are anxious
10 to keep pollution at the minimum but he is willing to
n take it and treat it.
12 I am wondering, and it does go on to say
13 that industries require water and we know that industries
14 require water.
15 I am wondering in this statement, for my
16 own knowledge of water treatment, whether you know whether
17 Mr. Louis is basing this on any medical opinion, as to
18 what he might be treating and what the products that
19 might be in the final water as delivered to the consumers
20 might be?
21 MR. MILLER: Well, Mr. Leo Louis is a participant
22 and he has a statement to present, and you can ask him
23 this question. I can't speak for him.
24 MR. KLASSEN: Will he be here?
25 MR. MILLER: Yes, sir.
-------
773
1 MR. KLASSEN: O.K., that is all.
2 MR. POSTON: I*d like to read a little of the
thinking about a hundred years ago. It might help
Mr. KLassen in determining the changes in the lake, and
this is a hundred years ago, and it is from the Tribune
and other sources, your historical scrapbook, and it is
dated January 13, 1865, and it says:
"The Tribune is against the proposal to
get Chicago's drinking water from Lake Michigan. No-
10 body will drink from a hog's head however large if he
n sees a putrid rat floating on the surface."
12 (Laughter.)
13 "To expect the people of Chicago to
14 drink water from the lake even though the tunnel be
15 successful and be taken to a point two miles from shore
16 while the sewer system for the dwellings for 200,000,
17 soon to be 500,000 people, and the concentrated filth
18 and abomination from innumerable slaughter, rendering
19 establishments, and distillers are constantly poured
20 into Lake Michigan is a most palatable abeurdity."
21 I would submit, Mr. Klassen, that ideas
22 have changed in these hundred years.
23 MR. KLASSEN: Yes, but not the Tribune's ideas because
24 they are still against it.
25 (Laughter.)
-------
They are still against pollution going
into the lake, as I understand it.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: I am glad you finished that sen-
tence, Mr. Klassen.
5 (Laughter.)
6 MR. KLASSEN: They have always been for clean water
and this, I might say from personal knowledge, that
Col. McCormick has been one of the real aggressors in
this area for clean water.
10 There are a number of reasons for this
11 but we all appreciate the support that we have gotten
12 from the Tribune.
13 CHAIRMAN STEIN: I told you Indiana Day would be
14 interesting Do you see the conferees are beginning to
is warm up.
16 (Laughter.)
17 Would you continue, Mr. Miller?
18 MR. MILLER: This presentation will be on the Basin,
19 Grand Calumet-Indiana Harbor Canal—Lake Michigan.
20 Mr. Eklund is going to help me and point out the location
21 of the industry when I get to them.
22 The Grand Calumet River originates near
23 the eastern border of Lake County. Practically all of the
24 dry-weather flow in the river is industrial cooling and
25 process water, and waste treatment plant effluents.
-------
775
Thus, the flow varies depending on the amount of water
used by industry and municipalities. Generally, the flow
returns to the lake via the Indiana Harbor Canal; however,
the direction of the flow in the canal can be in either
direction depending on the lake level.
The river and canal receive the
treated waste effluents from the East Chicago and Gary
Sanitary Districts, numerous Industries and some untreated
Industrial wastes. Samples collected from the canal at
10 the Dickey Road water quality monitoring station revealed
high coliform counts. It is discolored and contains oil
12 and other floatable material.
13 In addition to the wastes introduced to
14 Lake Michigan through the canal, the lake received effluents
15 from seven industries and three power plants.
15 The Sanitary Districts of East Chicago and
17 Gary provide adequate sewage treatment facilities.
18 East Chicago provides effective chlorination in the
19 effluent channel and effluent chlorination facilities
2Q are now under construction at Gary. The facilities are
21 well operated and maintained and produce a good quality
22 effluent. Construction of plant additions at Gary
23 necessitated some bypassing of raw and inadequately
24 treated sewage; however, primary and secondary treatment
25 are now provided.
-------
776
Storm water pumping stations and storm
water overflow from combined sewers discharge storm
water to the Grand Calumet River and Indiana Harbor
Canal. Hammond and Whiting have combined sewer over-
flows that discharge storm water overflows and, at times,
all flow to Lake Michigan. The discharge from these
installations will continue to impose a bacteria and
organic load on receiving waters.
The effluents from industry comprise most
10 of the flow in the river and canal. The Board and in-
11 dustry are aware that additional pollution abatement
12 facilities may be required after water quality criteria
13 are established. With these criteria, Indiana will require
14 industry to re-evaluate wastewaters and install the neces-
15 sary facilities.
16 East Chicago: The City of East Chicago
17 is served by a combined sewer system and an activated
18 sludge type sewage treatment plant, chlorination is pro-
19 vided in the effluent channel.
20 The plant is designed for a population
21 equivalent of 115,000 and a flow of 20 million gallons
22 per day. The City does not accept appreciable quantities
23 of industrial waste for treatment. The plant provides
24 approximately 95 percent treatment in terms of 5-day
25 B.O.D.
-------
777
The facilities are well operated and
maintained. The effluent is discharged to the Grand
Calumet River and, under normal flow conditions, the flow
is east to the Indiana Harbor Canal. Storm water overflow
from combined sewers and storm water pumping stations
discharge to the Grand Calumet River and Indiana Harbor
Canal.
8 I On April 22, 1964, the Board advised the
9 District of the requirement for continuous chlorination
10 of plant effluent. The District advised on May 25, 1964,
n that chlorination would be provided in the effluent chan-
12 nel with existing facilities. The effluent channel provides
13 in excess of 15 minutes detention time at design flow.
14 Gary: The City of Gary is served by a
is combined sewer system and an activated sludge type sewage
16 treatment plant. Effluent chlorination facilities are
17 under construction.
18 when construction of plant additions is
19 completed, it will provide for a design flow of 80
20 million gallons per day; aeration tank capacity which
21 provides 6-hour detention at a flow of 60 million gallons
22 per day and a population equivalent of over 500,000.
23 The plant provides approximately 95 percent
24
25
reduction in terms of 5-day B.O.D.; the facilities are
well operated and maintained. The effluent is discharged
-------
778
1 to the Grand Calumet River. Combined sewer overflows and
2 storm water pumping stations discharge to the Grand and
3 Little Calumet Rivers and Burns Ditch.
4 Chlorination facilities were not included
5 in the plans; however, the Board approval was conditioned
6 on provision of effluent Chlorination facilities.
7 Plans for Chlorination were approved on July 19, 1963.
8 Construction of Chlorination facilities, and additional
9 sewers is underway.
10 Merrillvllle Conservancy District: The
11 Merrillville Conservancy District was established on
12 December 28, 1962, to serve 2,647 parcels of land of
13 which 1,277 were then undeveloped. It was estimated
14 that 4,000 homes could ultimately be served within the
is original District boundaries. Since it was established
16 additional area has been included and a contract for sewage
17 treatment signed with the Gary Sanitary District.
18 Completion of these facilities will provide
19 for abandonment of semi-public sewage treatment facilities
20 now serving the Merrillville Bowling Alley, Merrillville
21 primary* grade and high schools—this is three sewage
22 plants—and Chapel Manor Subdivision.
23 Vulcan Materials Company, Gary: Mr.
24 E. W. Young, President, Vulcan, notified the Board on
25 January 11, 1964, that on or before March 1, 1965, all
-------
779
wastewaters would be eliminated from the Grand Calumet
River.
The plant located in Gary in 1955 for the
purpose of recovering tin from scrap tin plate. Approxi-
mately 2,800 gallons per minute of wastewater is discharged
to the river. Mr. Young indicated that as of March 1,
1965, this wastewater will be sold. All sewage is treated
in a septic tank-absorption field system. The estimated
expenditure of water pollution control facilities is
10 $12,000.
11 Cities Service Petroleum Company, East
12 Chicago: The Company pumps process water from Lake Michi-
13 gan and has a pumping capacity of 115 million gallons
14 per day. Plant wastewaters are separated by three sewer
15 systems; Sewage, process, and cooling.
16 All plant sewage is discharged to the East
17 Chicago Sanitary District sewerage system. Cooling water
18 and boiler blowdown is treated in an A.P.I, oil separator
19 which was constructed prior to 19^3. In 19^9, a
20 second A.P.I, oil separator was placed in operation for
21 treatment of process wastewaters. The cooling water flow
22 is 77 million gallons per day and the contaminated process
23 wastewater flow is 4.3 million gallons per day. These
24 flows are combined after treatment and discharged to
25 the Grand Calumet River.
-------
780
In 1961, an ammonia and sulfide sour water
stripper was placed in operation. Stripper bottoms are
discharged to the crude oil desalter for removal of
phenols. Spent caustics are sold for recovery of cresylic
acid. Spent sulfuric acid is returned to the supplier
for reprocessing. Hydraulic decoking waters are recir-
culated. An experimental column trickling filter and
an experimental activated sludge plant are installed for
additional treatability studies of the process waste-
10 water.
11 Plans for 1965 involve the discharge of
12 delay coking unit waters to the sour water stripper, and
13 an automatic effluent monitoring system. About
14 $1,7^5,000 has been expended by the Company for water
is pollution control facilities.
16 E. I. duPont de Nemours and Company,
17 East Chicago: The Company purchases potable water,
18 2.2 million gallons per day, from East Chicago and
19 pumps process water, 11.5 million gallons per day, from
20 the Grand Calumet River. In 19^7 > all plant sewage was
21 connected to the East Chicago Sanitary District sewerage
22 system. Acid neutralization for sulfuric acid production
23 wastes was installed in 1957.
24 In 1962, the Company requested approval
25 of a proposal to discharge up to 90,000 pounds per day
-------
781
of chlorides to the river. The chlorides are contained
in by-product hydrochloric acid wastes. The proposal
was submitted to the Public Health Service for comment.
It was requested that the Public Health Service Inform
the Board as to the compatibility of the proposal with
the long-range planning of the GLIRB project. We have
been unable to extract an opinion from the Public Health
Service on this proposal.
9 The Company was willing to neutralize the
10 wastes but suggested controlled discharge for the following
11 reasons.
12 Neutralization would increase the hardness
13 and soluble salt content of the river.
14 Controlled discharge would only decrease
15 natural river alkalinity by 25 milligrams per liter;
16 and the chloride content of the river would be Increased
17 18 milligrams per liter at average flow and neutralization
18 would not change the value.
19 The Board approved the proposal with the
20 understanding that the Company make an effort to sell
21 the acid rather than discharge it to the river. The
22 Company subsequently notified the Board that the acid
23 would be sold and no chlorides were discharged to the river
24 through this source.
25 The Company currently discharges under
-------
782
controlled conditions calcium sulfate, calcium salfamate,
sodium dichromate, ammonia and herbicide production
wastes to the river.
I might say on the herbicide wastes, we
require bio-analysis and information from the company
to date that this would not have any harmful effects upon
the water.
About $115,000 has been expended by the
Company for water pollution control facilities.
10 U. S. S. Lead Refinery, Inc., East Chicago:
n I! The Company uses the Grand Calumet River for cooling water.
12 The spent cooling water is returned to the river. No
13 process wastewaters are discharged to a surface stream.
L4 About 45,000 gallons per year of process wastewater are
is discharged to a ground absorption basin. In 19^7* all
16 plant sewage was connected to the East Chicago Sanitary
17 District sewerage system. About $27,000 has been expended
18 for water pollution control facilities.
19 General American Transportation Corporation,
20 S Plant 2, East Chicago: All plant sewage is discharged
21 to the East Chicago Sanitary District sewerage system.
22 Process wastewaters, and I have .2 million gallons per day
23 and Dr. Gutzeit informs me that it should be .02, are
24 II treated in the following facilities: Waste equalization
25 pond, oil separator, and chemical treatment plant.
-------
783
The chemical treatment plant consists of
coagulation, flocculatlon, and clarification. The treated
process wastewaters are discharged to the Indiana Harbor
Canal. About $200,000 has been expended for water pollu-
tion control facilities.
Blaw-Knox Company, East Chicago:
Potable and process water, 1.0 million gallons per day,
is purchased from East Chicago. All sewage is discharged
to the East Chicago Sanitary District sewerage system.
10 Processed wastewater is treated in settling tanks and
n filters prior to discharge t> the Indiana Harbor Canal.
12 American Steel Foundries, Indiana Harbor
13 Works, East Chicago: All sewage is discharged to the
14 East Chicago Sanitary District sewerage system. Process
15 waters, 0.4 million gallons per day, are pumped from
16 the Indiana Harbor Canal. Processed wastewaters are
17 treated in a settling basin prior to discharge to the
is Indiana Harbor Canal. About $15,000 has been expended
19 for water pollution control facilities.
20 Linde Air Products, East Chicago: All
21 plant sewage and process wastewater, except cooling tower
22 blowdown, is discharged to the East Chicago Sanitary
23 District sewerage system., Cooling tower blowdown is
24 discharged to the Indiana Harbor Canal.
25 Mobil Oil Company, East Chicago: The
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
784
Company purchases potable water from East Chicago and
pumps process water from the Lake George Branch, Indiana
Harbor Canal. In 19^7, all plant sewage was connected
to the East Chicago Sanitary District sewerage system.
In 1933, and 1935, oil traps were provided
for process wastewaters. In 19^0, the following waste-
water treatment facilities were installed: A.P.I, oil
separator, raw process water treatment plant, and cooling
towers for water reuse. The cooling towers reduced the
process water pumpage from the canal from 26 million
gallons per day to 1.5 million gallons per day.
Spent caustics are separated for use in
the wood pulping industry and for recovery of cresylic
acid. All spent sulfuric acid is returned to the supplier
for reprocessing. Separation tanks and an oil separator
are provided for ballast water.
The company recently installed an ammonia
and sulfide stripper for stripping sour accumulator. The
stripper will significantly reduce ammonia, sulfide, phenol,
C.O.D. and B.O.D. in the wastewaters. About $600,000
has been expended by the Company for water pollution
control facilities.
There is an unidentified source of pollution
in the storm sewer discharging to Lake George Branch,
Indiana Harbor Canal, East Chicago. An unidentified
-------
785
source of wastewater discharged to the Lake George Branch,
Indiana Harbor Canal, was investigated on February 3, 1965.
3* The wastewaters discharge to the Lake George Branch via
a storm sewer located on the northeast side of Indiana-
polis Boulevard. The sewer originates in the vicinity
of the American Oil Company, Whiting. Two storm sewers,
one on the northeast side and one of the southwest side,
parallel Indianapolis Boulevard to the vicinity of Riley
Avenue.
10 At Riley Avenue, the southwest sewer crosses
11 under Indianapolis Boulevard and is connected to the north-
12 east sewer which drains to Lake George Branch.
13 Estimated flow in the sewer on February 3,
14 1965* was 50,000 gallons per day. The wastewater was
15 light in color and had a gasoline odor. The source of
16 the wastewater has not been identified.
17 Calumet Nitrogen Products Company, Hammond:
is The Company is jointly owned by American Oil Company,
19 Whiting, and Sinclair Refining Company, East Chicago.
20 The plant is operated by American Oil Company, The plant
21 located in Hammond in 1956. Ammonium nitrate plant waste-
22 water and all sewage is discharged to the Hammond Sanitary
23 District sewerage system. Wastewater from the ammonia
24 plant plus cooling tower blowdown is discharged to a
25 separation basin for removal of settleables and floatables.
-------
786
The basin effluent drains to the Lake George Branch,
Indiana Harbor Canal. Approximately $50,000 has been
expended by the Company for pollution control facili-
ties.
The Union Tank Car Company, Whiting:
The Company's activities involve the construction and
maintenance of railroad tank cars. Potable and process
water is purchased from Whiting. Approximate water usage
is .2 million gallons per day. All sewage is disposed
10 in septic tank-absorption field systems. Process waste-
n water is treated in skimming tanks prior to discharge
12 to the Lake George Branch, Indiana Harbor Canal. Skimmings
13 are chemically and thermally treated for oil recovery.
14 Sludges from these, facilities are burned. About $15,000
15 has been expended by the Company for wastewater treatment
IB facilities.
17 Sinclair Refining Company, East Chicago:
18 Sinclair is the second largest petroleum refinery in
19 Indiana. The company purchases potable water from East
20 Chicago and pumps process water from Lake Michigan.
21 In 1947, all plant sanitary sewers were connected to the
22 East Chicago Sanitary District sewerage system.
23 Treated process wastewater and recirculatlng process
24 water cooling tower blowdown is discharged to the Lake
25 George Branch, Indiana Harbor Canal.
-------
787
In 1946, two A.P.I, oil separators were
built to replace one of two oil separators built prior to
1933. Cooling towers are utilized on the process waters,
In-plant recirculation of water is 250 million gallons
per day and treated wastewater discharge is 5 million
gallons per day. Considerable refinery equipment modifica-
tion in the late 19^0fs and early 1950's reduced the amount
8 of wastewater requiring treatment.
9 An ammonia and sulfide stripper is utilized
10 in the treatment of sour water. Stripper bottoms and cool-
11 ing tower blowdown are discharged to the crude oil desalter
12 for additional phenol extraction.
13 Boiler blowdown and hot lime sludge is
14 discharged to a separator for treatment. Caustics contain-
15 ing phenols are sold for by-product recovery. Spent
16 caustics containing sulfides and mercaptans are oxidized.
17 Spent sulfurlc acid is returned to the supplier for
18 reprocessing.
19 New ballast water A.P.I, oil separators
20 were constructed in 1963. About $3,930,000 has been ex-
21 pended by the Company for water pollution control faclli-
22 ties.
23 U. S. Gypsum Company, East Chicago: The
24 plant produces plaster, wallboard and asbestos-cement
25 shingles. All sewage is discharged to the East Chicago
-------
788
Sanitary District sewerage system. Process wastewaters,
.4 million gallons per day, are discharged to the Indiana
Harbor Canal.
Youngstown Sheet and Tube Company, Indiana
Harbor Works, East Chicago: The company pumps process
water, 288 million gallons per day, from Lake Michigan
and discharges treated and untreated process wastewaters
to the Indiana Harbor Canal and Lake Michigan. All sewage,
except for isolated septic tank-absorption field systems,
10 is discharged to the East Chicago Sanitary District sewerage
11 system.
12 Dephenolizers were installed in the coke
13 plant for wastewater treatment. Coke quenching wastes are
14 discharged to a settling basin with partial recirculation.
is Tar decanter waters are discharged to the dephenolizer.
16 Benzol condensates are double decanted prior to discharge
17 to the canal. Scale pite are provided at all rolling mills
18 and secondary pits are baffled to trap free oil.
19 Wastewater discharged to Lake Michigan passes
20 through an oil removal basin which is equipped with a
21 continuous oil removal belt. A portion of the waste pickle
22 liquor is trucked to the slag dump for disposal and some
23 is discharged to the canal.
24 In-plant controls, in compliance with
25 Regulation SPC-2, to isolate concentrated cyanide solutions
-------
789
were Installed in 1956. A gravity oil separator for a
six-stand tandem mill in the No. 2 tin mill was approved
by the Board and installed in 1961.
Haiogen tinning line plating solution Is
trucked to the slag dump for disposal.
The wastewater treatment facilities for
a new No. 3 cold reduced sheet mill now under construction
were approved by the Board on October 23, 1964. These
facilities consist of gravity oil separators and a terminal
10 lagoon. The lagoon effluent will seep horizontally through
11 250 feet of slag before reaching Lake Michigan. Cooling
12 waters containing less than 10 milligrams per liter of
13 oil will be discharged directly to Lake Michigan.
14 Flue dust thickeners and sludge dewatering
15 equipment are installed for the blast furnace gas washer
16 system. About $5,000,000 has been expended by the Company
17 for water pollution control facilities.
18 Inland Steel Company, East Chicago:
19 The Company pumps process water, 800 million gallons a
20 day> from Lake Michigan and discharges treated and untreated
21 process wastewaters to the Indiana Harbor Canal and
22 Lake Michigan. All plant sewage is treated in two Company
23 owned and operated trickling filter treatment plants.
24 A third plant is proposed. All sewage plant effluents
25 are chlorinated prior to discharge to either the canal
-------
790
i or lake.
2 In 1928, the Company Installed facilities
3 for recirculation of coke plant gas final cooling waters
4 for phenol reduction. About 1930, a Koppers vapor
5 recirculation phenol recovery unit was installed for
6 ammonia still wastes.
7 Blast furnace flue dust thickeners and
8 vacuum dewatering facilities for thickener sludges were
9 installed about 1931. Additional phenol recovery by light
10 oil extraction; a settling basin for coke quenching
11 wastes and ammonia still wastes; recirculation of coke
12 plant tar decanter wastes; 13 scale pits; oil recovery and
13 treatment facilities on the slab mill, 44-inch hot mill,
14 46-inch tandem cold mill, 40-inch tandem mill and the
15 three-stand skinny tin line has also been provided.
16 Fly ash and bottom ash lagoons for the
17 new power plant have been constructed. Facilities under
18 construction consist of: Scale pits for new blooming and
19 billet mills, scale pits, oil skimming pits, some
20 chemical flocculator-clarifiers, and a tunnel to divert
21 wastewaters to the Indiana Harbor Canal for a new 80-
22 inch hot strip mill. The wastewater treatment proposal
23 for the 80-inch hot strip mill was submitted to the Public
24 Health Service for comment. It was requested the Public
25 Health Service inform the Board as to the compatibility
-------
791
of the proposal with the long-range planning of the
GLIRB project. The Public Health Service did not ex-
press an opinion on the proposal. The new oxygen steel-
making facilities will have a closed stack gas washer
system.
About $19,100,000 has been expended by
the Company for water pollution control facilities.
National Tube Division, United States
Steel Corporation, Gary: In 19^9* all plant sewage was
10 diverted to the Gary Sanitary District sewerage system.
11 Approximately 10 million gallons per day of process waters
12 is obtained from the Gary Steel Works. Process wastewaters
13 are discharged to the Grand Calumet River. About $800,000
14 has been expended for separation of sewers and installa-
15 tion of facilities to convey sewage to the Gary-Sanitary
16 District.
17 Gary Steel Works, United states Steel
18 Corporation, Gary: The Company pumps process water,
19 577 million gallons per day, from Lake Michigan and dis-
20 charges treated and untreated wastewaters to the Grand
21 Calumet River. Some cooling waters are discharged to
22 Lake Michigan. All plant sewage is discharged to the
23 Gary Sanitary District,
24 Ammonia still liquors are used for quenching
25 coke. Coke quenching wastewater is recirculated.
-------
792
Benzol condensates are discharged to the river.
Flue dust thickeners are installed for
partial recovery on the blast furnace gas washer system.
In 1950 and 1951* an experiment on the
treatability of ammonia still liquors at the Gary Sani-
tary District sewage treatment plant was conducted.
The experiment was a success but the City and industry
did not reach agreement to continue the project. About
$11,000,000 has been expended by the Company for water
10 pollution control facilities.
il Gary Sheet and Tin Mill Division, United
12 States Steel Corporation, Gary: The Company pumps process
13 water, 60 million gallons per day, from Lake Michigan and
14 discharges treated and untreated wastewaters to the Grand
15 Calumet River. Some cooling water and storm water from
16 combined process wastewater sewers is discharged to Lake
17 Michigan. All plant sewage is discharged to the Gary
18 Sanitary District,
19 Waste pickle liquors are discharged to a
20 lagoon and seepage therefrom drains to Lake Michigan.
21 The lagoon will be eliminated by the use of a deep well
22 disposal system which is under construction* Waste pickle
23 liquors and tinning line chromium solutions will be dis-
24 charged to the deep well system. A lagoon for neutralized
25 nitric and hydrofluoric acids from the stainless steel
-------
793
line will be constructed in 1965.
Waste treatment facilities consisting of
gravity oil separators with an emergency bypass to Lake
Michigan were approved by the Board in 1964 for a new
80-inch, five-stand sheet mill. These facilities have
been completed and are in operation. The separator
effluent is discharged to the river. About
$3,600,000 has been spent by the Company for water pollu-
tion control facilities.
10 American Bridge Division, United States
11 Steel Corporation, Gary: In 1945, all plant sewage was
12 diverted to the Gary Sanitary District sewerage system.
13 Currently, only rivet machine cooling water is discharged
14 to the Grand Calumet River. About $1,000,000 has been
15 expended for water pollution control facilities.
16 Steiner Tissue Mill, Gary: Potable water,
17 .1 million gallons per day, is purchased from the Gary-
is Hobart Water Company. Process waters, 1.4 million
gallons per day, are pumped from the Grand Calumet River
20 to a clarification pond prior to use in the plant.
21 Process wastewaters are treated in two fiber save-all
22 units prior to discharge to the Grand Calumet River.
23 All sewage is discharged to the Gary Sanitary District.
24 Berry Refining Company, Gary: All process
25 and potable water is purchased from the Gary-Hobart Water
-------
794
1 Company. All sewage is disposed in septic tank-absorption
2 field systems. Process wastewaters are treated in an
3 A.P.I, oil separator and impounding basin.
4 The effluent from the impounding basins
5 is discharged to a swampy area on Cities Service Oil
6 Company property. No wastewaters are discharged to a
7 surface stream, surface waters, or lake. About
8 $15,000 has been expended for water pollution control
9 facilities.
10 Northern Indiana Public Service Company,
n Bailly Generating Station, Baileytown: The Bailly
12 Generating Station started operation in 1962. Initial
13 capacity was 175.,000 kilowatts. Maximum process water
14 requirement is about 425 million gallons per day and
15 the water is pumped from Lake Michigan. Sewage is
16 disposed in septic tank-absorption field systems. Bottom
17 ash, fly ash and cinders are sluiced to a solids storage
18 area. Sluicing waters and coal storage drainage are
19 absorbed into the ground. Approximately $70,000 has
20 been expended by the Company for pollution control facilities,
21 Universal Atlas Cement Company, United
22 States Steel Corporation, Gary: Process water is pumped
23 from Lake Michigan. Pump capacity is 72 million gal-
24. Ions per day. All plant sewage is treated in a fixed-
25 nozzle trickling filter plant. The sewage plant was
-------
795
built in 1926. The sewage plant effluent is discharged
to Lake Michigan. During a recent inspection, fis»h were
observed to be living in the final clarifiers. No process
wastewaters other than indirect cooling waters are
discharged to the lake. About $200,000 has been expended
for water pollution control facilities.
Northern Indiana Public Service Company,
Dean H. Mitchell Station, Gary: The plant pumps process
water, 433 million gallons per day, from Lake Michigan.
10 Process vjastewater is discharged to Lake Michigan. Sewage
11 is treated in septic tanks. The septic tank effluent is
12 discharged to Lake Michigan. The raw process waters are
13 chlorinated. About $82,000 has been expended by the
14 Company for water pollution control facilities.
15 Union Carbide Corporation, Chemicals Division,
16 Whiting: Process water is pumped from Lake Michigan.
17 Process wastewaters are discharged to Lake Michigan
18 and the Indiana Harbor Canal. All plant sewage is dis-
19 charged to the Whiting sewerage system. Cooling towers
20 are utilised for partial reuse of product contaminated
21 cooling waters.
22 In 1934, the Company initiated a program
23 to separate sewage from other wastewaters for discharge
24 to a municipal sewerage system. The program was completed
25 in 1947 when all sewage was discharged to the Whiting
-------
796
l sewerage system. During the 1935 to 1960 period, the
2 Company installed the following facilities: Wastewater
3 clarification basin, raw water chlorination unit, closed
4 cooling water system for direct product-contact cooling
5 waters, and a cooling tower system, and established an
6 effluent monitoring program. During the 1960 to 1965
7 period, the following facilities were added: Retention
8 basin, automatic effluent sampler, skimming pit, col-
9 lection tank for land disposal of concentrated wastes,
10 plus many other minor pollution control facilities.
n Approximately $950,000 was expended by the Company for
12 pollution control facilities during the 1935 to 1965
13 period,.
14 Future plans indicate that the following
15 pollution control units will be installed in 1965 at
16 an estimated cost of $46,100: Closed water system
17 dissolved solids removal unit, improved oil recovery
is facilities, screens and recovery facilities for polyethylene
19 pellets, and wastewater laboratory equipment.
20 American Oil Company, Whiting: The
21 Company is the largest petroleum refinery in Indiana.
22 Process water is pumped from Lake Michigan and discharged
23 to Lake Michigan after treatment.
24 Potable waters are obtained from Whiting.
25 All sewage, except from a few isolated buildings is
-------
797
discharged to the Whiting sewerage system. Isolated
buildings are served by septic tank-absorption field
3* systems. Process wastewaters are conveyed to treatment
facilities via two separate sewer systems. Wastewaters
containing settleables and floatables are discharged to
mechanically equipped A.P.I, oil separators and thence
to Lake Michigan.
Wastewaters containing settleables, and
floatables, dissolved organics and dissolved inorganics
10 are discharged to mechanically equipped A.P.I, oil
n separators and thence to bio-flotation facilities.
12 The bio-flotation facilities consist
13 of aeration and settling units. The effluent from
the bio-flotation facilities are dischargees to Lake
15 Michigan.
16 Spent caustics containing sulfides and
17 phenols are trucked to lagoons located northwest of the
18 Lake George Branch, Indiana Harbor Canal. Cooling towers
19 are utilized for partial reuse of cooling waters. Spent
20 sulfUric acids are returned to the supplier for reprocessing.
21 Separation tanks and an oil separator are utilized for
22 ballast water in Indiana Harbor Canal docks.
23 Cooling towers have been installed for
24 recirculation of 100 million gallons per day of cooling
25 waters. Water usage peaked in 1946 at about 200 million
-------
798
1 gallons per day. Water usage has been gradually decreased
2 to about 140 million gallons per day in 1964. The oil
3 separators utilized on wastewaters containing settleables
^
4 and floatables were built in 1940. The oil separators
5 preceding bio-flotation were constructed in 19^8.
B The bio-flotation facilities were placed
7 in operation in I960.
8 Facilities for conveying plant sewage to the
9 Whiting sewerage system were completed in 1948. Approxi-
10 mately $9*055*000 has been expended for pollution control
11 facilities at the refinery.
12 American Maize Products Company, Hammond:
13 The company located in Hammond in 1905 and is a corn
14 processing plant. Potable water, .7 million gallons per
15 day, is purchased from Hammond. Process water,
16 11 million gallons per day, is pumped from Lake Michigan.
17 All sewage, except from one warehouse toilet, and a small
is amount of concentrated process wastewater is discharged
19 to the Hammond Sanitary District.
20 The warehouse toilet is sewered to the
21 process wastewater lagoon system. Treated process waste-
22 waters are discharged to Lake Michigan. Treatment
23 consists of anaerobic-aerobic lagoons. Many in-plant
24 controls of wastewater have been provided as well as an
25 in-plant wastewater monitoring system.
-------
10
12
13
14
15
16
17
20
21
22
23
24
25
799
Prior to 19^0, all wastewaters were dis-
charged to Lake Michigan without treatment. In 19^0,
all sewage and some process wastewater was diverted to
Hammond. Considerable in-plant equipment changes were
made in 19^9 and 1950 in order to reduce waste loadings
to Lake Michigan. Raw water supply chlorination was
instituted in 1950. Sufficient chlorine was applied to
the raw water to maintain a chlorine residual in the
effluent to Lake Michigan. Later, chlorine was also
applied directly to the wastewater discharged to Lake
Michigan.
During the late 1950's and early 1960's,
the Company developed an anaerobic-aerobic lagoon system
for treatment of wastewater prior to discharge to Lake
Michigan. An experimental column trickling filter has
been installed for continuing studies on the treatabillty
of process wastewaters.
The ultimate objective of the Company is
to produce a plant effluent of .5 population equivalent
per bushel of corn processed. Approximately $1,3^0,000
has been expended by the Company for water pollution
control facilities.
Commonwealth Edison Company, Inc., State-
line Generating Station, Hammond: The plant purchases
potable water, J. million gallons per day, from Hammond
-------
8oo
i and pumps process water, one thousand and seven million
2 gallons per day, from Lake Michigan. Process waters
*
3 are chlorinated prior to use. A sewerage system was
4 installed in 1920 for collection of sewage for discharge
5 to the Metropolitan Sanitary District of Chicago.
6 In 1949, an Imhoff tank with effluent
7 chlorination was installed. The chlorinated effluent
8 discharged to Lake Michigan until the Metropolitan
9 Sanitary District connection became available in 1961.
10 An ash disposal basin was constructed in 1946. The basin
n was later replaced in 1961 with bottom ash dewatering
12 tanks. Fly ash is handled dry. Approximately $460,000
13 has been expended by the Company for water pollution
14 control facilities.
15 Little Calumet River-Burns Ditch: The
16 Little Calumet River-Burns Ditch drainage basin includes
17 the major land area of the Calumet Basin. Burns Ditch
18 is a man-made drainage canal constructed in 1923 discharging
19 to Lake Michigan. This ditch reversed the flow to the
20 east in the Little Calumet River at about Broadway
21 Street in Gary. The basin receives the treated effluent
22 from the Chesterton, Crown Point, East Gary, Hobart, and
23 Valparaiso sewage treatment plants.
24 The sewage from Porter is not yet treated,
25 but the Town ia under Board order. Portage, New Chicago,
-------
801
Ogden Dunes and St. John do not have sewer systems.
2. The sewage treatment plants serving Ches-
terton, Hobart and Valparaiso provide adequate capacity,
are well maintained and operated, and produce a good
quality effluent. Improvements planned for construction
at Crown Point this year will provide adequate capacity,
good operation and maintenance will continue. Effluent
chlorlnation is provided for all these pl&nts.
The adequacy of the Gary-Miller District
10 plant that is now serving East Gary is problematical.
11 Plant additions, including effluent chlorination facilities,
12 and improved operation and maintenance is required.
13 The start of construction of sewage works
14 for Porter is scheduled for July 1, 1965.
15 Treated waste effluents from Midwest
16 Steel and Bethlehem Steel plants discharge to Burns
17 Ditch and the Little Calumet River, respectively. The
18 effluent from Northern Indiana Public Service Company
19 discharges to Lake Michigan.
There is no interstate pollution from the
21 Little Calumet River-Burns Ditch drainage basin.
22 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Mr. Miller, if we are going to
23 continue, let me call these two gentlemen first.
24 Mr. H. R. McDonald, of Lever Brothers,
25 and Mr. Keiper, of Mobil Oil?
-------
1
2
802
Go ahead.
MR. MILLER: Crown Point: The City of Crown Point
is served by sanitary and combined sewers. The I960
population was 8,^33; the plant was designed for a popu-
lation of 7,500 and a flow of .8 million gallons per
day.
The existing activated sludge-type sewage
8 I! treatment facilities, including effluent chlorination
9 provide treatment for most of the present population. The
10 plant provides approximately 85 percent reduction in
n terms of 5-day B.O.D.
12 The plant is fairly well operated and
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
maintained. Approved plans for plant additions, including
expanded chlorination facilities, will extend the capa-
city to 1.8 million gallons per day. The plant effluent
and stormwater overflow from combined sewers discharge
to Bee Line Ditch, a tributary to Keep River and Burns
Ditch.
Hobart: The City of Hobart is served by
a system of sanitary and combined sewers, and an activated
sludge-type sewage treatment plant including effluent
chlorination facilities were placed into operation.
The I960 population was 18,680; the plant is designed
24 for a population of 23,000 and a flow of two million
25 gallons per day.
-------
2.
10
11
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
24
25
803
Primary treatment facilities were placed
in operation in 1953 and secondary facilities were com-
pleted in 1962. The plant provides approximately 90
percent reduction in terms of 5-day B.O.D. The facili-
ties are well maintained and operated.
6 I The effluent discharges to Deep River
thence to Burns Ditch. Stormwater overflow from combined
8 I sewers discharge to Deep River and tributaries there-
to.
On September 29, 1948, the Board issued
a pollution abatement order to the City of Hobart.
12 The City filed a petition to set the order aside. The
case was finally heard on February 2, 1950, in Jasper
Circuit Court. The court issued a decision upholding
the Board's order.
East Gary: The City of East Gary is
served by combined and sanitary sewers. And wastes from
this community are discharged to the Gary-Miller sewage
treatment plant.
The Gary-Miller trickling filter-type
sewage treatment plant is designed to treat approxi-
mately 1.5 million gallons per day. Effluent chlorination
23 is not provided$ the plant provides approximately 70
percent reduction in terms of 5—day B.O.D. Plant effluent
and stormwater overflow from combined sewers discharge
-------
804
to Burns Ditch.
On April 3* 1958, the City of East Gary
signed an agreement with the Gary Sanitary District for
treatment of East Gary sewage at the Gary-Miller District
plant.
On January 13, 1959* the Board approved
plans for interceptor sewers, connection to the Miller
District plant and improvements to the Miller District
plant.
10 It has approximately 40,000 feet of
11 combined sewers; since 1960, approximately 37,500 feet
12 of sanitary sewers have been installed.
13 In 1962, the City of East Gary was advised
14 that effluent chlorination would be required. At that time,
15 the Gary Sanitary District was planning a lift station and
16 interceptor to divert the Gary sewage then discharged to
17 the Miller plant to the Sanitary District's main plant,
18 and it was indicated that East Gary would acquire the
19 Miller plant.
20 The Gary sewage from this area is now
21 discharged to the Gary Sanitary District's main plant.
22 On October 9, 1964, the State Board of
23 Health advised East Gary that the Miller District plant was
24 in poor condition and that laboratory and chlorination
25 facilities were required. This last report from East
-------
805
i Gary indicated that an earlier decision would be made on
2f whether to acquire the Miller plant or effect an agreement
3 ] for treatment of its sewage by the Gary Sanitary Dis-
4 trict.
5 New Chicago 2 The Town of New Chicago
6 is not served by a sewer system. The soil is predominantly
7 sandy and individual sewage effluents are apparently ab-
8 sorbed into the ground.
9 In May, 19^9> a preliminary report on a
10 proposed water and sewer system was submitted. A public
n water supply has been installed. However, no progress has
12 been made towards providing sewage works. An engineering
13 survey was proposed in 1962; further information has not
14 been received.
15 Chesterton: The Town of Chesterton Is
16 served by a combined sewer system and an activated
17 sludge-type sewage treatment plant with effluent chlorina-
18 tion facilities. The 1960 population was 4,192; the plant
19 is designed for a population of 10,000 and a flow of
20 one and a half million gallons per day.
21 The plant provides approximately 90
22 percent reduction in terms of 5-day B.O.D.; the facilities
23 are well maintained and operated.
24 The effluent discharges to the Little
25 Calumet River. Stormwater overflow from combined sewers
-------
806
discharge to the Little Calumet River and tributaries
thereto.
Valparaiso: The City of Valparaiso is
served by a combined sewer system and an activated sludge-
type sewage treatment plant. Effluent chlorination is
provided. The I960 population is 15,227j the plant is
designed for a population of 20,000 and a flow of 2.0
million gallons per day.
9 The plant provides approximately 95 per-
10 cent reduction in terms of 5-day B.O.D.j and the facilities
ll are well maintained and operated.
12 The effluent discharges to Salt Creek,
13 thence to the Little Calumet River and Burns Ditch.
Stormwater overflow from combined sewers discharges
15 to Salt Creek and tributaries thereto.
16 A letter from the Board dated June 4,
i7 1964, requested continuous chlorination of plant effluent
18 and a chlorine residual of one milligram per liter.
19 On June 9, 1964, the mayor advised that the City would
20 comply with the Board's request.
21 On January 5* 1965, the Board approved
22 additions to chlorination facilities and recommended
23 that the City authorize a study of sewer and sewage treat-
24 ment plant improvement needs and that construction of
23 facilities be undertaken to keep pace with community
-------
8o?
development.
Portage: The Town of Portage was incorporated
in 1959. The area of 27 square miles had a 1960 popu-
lation of 11,822. The Gary-Hobart Water Corporation
is providing water to the area. A drainage project,
to be partially financed by a $100,000 loan from the
Indiana Flood Control Revolving Fund, is now under
consideration. No municipal sewers are available.
The preliminary engineering report on
10 sanitary sewers and sewage treatment, which was submitted
n January 25, 1962, proposed the installation of approxi-
12 mately 263,000 feet of sanitary sewers and a 1.25 million
13 gallon per day activated sludge-type sewage treatment
14 plant to serve a population of 12,500. No progress has
is been made towards construction of sewage works.
16 The Portage Junior-Senior High School
17 and Capitol Estates and Robbinwood Subdivisions, that
18 are located within the corporate limits of Portage,
19 provide activated sludge-type sewage treatment facilities
20 with effluent chlorination. Robbinwood has chlorinatlon
21 facilities approved. The effluent from these plants
22 discharges to Salt Creek and tributaries to the Little
23 Calumet River.
24 Porter: The Town of Porter is served
25 by separate and combined sewers. The Town sewers discharge
-------
808
i to the Little Calumet River. Sewage from 15 homes
2 adjacent to the Chesterton sewage treatment plant is
*•
3 treated at that plant.
4 On October 8, 1964, the Board ordered
5 the Town of Porter to abate its contribution to the
6 pollution of the Little Calumet River. Plans and speci-
7 fications are due March 1, 1965; construction is to be
8 started by July 1, 1965, and the facilities are to be
9 completed by July 1, 1966.
10 Midwest Steel Company Division, National
n Steel Corporation, Portage: The Company pumps water
12 from Lake Michigan and has a maximum pumping capacity
13 of 52 million gallons per day. Treated wastewaters
14 are discharged to Burns Ditch. The plant started pro-
is duction in 1961.
16 One of the outstanding industrial
17 waste treatment plants in the country was provided as
18 a part of original plant construction. These three
19 separate sewer systems for conveying sewage, process waste-
20 waters and cooling waters are utilized. All sewage receives
21 activated sludge treatment with effluent chlorination
22 prior to discharge to Burns Ditch. Treatment of process
23 wastewaters consists of acid-alkali neutralization, oil
24 emulsion breaking with coagulation and clarification,
25 and mechanically-equipped basins for removal of settleables
-------
809
and floatables.
Concentrated chromium and fluoride-bearing
wastes are treated separately. A deep well disposal
system was constructed in 1964 for underground disposal
of waste pickle liquor and spent chromium-bearing solu-
tions.
7 The plant effluent is routinely monitored
8 by automatic samplers and laboratory analyses. In-plant
9 controls, in compliance with Regulation SPC-2, to isolate
10 concentrated Cyanide Solution tanks have been installed
11 in the tin mill. The Board's 1961 approval of the process
12 wastewater system was based on the final effluent meeting
13 the following standards:
14 B.09D., 10 milligrams per liter; fluoride,
15 10 milligrams per liter.
16 MR. POOLE: Two.
17 MR. MILLERs Pardon me, two.
18 Zinc, 15; chromium, 2; cyanides, .5;
19 pH between 5 to 10; suspended solids, 40 milligrams
20 per liter; floating material, no objectionables; color,
21 no objectionable; oils, 15 milligrams per liter.
22 The effluent from the treatment facilities
23 is consistently better than the standards approved by
24 the Board.
25 No impairment of Burns Ditch or Lake
-------
8io
Michigan has occurred as a result of the companyss waste-
water. The operation of the wastewater treatment facilities
has been without exception excellent. About $6,025*000
*
has been expended for water pollution control facilitfes.
It is expected that, when the company installs basic steel
and coking production units, equally extensive waste-
water treatment will be provided.
Midwest Steel Company is an example of a
new industry that has provided adequate water pollution
10 control facilities to comply with the requirements of
11 the Board.
12 Bethlehem Steel Company, Inc., Burns
13 Harbor Plant, Chesterton: The construction of the
14 Burns Harbor plant is the most recent major Industrial
15 development in Indiana. Initial production began in 1964
16 and additional production facilities are under con-
17 struction. Water is pumped from Lake Michigan. Treated
18 wastewaters are discharged to the Little Calumet River,
19 thence to Burns Ditch.
20 Separate sewers for- conveying sewage, process
21 wastewaters and cooling waters are, or will be, installed;
22 all sewage receives activated sludge treatment and the
23 effluent is chlorinated. The chlorinated effluent
24 is discharged to a terminal lagoon for tertiary treatment.
25 Treatment of process wastewaters consists of acid-
-------
3.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
811
alkali neutralization, emulsion breaking with coagulation
and clarification, and mechanically equipped basins for
removal of settleables and floatables.
Concentrated chromium—and fluoride-bearing
wastes will be treated separately. A deep well dis-
posal system for underground injection of waste pickle
liquor is under construction.
An 80-acre terminal lagoon system has been
9 I! constructed for tertiary treatment of all wastewater
other than cooling water. Final settling, reaeration
and cooling will occur in the terminal lagoon. The lagoon
spillway has been constructed so that additional aeration
or reaeration will occur. Facilities for removing
floatables from the lagoon have been installed.
The plant effluent will be routinely moni-
tored by automatic samplers and laboratory analyses.
In-plant controls, in compliance with Regulation SPC-2
to isolate concentrated cyanide solutions will be installed
in the tin mill. The Board's approval of the process
wastewater system was based on the final effluent meeting
the following standards:
pH between $ to 10; suspended solids,
40 milligrams per liter; oils, 15; B.O.D., 10; cyanides,
.2; chromium, 1; fluoride, 1.5; and there will be no
objectionable floating material or color.
-------
812
It is anticipated that the effluent will
be of better quality than that approved by the Board.
About $7,000,000 has been expended for
water pollution control facilities. It is expected that,
when the Company installs basic steel and coking production
units, equally extensive wastewater treatment will be
provided.
Bethlehem Steel Company, Inc., is another
example of a new industry that has provided adequate water
10 pollution control facilities to comply with requirements
11 of the Board.
12 Semi-Public: There are two semi-public
13 sewage treatment plants in this drainage basin. Most of
14 the subdivisions are served by package activated sludge
15 sewage treatment plants. Operation and maintenance of
16 many of the facilities is inadequate. The owners have
17 been advised of the requirement for providing continuous
18 effluent chlorination; however, in some instances,
19 chlorination facilities are not available or, if available,
20 not effectively operated.
21 Plans have been approved for effluent
22 chlorination facilities for the Lake County Home, north
23 of Crown Point, and the Robbinwood Subdivision in Porter
24 County.
25 The public schools in the area that have
-------
813
private sewage disposal facilities do not routinely provide
adequate operation and maintenance. The two Indiana
Toll Road treatment plants in the area are well
maintained and operated.
At least five of the semi-public sewage
treatment plants in and near the Merrillville Conservancy
District will be abandoned when the District sewers now
under construction are available.
These include three Merrillville schools,
10 a bowling alley, and Chapel Manor Subdivision.
11 The Little Calumet River-West: The
12 Little Calumet River Basin is divided into two drainage
13 areas by Broadway Street in Gary. That area east of
14 Broadway discharges to Lake Michigan through Burns Ditch.
15 West of Broadway, the water flows into the Calumet-Sag
16 Canal entering Illinois approximately 300 yards west of
17 Hohman Avenue in Hammond.
18 The Little Calumet River receives
19 sewage from Dyer and Schererville, a portion of the sewage
20 from Griffith and Highland, and treated waste from Sim-
21 mons Company.
22 A TJ. S. Geological Survey recording gage
23 on the Little Calumet River near the state line shows a
24 minimum daily discharge of 1.9 cfs and a mean daily dis-
25 charge of 7.3 cfs for August 1964. Water quality
-------
1 monitoring data shows the stream to be polluted.
2 The sewerage project recently completed
*
3 by the Hammond Sanitary District, completion of the
4 sanitary sewage connection to Hammond by Griffith and
5 Highland, and completion of the sewage works projects
6 under construction by Dyer and Schererville will return
7 the Little Calumet River flowing into Illinois to a
8 satisfactory condition.
9 Stormwater pumping facilities in Griffith,
10 Highland, Munster, and Gary and stormwater overflow from
11 combined sewers will continue to impose a bacteria and
12 organic load on the Little Calumet River and tributaries
13 thereto.
14 Dyer: The Town of Dyer is served by
15 sanitary and combined sewers. The project now under
is construction will provide interceptor sewers and an acti-
17 vated sludge type sewage treatment facility, including
18 effluent chlorination, for a design population of 6,000
19 and a flow of .6 million gallons per day. The effluent
20 from the plant and stormwater overflows will discharge
21 to Kart Ditch, a tributary to the Little Calumet River.
22 The Board issued a pollution abatement
23 order to the Town of Dyer on July 20, I960; as constructive
24 progress was not achieved, the case was referred to the
25 Attorney General on July 18, 1961. Court action was
-------
815
deferred when the Town agreed to proceed with preparation
of final plans.
Griffith: The Town of Griffith is served
by a combined sewer system. The dry weather sewage flow
is pumped to the Hammond Sanitary District interceptor
for treatment; stormwater overflows from combined sewers
are discharged to Cady Marsh Ditch and to the Little
Calumet River.
Highland: The Town of Highland is served
10 by separate and combined sewers. The dry weather sewage
n flow from approximately 50 percent of the population is
12 pumped to the Hammond Sanitary District for treatment.
13 Sewage and wastes from the remainder of the community,
14 which are now discharged to Hart Ditch and the Little
15 Calumet River, will be connected to Hammond Sanitary
16 District interceptors by the project now under construc-
17 tion. Stormwater overflows will continue to discharge
18 to Hart Ditch and the Little Calumet River,
19 Munster: The Town of Munster is served
20 by sanitary and combined sewers; and the dry weather
21 sewage and waste flow is treated at the Hammond Sanitary
22 District treatment plant. The Town of Munster was made
23 a part of the District on January 26, 1948. The stormwater
24 overflow from combined sewers discharges to Hart Ditch
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
816
and the Little Calumet River.
On August 26, 1948, plans were approved
for interception of existing sewers and connection to •
Hammond interceptors; however, financing of the project
was delayed and actual connection was not made until
December, 1953.
Local developers continued to construct
combined sewers with outfalls to the Little Calumet
River; therefore, additional pollution was created.
As provisions were not undertaken for
correction, the Board issued an order to the Hammond
Sanitary District on September 21, 1961. On September 27*
1961, a petition for a court review of the order was filed
by the Hammond Sanitary District. However, the petition
was dismissed in 1962 and the District proceeded with plans
for the construction of additional interceptor sewers.
The project, which was financed by $592,000 in Sanitary
District bonds and a $243,000 Federal grant, was completed
early in 1964.
Schererville: The Town of Schererville
is primarily served by sanitary sewers. The project now
under construction provides for the installation of
approximately 75*000 feet of sanitary sewers and an activated
sludge type sewage treatment facility, including effluent
chlorlnation, to serve a design population of 6,000 and
-------
81?
a flow of .86 million gallons per* day. The effluent
from the plant will discharge to a tributary to Hart
Ditch, thence to the Little Calumet River.
Simmons Company, Munster: Process and
potable water is purchased from Hammond. Approximate
water usage is .3 million gallons per day. All sewage
Is discharged to the Hammond Sanitary District sewerage
system. Treated process wastewaters are discharged to
the Little Calumet River.
10 Cyanide control facilities, in compliance
11 with Regulation SPC-2, are provided within the plant.
12 Process wastewaters are chemically treated to oxidize
13 cyanides and reduce chromiums. Basins are provided to
14 remove settleables including metal precipitates and
is floatables.
16 Two-stage continuous alkaline-chlorination
17 is provided for cyanide-bearing wastewaters. Sodium
is metabisulfite reduction plus lime neutralization is
19 provided for chromium-bearing rinse waters. The discharge
20 of treated process wastewaters to the river was Approved
21 by the Board in 1959. The approval was based upon the
22 contaminants in the effluent not exceeding the
23 following concentrations:
24 Cyanide, 0; chromium, .5. These are
25 milligrams per liter. Oil, 5; settleable solids, none;
-------
8l8
pH between 6.5 to 8.5.
The Company has, in general, been meeting
.*
the effluent quality specified by the Board. Approximately
$65,000 has been expended by the Company for pollution
control facilities.
Semi-Public: The Dyer Elementary School
and the Mount Merch Sanatorium in Dyer will be connected
to the Dyer municipal sewer system. The sewage treatment
facilities serving the Wilbur Wright School in Munster
10 will be abandoned and connection made to a Hammond
il Sanitary District sewer.
12 St. Mary's in Schererville disposes
13 of its sanitary sewage, after activated sludge treatment
14 and chlorination, on its own grounds; however, if difficulty
15 is experienced, connection could be made to the Schererville
16 sewer system,
17 Consideration is being given to connection
18 of the St. John's Township schools, which are in the
19 Burns Ditch drainage basin, to the Schererville sewer
2o system.
21 With the completion of municipal sewer
22 systems now under construction, it appears that all
23 significant sources of sanitary wastes from semi-public
24 installations in this drainage basin could feasibly be
25 connected to municipal sewers.
-------
819
The Grand Calumet River-West: The Grand
Calumet River enters Illinois approximately 700 yards
west of Hohman Avenue, Hammond. The divide in the river
is approximately at Indianapolis Boulevard in Hammond
although both easterly and westerly flows have been observed
at this location.
Generally, any discharges to the river
west of the boulevard flow into Illinois and discharges
east of the boulevard enter Lake Michigan by way of the
10 Indiana Harbor Canal. There are no streamgBMging sta-
ll tions on the Grand Calumet River in Indiana.
12 Most of the flow at the state line consists
13 of Hammond Sanitary District sewage treatment plant effluent.
14 Some industrial wastes are also present.
15 Water quality monitoring data show the
16 stream to be polluted. The higher B.O.D.'s and coliform
17 counts noted in 1963 and 1964 were caused by the bypassing
is of all or portions of the plant units during construction
19 of improvements at the Hammond plant.
20 When effluent chlorination facilities are
21 installed, the bacterial quality of the Grand Calumet
22 River flowing into Illinois will be improved. However,
23 it should be pointed out that during periods of storms,
24 stormwater overflow from combined sewers will impair
25 bacterial quality and contribute some organic load to the
-------
820
stream.
Hammond: The Hammond Sanitary District
provides interceptor sewers and sewage treatment for the
City of Hammond and the Town of Munster within District
boundaries and sewage treatment by contract for the
Towns of Griffith and Highland and the City of Whiting.
The I960 tributary population of 155,915
8 !| is served by an activated sludge plant with a design
9 population equivalent of ^90,000 and a design flow of
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
13
20
21
22
23
24
25
36 million gallons per day.
The plant provides approximately 95 per-
cent reduction in terms of 5-day B.O.D.; in general,
the operation and maintenance of the facilities is adequate.
However, bypassing of all or portions of
the sewage works, including pump stations and interceptors,
during recent improvement projects contributed materially
to the high coliform bacteria counts and organic loads
noted in the Grand and Little Calumet Rivers.
The majority of the area is served by com-
bined sewers; as early as 1930, it was reported that
Hammond had 155 miles of combined sewers.
However, separate stormwater systems serve
an area with stormwater discharge to Wolf Lake and Lake
Michigan. The Robertsdale pumping station discharges
stormwater overflow from combined sewers to Lake Michigan.
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
21
22
23
24
821
The activated sludge type sewage treatment
facilities are located adjacent to Columbia Avenue and
effluent is discharged to the Grand Calumet River. Under
normal flow conditions, the flow is west to Illinois.
Chlorinatlon facilities are not provided; the Board
has advised that chlorination of the effluent is required.
On September 2, 1964* a report on chlorination
facilities was considered satisfactory by the Board and
the District was required to advise of action planned
to Install said facilities. The District has not sub-
mitted a timetable for construction of chlorination
facilities.
Whiting: The City of Whiting is served
by a combined sewer system with provisions for discharge
of dry weather sewage flow to the Hammond Sanitary District
for treatment. A sewer outfall to Lake Michigan at
Front Street and a stormwater pumping station at Atcheson
Avenue discharges, at times, sewage and stormwater
overflow to Lake Michigan,..
20 On April 25 the Board approved plans for
connection to approximately two-thirds of Whiting's sewage
to the District.
On October 1, 1946, Whiting filed a
stipulation with the U. Se Supreme Court agreeing either
25 j to construct a plant or connect all its sanitary sewage
-------
822
to the Hammond Sanitary District within two years.
The stipulation pointed out that two-thirds of Whiting's
sewage was discharged to Hammond.
On October 24, 194?, the Board approved
plans for connection of the remainder of the sewage to
Hammond; however, the work was not completed until
December 5, 1949. Operation of the Front Street
station was not satisfactory. On May 31, 1951, the Board
approved plans for improvements.
10 Intermittent discharge of raw sewage to
11 Lake Michigan continued. A stipulation, in lieu of
12 an order, was entered into by the Board and Whiting
13 on February 9, 1954. The City stipulated that necessary
14 improvements to abate sewage discharge to Lake Michigan
15 would be constructed.
16 In 1954, a flood gate was installed on
17 the Front Street outfall to keep lake water from entering
18 the sanitary sewage pump station which was designed to
19 discharge sewage to Hammond. The operation of the
2o sanitary sewage pump station has not been satisfactory
21 as raw sewage is still intermittently discharged to
22 Lake Michigan.
23 Adolph Plating, Inc., East Chicago: The
24 East Chicago plant of Adolph Plating Company is currently
25 under construction. Plant operations will begin in
-------
823
1965, and all plant sewage will be discharged to the East
Chicago Sanitary District sewerage system.
Untreated process wastewaters, .3 million
gallons per day, will be discharged to the Grand Calumet
River. The project was approved by the Board on January 5,
1965, with the understanding that when water quality
criteria for the river are established, the necessary
waste treatment will be provided. In-plant cyanide
control facilities, in compliance with Regulation SPC-2,
10 will be provided.
11 LaSalle Steel Company, Hammond: All
12 plant sewage is discharged to the Hammond Sanitary
13 District sewerage system. Process wastes consist of
14 16,000 gallons per week of waste pickle liquor and pickling
15 rinse waters. Waste pickle liquor is discharged twice
16 a week to a mixing basin where a wire coating lime-dip
17 solution is added for neutralization. Routine rinse
is waters are also discharged to the mixing basin. The
19 neutralized wastes are discharged to the Grand Calumet
20 River.
21 Estimated Company expenditure for water
22 pollution control facilities is $16,000.
23 Federal Cement Tile Company, Hammond:
24 The Federal Cement Tile Company is served by a 7,500
25 gallons per day activated sludge type sewage treatment
-------
824
1 plant with effluent discharge to the Grand Calumet River
2 near the Indiana-Illinois state line. It is the only
A
3 semi-public sewage treatment facility in this sub-basin. «
4 The Company has been advised of the need for chlorination
5 facilities.
6 The Wolf Lake Basin: Wolf Lake is a
7 natural lake located on the Indiana-Illinois state line
8 which, in the past, drained into Lake Michigan. This
9 outlet is now blocked and the lake discharges to the
10 Calumet River in Illinois. There is very little outflow
11 from the lake. The lake receives the effluent from
12 Lever Brothers waste treatment facilities via Wolf Lake
13 channel. This channel begins at the Lever outfall.
14 The Board initiated enforcement actions against Lever
15 Brothers and accepted a stipulation in 1947. After that
16 date, complaints were received that fish kills occurred.
17 In 1962, a hearing was held. As a result of this hearing,
18 the Company has retained an engineer and studies are being
19 conducted to determine necessary improvements.
20 The water quality of Wolf Lake, at the
21 state line, is generally good and there is no inter-
22 state pollution of Wolf Lake.
23 Lever Brothers Company, Hammond: The
24 Company located at Hammond in 1930. Potable water is
25 purchased from Hammond and process water, 10.5 million
-------
825
gallons per day, is pumped from Lake Michigan. All plant
sewage and some industrial wastewater is discharged to
the Hammond Sanitary District sewerage system. About
10 million gallons per day of treated process wastewater
and cooling water is discharged to Wolf Lake.
Pollution of the channel which conveys
the Company's wastewater to Wolf Lake is evident. This
pollution neither extends into Wolf Lake proper nor does
it cause interstate pollution of Wolf Lake. The Company's
10 pollution of Wolf Lake Channel has been of concern to
11 the Board for many years, and administrative hearings
12 were scheduled in 1956 and 1961.
13 A ten-day hearing was held in 1962.
14 Oh, I might say, there was evidence that
15 was presented on fish kills and the tainting of fish
16 flesh, but since that date, 1962, we have received no
17 complaints of any fish kill in Wolf Lake or reports of
18 tainting of fish.
19 As a result of the 1962 hearing, the
20 Company retained an engineer to review operations and
21 make improvements where investigations indicate improve-
22 ments are needed.
23 In 19^4, the Company installed raw water
24 chlorination equipment. Sufficient chlorine is added
25 to maintain a residual in the wastewater discharged to
-------
826
1 Wolf Lake. In 1952, two air flotation units were in-
2 stalled. Two basins for removal of settleables and
3 floatables are in use. Because of the relatively low
4 strength of the total plant effluent, the Company has
5 been reluctant to provide secondary biological treat-
6 ment. The Company is attempting to improve in-plant
7 waste prevention measures. About $750,000 has been
8 expended by the Company for pollution control facili-
9 ties.
10 Conclusions: The Great Lakes-Illinois
11 River Basin report of the Department of Health, Educa-
12 tion, and Welfare is needed to establish water quality
13 criteria for Lake Michigan. These criteria are absolutely
14 essential to the determination of final sewage and waste
15 treatment requirements.
16 The Board's Watar Quality Monitoring
17 Program has a sufficient number of stations to deter-
18 mine quality of the waters in the Indiana portion of
19 the basin. The Department of Health, Education, and
20 Welfare's report for this conference recommends continu-
21 ously recording monitors at selected locations and for
22 selected indices.
23
24
25
-------
827
i Monitors currently available have limita-
1
2 tions on pollutants that can be measured. Maintenance is
3 difficult, and a careful investigation should be
4 conducted before a decision is made on installation.
5 If continuously recording monitors for
6 the pollutants of concern are available, this would
7 improve the data and make it more usable.
8 Major industrial plants should institute
9 permanent effluent sampling programs. Data obtained
10 from these programs should be submitted to the Board.
11 The O'Brien Lock should be placed in
12 operation to provide more positive control of the flow
13 from Lake Michigan and reduce the reversal of flow from
14 the Calumet River to Lake Michigan, which affects
15 Indiana waters.
16 All municipalities, except Porter, are
17 providing secondary treatment and some are providing
18 effluent chlorination.
19 The remainder of the municipal and the
20 semi-public installations have been advised to provide
21 effluent chlorination.
22 The Board intends to take whatever action
23 is necessary to obtain compliance.
24 The waters discharged from Burns Ditch
25 to Lake Michigan and from Wolf Lake to Illinois do not
-------
828
i contribute to Interstate pollution.
2 When existing sewage works are augmented
3 by facilities now under construction and planned, the
4 waters of the Grand and Little Calumet Rivers where they
5 cross the State line will be as good as modern sewage
6 treatment practices can make them, except during periods
7 of stormwater overflows.
8 The Grand Calumet River and Indiana
9 Harbor Canal dry water flow is practically all
10 industrial cooling and process waters and waste treat-
11 ment plant effluents.
12 The origin and character of this flow
13 must be considered in development of water quality
u criteria.
15
16 Once the water quality is established,
17 the Board will insist on the needed improvements
18 The water quality monitoring records for
19 the Whiting Water Plant for the past eight years, and
20 for the Dickey Road Station on the Indiana Harbor Canal
21 for the past five years, show little if any deterioration
22 of the water quality during those periods <,
23 This indicates the Board is holding the
24 line on pollution even with increasing industrial
25 expansion and population growth.
The waters in Lake Michigan will Improve
-------
829
once the Great Lakes-Illinois River Basin criteria have
been established and additional treatment of waste
reduction is provided.
The number of semi-public Installations
have been eliminated and connections made to municipal
sewers. This is in compliance with a condition in the
Board's approvals requiring connection when municipal
sewers become available.
The Board will press for the elimination
10 of these installations as public sewer systems become
11 available.
12 The Indiana law is adequate to achieve
13 the desired water quality for the basin.
14 Thank you.
15 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you, Mr. Miller.
16 (Applause.)
17 Mr. Poole.
18 Mr. Poole, I always knew you were an
19 enduring bunch in Indiana, but I never fully appreciated
20 the extent of your staying power until now.
21 Perry, that was a virtuoso performance
22 and I know you are not a bit tired. But at the request
23 of Mr. Poole and to give the conferees time to collect
24 themselves and because there are commitments to two
25 Mayors we'd like to put on, we are going to ask the
-------
630
conferees to withhold their questions, perhaps,
until after lunch, in order to meet these schedules.
3 Mr. Poole.
4 MR. POOLE: We have two Mayors who have early
afternoon engagements back home and if you will
indulge us for a while longer, I'd like to call on
Mayor John Nicosia of the City of East Chicago.
Incidentally, he is an M.D. of some
30-odd years experience, I believe.
10 Mayor Nicosia.
11 MAYOR NICOSIA: Mr. Chairman, conferees,
12 distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen, fellow
13 Hoosiers. I am Dr. John B. Nicosia, Mayor of East
14 Chicago, Indiana.
15 Having been a medical doctor for 30
16 years and a mayor for only one, the practice of main-
17 taining the good health of my patients has now been
18 extended to encompass the well-being of all the citizens
19 of East Chicago. Immediately upon my taking office, my
20 attention was directed to pollution, both air and water.
21 The Sanitary District Sewage Treatment
22 Plant has been operating at a very high degree of
23 efficiency with suspended solids removal of 9^.7 per-
24 cent and BOD removal of 85.9 percent.
25 Chlorination of plant effluent discharged.
-------
831
i into the Calumet, Grand Calumet has produced waste
2 , water with better characteristics than is available in
3 " Lake Michigan for water purification purposes. The MPN
4 test showed an average count of 7.2 per 100 ml.
5 Monthly reports are standardized to
6 correspond with Indiana State Board of Health forms.
7 A bacteriological control laboratory has
8 been constructed and is at present being set to standards
9 for water purification.
10 I might make a comment here now, that
11 no one has set a standard for disinfecting of sewage
12 waste and, therefore, we are following a water purifica-
13 tion standard in treating our sewage.
14 As to the water situation in East
15 Chicago, may I make these points:
16 First, in general, our water supply is
17 very good and trouble free. There are intermittent
19 instances when some problems of taste and odor arise,
19 but these are minute. The indication of the minor
20 nature of this taste and odor problem is illustrated by
21 the fact that chemical treatment costs, per million
22 gallons treated, have declined almost 5 percent since 1959.
23 Second, East Chicago's Municipal Beach
24 has never been closed because of contamination or
25 pollution.
-------
832
l For the record, Mr. Chairman, I would
2 like to correct several statements made in the February f
3 1965 report of the United States Department of Health,
4 Education, and Welfare as presented to this conference.
5 On page 16, it is stated that,quote
B "It is understood that the East Chicago Plant has
7 chlorination facilities but they are not regularly
8 operated" end of quote. As I stated earlier, chlorina-
9 tion facilities in the East Chicago Sanitary District
10 are in continual use in disinfecting the plant effluent.
n In Table VI-1A, there appears a
12 footnote (b) which does not apply to East Chicago.
13 This, I beg to say, applies to Gary Township and not
14 East Chicago.
15 In the Corrective Action Needed"
16 which was recommended, recommendation No. 5 states,
17 "A dam be built across the Grand Calumet River to
18 prevent uncontrolled flows from Lake Michigan to the
19 Illinois River through that channel. Preferred loca-
20 tion of the dam is east of the outfall from the East
21 Chicago Municipal Waste Treatment Plant."
22 I would like to urge the conferees to
23 study this recommendation more closely, to determine
24 jointly, with all those affected, industries, munici-
25 palities, local, county and state officials, as to the
-------
333
i overall effect such a dam would have on the surrounding
2 "| area.
3 Recommendation No. 7 states:
4 "Hammond and East Chicago investigate
5 the feasibility of constructing lagoons for
6 further treatment of waste effluents. Part of
7 the existing poorly-drained flood plain of the
8 Grand Calumet River might be utilized for this
9 purpose, with levees around the lagoons high
10 enough to prevent flooding, and improved bypass
n channels for storm drainage."
12 I have present with me today Cornel
13 Leahu, Superintendent of the East Chicago Sanitary
14 District, who will present a statement in which he
15 discusses this recommendation.
16 Recommendation No. 8 states:
17 "All sanitary wastes be disinfected
18 before discharge. Disinfection should be practiced
19 in the manner prescribed by State water pollution
20 control agencies and mutually agreed upon between
21 the two states."
22 I must repeat that East Chicago's
23 Sanitary District is disinfecting sanitary wastes at
24 present. This recommendation, however, does bring up the
25 need for a definitive agreement among the agencies
-------
634
involved. I would recommend prompt action on this
point.
*
I would like to comment that I know of
no definite standard of disinfecting sanitary wastes
which would be amenable to both states.
As Mayor of the City of East Chicago,
I pledge by City Administration to work tirelessly for
pollution abatement to preserve the God-given resource
at our doorstep.
10 Mr. Chairman, I would also like to make
11 a comment with your permission.
12 Looking over your agenda, it seems
13 strange to me that some of the major Industries in
14 Illinois such as Wisconsin Steel Works, Interlake Iron
15 Works, Republic Steel Works, Acme Steel Works,
16 Sherwin Williams, et cetera, et cetera, and many of the
17 industries that I am certain border on the waterways
18 and tributaries and who are involved in this particular
19 situation that we are discussing here don't seem to be
2o represented.
2i I get the impression that, perhaps, the
22 State of Indiana is the whipping boy here.
23 I hope that I am wrong, but for the
24 interest of everybody concerned and certainly for the
25 success of this type of a program, I think that it is no more
-------
835
1 than fair and right that the Illinois industries should
*
2* have some representation to be cross-examined just like
i
3» those of the State of Indiana.
4 Thank you.
^ (Applause.)
6 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Mr. Mayor, would you wait a
7 moment ?
8 This question has come up before and
9 I am sure it will appear in the record that the question
10 has been asked and an answer has been given.
11 Again, let me explain the Federal position
12 on this: When this law was first developed, representa-
13 tives of the states came before the conference and
14 urged that at this stage of Federal enforcement pro-
is ceedings, the Federal Government not get in touch with
16 the individual, allegedly dischargers directly; that is,
17 municipalities or industries—that we deal with the
18 states and the states do this.
19 I think we have dealt with both industry
20 and Illinois on an equal basis.
21 I think Mr. Klassen has indicated the
22 jurisdictional problem in Illinois which has led to
23 the situation to which you alluded, but I think as far
24 as the Federal law is concerned, the Congress has made
25 it abundantly clear what we are supposed to do.
-------
836
Now, personally, I do believe that
v
conferences are best when all industries are asked to
*t
participate, because no one can tell the story for you *
as you can yourself. However., there have been
conferences that we have had in other parts of the
country with state agencies when they have invited no
one to participate other than themselves.
Under the law as presently constituted,
this is the situation.
10 MR. KLASSEN: Yes, I just want to amplify that,
11 Mayor, because this question was asked yesterday.
12 The territory involved here, with the
13 exception of the three little white areas that you see
14 on the map, are all under the Jurisdiction of the
15 Metropolitan Sanitary District of Chicago and are exempt
16 from state jurisdiction. We have a specific Attorney
l? General's opinion stating that the Water Board of the
18 State of Illinois has no jurisdiction, nor no control
19 over waste entering Lake Michigan that originates within
20 the Sanitary District. This is the reason that the
21 Sanitary Water Board has not invited the industries,
22 and has given this prerogative in writing to the Chicago
23 Sanitary District.
24 Whether or not they call in industries,
25 I do not know, and this undoubtedly will be determined.
-------
837
when the Sanitary District time comes up to do this.
2% If industries are called, they will have
3* to be called by the Sanitary District. This is their
responsibility under the law.
MAYOR NICOSIA: Mr. Klassen, I appreciate your
remarks and your explanation. But if we are dealing
with a problem that everybody knows is critical
throughout this area and certainly has been critical
for the last hundred years, and if we are dealing with
10 industries who seem to be — shall we say — the
11 major offenders, I think it is no more than feasible
12 and fair that the Sanitary District of the City of
13 Chicago should have made an effort so that we, from
14 the State of Indiana, could listen to their side of the
15 story. We feel that we are being whipped here in
16 this particular conference, and we Just don't like it
17 in Indiana to get whipped unless we get a fair fight.
18 MR. KLASSEN: I agree with you.
19 MR. CHESROW: Dr. Nicosia, for your information,
20 the Sanitary District has invited industry to participate.
21 I want to point out that probably you
22 don't know that the Sanitary District of Greater
23 Chicago does have a very effective industrial waste
24 ordinance that is being complied with, and it will be
25 brought out tomorrow when we present our story.
-------
838
MAYOR NICOSIA: If that is so, I stand corrected,
but I still want to be on the record. I want to make
sure that this is so.
4 Thank you.
5 (Applause.)
6 Mr. Leahu will follow me.
7 MR. LEAHU: Mr. Chairman, my name is Cornel Leahu,
Superintendent of the East Chicago Sanitary District
located at 5200 Indianapolis Boulevard, East Chicago,
10 Indiana.
li Mr. Chairman, honorable conferees,
12 distinguished guests, members of the conference, I was
13 directed by the Commissioner of the East Chicago
14 Sanitary District to read into the record their address
15 that is given on our report which we hope will be
16 included in the printing of the record.
17 Honorable Anthony J. Celebrezze,
18 Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, Indiana and
19 Illinois Water Pollution Conference, McCormick Place,
20 Chicago, Illinois.
21 Honorable Mr. Secretary: Our distin-
22 guished Mayor, Dr. John B. Nicosia, enjoined the East
23 Chicago Sanitary District to undertake a positive program
24 to abate any stream pollution that could be attributed
25 to our municipality. We, in the District, are operating
-------
839
a Guggenheim Bio-chemical Treatment Plant with a capa-
city of twenty (20) million gallons per day. Presently
we are treating an average of ten (10) million gallons
per day. Our BOD removal varies from eighty-eight (88)
to ninety- five (95) percent efficiency of removal.
The effectiveness of our suspended solids removal is in
the same category.
Following our Mayor's directive, we
experimented with chlorination of the plant effluent in
10 June of last year. The Sanitary District Commissioners
ll wrote to the Indiana State Board of Health requesting a
12 directive to chlorinate our effluent. We were in need
13 of documentation with teeth in it to justify additional
14 appropriations with which to purchase chlorine. This
15 was not forthcoming; rather we received a letter urging
16 the Commissioners to place chlorination into effect and
17 hire a consultant engineer, not a directive. The
18 District took it upon itself to obtain monies earmarked
19 for chemicals and use this exclusively for chlorine.
20 At present, rather than vacuum filtering sludge, we
21 have and are continuing to construct sludge lagoons. In
22 this manner, monies saved by not purchasing chemicals
23 for vacuum filtration are expended on chlorine.
24 We experimented for six months in 1964,
25 from June through December, obtaining information
-------
840
regarding contact time to produce an acceptable chlorine
residual. We use our effluent channel as a contact tank.
The mechanics for this being completed we went one step
further and proceeded to reduce the presence of members
of the coliform group. At this time, we did not have
the facilities for bacteriological analysis, therefore,
we took our samples to the Gary- Hobart Water Company, an
independently owned and operated utility. Their analysis,
as documented, both on the multiple tube fermentation
10 technique and by the membrane filter technique, indicate
11 that our plant effluent has better characteristics than
12 the raw water from Lake Michigan. We are finishing
13 our bacteriological laboratory so we may remain on top
14 of this abatement program and preserve the effort that
15 has been expended to date.
16 The Sanitary District has several plans
17 which are being entertained but, due to limited funds
18 available, would require Federal participation to
19 accomplish: these are:
20 (l) Separate the sewer system in East Chicago.
21 (2) When separated, remove particulate matter
22 from the storm sewer effluent and chlorinate.
23 (3) Construct tertiary treatment for the sewage
24 disposal plant to produce potable water for
25 sale or reuse.
-------
These programs, though highly ambitious,
i, 2~ we feel are the only answer to positive abatement of any
"* pollution attributable to the East Chicago Municipal
Sanitary District. The Sanitary District Board of
Commissioners would also like to recommend, to the
Army Corps of Engineers, to resume discussion and
planning of widening and straightening the Grand
Calumet River; to reconsider a proposal to connect the
Lake Michigan breakwater from the Gary Lighthouse to
10 South Chicago; put in locks and in general create a
11 tremendous settling basin to maintain our God-given
12 resource, Lake Michigan, pure and pollution free.
13 Respectfully submitted, Peter E. Auksel,.
14 President; Carlos Borge, Vice-president; A. G. Giannini,
15 Secretary.
16 The report and statistics provided were
17 presented by me and are in retrospect to the previous
is statistical data. I wish to bring this
19 additional information.
20 The dissolved oxygen demand of the
21 East Chicago Municipal Sanitary District effluent, as
22 discharged into the Grand Calumet River and the Lake
23 Michigan Basin, is on the average for the year 1964,
24 3,163 in population equivalent (PE).
25 The average coliform density of the East
-------
Chicago Municipal Sanitary District Sewage Treatment
2 Plant effluent, as documented by impartial laboratory
analysis of the Gary-Hobart Water Corporation, discharged
into the Grand Calumet River and the Lake Michigan
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Basin, was, for the month of February 1965, in the
order of 7.2 per 100 ml. Bacterial disinfection of
this magnitude indicates an extremely successful
treatment process.
The Sanitary District, at the behest
of our tireless Mayor, Dr. John D. Nicosia, is
presently studying feasibility reports and negotiating
with Industry the possibility of diverting industrial
wastes (phenolics, ammonia, nitrates, nitrites, cyanide,)
to the District for final treatment. Studies at present
indicate this may be accomplished by settling in a deep
lagoon, aereating and chlorinating, prior to discharge
into the Grand Calumet River and the Lake Michigan
Basin.
This report and statistical data of
the Sanitary District of the City of East Chicago,
Indiana, is hereby respectfully submitted to the
Honorable Dr. John B. Nicosia, Mayor, the Sanitary
Commissioners, Honorable Secretary Anthony J. Celebrezze
of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare,
Honorable Murray Stein, Chairman of the Conference, and
-------
843
i | the Indiana State Board of Health, this 2nd day of
i
2 March, 1965.
*-v,
3 Thank you.
4
5
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you, Mr. Leahu.
Your technical report will appear in
the record and will be referred to in the report. It
will, of course, include columns of figures. This record
8 I will be available for inspection in Washington and in
9 I Chicago at all times during business hours.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-------
844
1 REPORT ON
TREATMENT PROCESS PRIOR TO DISCHARGE INTO THE
- 2 WATERS OF THE GRAND CALUMET RIVER, LITTLE CAL-
UMET RIVER, LAKE MICHIGAN, AND THEIR TRIBUTARIES.
» 3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 EAST CHICAGO SANITARY DISTRICT
11 HONORABLE DR. JOHN B. NICOSIA, MAYOR
12 CORNEL A. LEAHU, SUPERINTENDENT
13
14
15
16
17
18 BOARD OF SANITARY COMMISSIONERS
19 PETER E. AUKSEL PRESIDENT
20 CARLOS BORGE, P. E. VICE-PRESIDENT
21 A. G. GIANNINA, P. E. SECRETARY
22
23
24
25
-------
845
1 TABLE OF CONTENTS
*,
2 Page No.
3 I FOREWARD Bl7
4 Honorable Dr. John B. Nicosia, Mayor
5 II SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 849
6 Sanitary Commissioners 853
7 Exhibit "A" 854
8 Gary-Hobart Summary 855
9 Gary-Hobart Examination 2/5/65 857
10 Gary-Hobart Examination 2/8/65 858
il Gary-Hobart Examination 2/L5/65 859
12 Gary-Hobart Examination 2/23/65 860
13 III BACKGROUND
14 Plant Design Information 861
15 Statistical Summary 862
16 Description of Treatment Process 863
17 Table 2 —Sewage Plow and Solids Removed 867
18 Table 3 - Characteristics of Raw Sewage 868
19 Table A - Settleable Solids 869
20 Table 5 —Suspended Solids and % Removal 870
21 Table 6 - B.O.D. and % Removal 871
22 Table 7 - % Volatile Suspended Solids 872
23 Table 8 - Grit — Screenings — Scum Removed873
24 Table 9 - pH 874
25 Table 10 - Mixed Liquor - Return Sludge DatasTS
-------
846
Page No.
Table 11 - Aeration Data 876
Table 12 - Air Consumption 877
3 Table 13 - Comminutors 878
4 Table 14 —Air Blowers in Operation 879
5 Table 15 - Return Sludge Pumps 880
6 Table 16 - Detritor and Cleaning Mechanism 891
7 Table 17 - Raw Sludge to Digesters Data 882
8 Table 18 - Sludge Vacuum Filtration Data 39.3
9 Table 19 - Gas Engine Operation 884
10 Table 20 - Summary Showing Monthly Payroll 885
il Table 21 - Summary Showing Utility Costs 886
12 Table 22 —Summary Showing Monthly Fuel
Oil Costs 887
13
Table 23 - Summary Electric Power Costs 888
14
Table 24 - Summary Monthly Chemical Costs QQQ
15
Table 25 —Budget Classification 890
16
IV SUBMISSION NOTE 891
17
Conclusion by the Superintendent
18
MONTHLY REPORTS OF OPERATION FOR THE YEAR 1964 895
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-------
84?
l CITY OP EAST CHICAGO
2 East Chicago, Indiana
3 Office of the Mayor
Dr. John B. Nicosia, Mayor
February 16, 1965
Gentlemen:
Having been a medical doctor for 30 years
and a mayor for only one, the practice of maintaining the
good health of my patients has now been extended to en-
10 compass the well-being of all the citizen's of East
11 Chicago. Immediately, upon my taking office, my attention
12 was directed to pollution, both air and water.
13 I called my Sanitary District Board of
14 Commissioners, together with the new Superintendent,
15 and requested a complete resume of what was being done
16 to abate pollution. The returned report was shocking
17 to say the least. Prior to 1964, the Sanitary District
is had filed a monthly report to the State Board of Health
19 but not on their standard form. I found that chlorina-
20 tion facilities were available to chlorinate plant
21 effluent but were never used for this purpose. I
22 immediately directed the Sanitary District to do every-
23 thing within their jurisdiction of work to abate further
24 pollution of the Grand Calumet River.
25 It is with gratifying satisfaction that I
-------
848
1 can now report the following:
2 (l) The Sanitary District Sewage Treatment Plant
3 has been operating at a very high degree of
4 efficiency.
5 (2) Chlorination of plant effluent has produced a
6 waste water with better characteristics than
7 is available in Lake Michigan for water puri-
8 fication purposes.
9 (3) Monthly reports are standardized to correspond
10 with Indiana State Board of Health forms.
11 (4) A bacteriologial control laboratory has been
12 constructed and is at present being set to
13 standards for water purification.
14 Gentlemen, all this has been accomplished
is in less than a year, without additional expenditures to
16 burden the taxpayer. A more ambitious program, which
17 the Sanitary District is at present entertaining, would
18 require the assistance of Federal funds. These other
19 programs are of such magnitude that to embark on them, to
20 make Federal waterways acceptable to fish life, recreation,
21 and possible potability, is not within the financial scope
22 of the Sanitary District.
23 Sincerely,
24 Dr. John B. Nicosia, Mayor
25 East Chicago, Indiana
-------
1
Mayor
2
5200 Indianapolis Blvd. Cornel A. Leahu
East Chicago, Indiana 46312 Superintendent
EXport 7-1068 February 23, 1965
5
Hon. Anthony J. Celebrezze
Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare
Indiana & Illinois Water Pollution Conference
McCormick Place
Chicago, Illinois
8
Hon. Mr. Secretary:
Our distinguished Mayor, Dr. John B. Nicosia,
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
849
EAST CHICAGO SANITARY DISTRICT Dr. John B. Nicosia
enjoined the East Chicago Sanitary District to under-
take a positive program to abate any stream pollu-
tion that could be attributed to our municipality. We,
in the District, are operating a Guggenheim bio-
chemical treatment plant with a capacity of twenty (20)
million gallons per day. Presently, we are treating an
average of ten (10) million gallons per day. Our
B.O.D. removal varies from eighty-eight (88) to ninety-
five (95) percent efficiency of removal. The effective-
ness of our suspended solids removal is in the same
category.
Following our Mayor's directive, we
experimented with chlorination of the plant effluent in
June of last year. The Sanitary District Commissioners
wrote to the Indiana State Board of Health requesting a
-------
850
directive to chlorinate our effluent. We were in need
of documentation with teeth in it to justify additional
appropriations with which to purchase chlorine. This
was not forthcoming; rather we received a letter urging
the Commissioners to place chloriniion into effect and
hire a consultant engineer, not a directive. The
District took it upon itself to obtain monies earmarked
for chemicals and use this exclusively for chlorine. At
present, rather than vacuum filtering sludge, we have
10 and are continuing to construct sludge lagoons. In this
manner, monies saved by not purchasing chemicals for
12 vacuum filtration are expended on chlorine.
13 We experimented for six months of 1964,
from June through December obtaining information
15 regarding contact time to produce an acceptable chlorine
16 residual; we use our effluent channel as a contact
17 tank. The mechanics for this being completed we went
18 one step further and proceeded to reduce the presence
19 of members of the coliform group. At this time, we did
20 not have the facilities for bacteriological analysis,
21 therefore, we took our samples to the Gary Hobart Water
22 Company, an independently owned and operated utility.
23 Their analysis, as documented, both on the multiple tube
24 fermentation technique and by the membrane
25 technique, indicate that our plant effluent has better
-------
851
1 characteristics than the raw water from Lake Michigan.
2 We are finishing our bacteriological Laboratory so we
3 may remain on top of this abatement program and preserve
4 the effort that has been expended to date.
5 The Sanitary District has several plans
6 which are being entertained but, due to limited funds
7 available, would require Federal participation to
8 accomplish; these are:
9 (l) Separate the sewer system in East Chicago.
10 (2) When separated, remove particulate matter from
11 the storm sewer effluent and chlorinate.
12 (3) Construct tertiary treatment for the sewage
13 disposal plant to produce potable water for
u sale or reuse.
15 These programs, though highly ambitious,
16 we feel, are the only answer to positive abatement of
17 any pollution attributable to the East Chicago Municipal
18 Sanitary District. The Sanitary District Board of
19 Commissioners would also like to recommend, to the Army
20 Corps of Engineers, to resume discussion and planning
21 of widening and straightening the Grand Calumet River;
22 to reconsider a proposal to connect the Lake Michigan
23 breakwater from the Gary Lighthouse to South Chicago;
24 put in locks and in general create a tremendous
25 settling basin to maintain our God given resource, Lake
-------
852
Michigan, pure and pollution free.
Respectfully submitted,
Peter E. Auksel, President
Carlos Borge, Vice-President
A. G. Giannini, Secretary
Board of Sanitary Commissioners
7 Attest: Cornel Ae Leahu,
Superintendent
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-------
853
1 State of Indiana
2 STREAM POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
3 1330 West Michigan Street
Indianapolis, Indiana 46207
4
April 22, 1964
Board of Sanitary Commissioners
East Chicago Sanitary District
5200 Indianapolis Boulevard
East Chicago, Indiana
8
Gentlemen:
Re: Chlorination Facilities, Sewage
10
n
12
13
14
IS
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Treatment Plant, East Chicago Sanitary
District.
The East Chicago sewage treatment plant
provides primary and secondary treatment for sewage origi-
nating within the ifiast Chicago Sanitary District. In
addition, the East Chicago plant has Chlorination facili-
ties utilizing the effluent channel for a chlorine
contact tank.
It is the purpose of this letter to urge
the East Chicago Board of Sanitary Commissioners to:
1. Repair, if necessary, and place in operation
Chlorination equipment presently on hand.
Such facilities should be used on a continuous
basis.
2. Retain the services of a consulting engineering
-------
854
1 firm to study the adequacy of the East Chicago
2 sewage treatment plant effluent chlorination
3 and to render a report with recommendations
4 for improving the facilities,
5 A reply relative to the above should be
submitted to this office not later than June 1, 1964.
If we can be of further assistance in
this matter, please feel free to call on us.
9 Very truly yours,
10 B. A. Poole,
11 Technical Secretary
12 VGW/gwn
13 cc: Ted Leahu, Superintendent, East Chicago Sanitary
U District
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-------
1
2
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
IS
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
855
GARY-HOBART WATER CORPORATION
650 Madison Street
Gary, Indiana 46401
February 26, 1965
Mr. Ted Cornel Leahu
East Chicago Sewage Dept.
5200 Indianapolis Blvd.
East Chicago, Indiana
Dear Mr. Leahu:
The results of the coliform bacteria
test run on the East Chicago sewage plant effluent sub-
mitted to us, by Mr. Popa, show a definite decrease for
the month of February. The M.P.N. test showed an
average count of 7.2 for the four (4) samples submitted,
while the membrane Filter test had an average of 35
colonies per one-hundred (100) milliliters for the same
four (4) samples. The enclosed bacteriological report
sheets show the actual count obtained from each sample
submitted.
These results can be compared to the
average coliform bacteria concentration, for the past
nine (9) years of 228 per one-hundred (100) milliliters
of water for our raw water taken from Lake Michigan.
*
This average is obtained by using the M.P.N. charts
according to "Standard Methods for the Examination of Water,
Sewage and Industrial Wastes."
-------
856
The sewage effluent samples submitted to
2 us are performed impartially by the water quality control
3 laboratory of the Gary-Hobart Water Corporation.
4 Sincerely yours,
5 /S/ Herbert L. Plowman, Jr
Chief Chemist
6
HLP:jk
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-------
GARY-HOBART WATER CORPORATION
REPORT OF BACTERIOLOGICAL EXAMINATION
857
6A*Y-HOBART WATER CORPORATION
REPORT OF ^ACtERIOLOGICAL EXAMINATION
. Date —ia&C:
5 - 250 ml
4 = 100 ml
3 = 50 ml
2 = 10 ml
1 - 5 ml
6
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
-- 1 ail
=* 0.5 id
*• 0.1 ml
= 0.01 ml
- 0,001
-JT:: •**•**/
-------
858
6ARY-JWBART WMER CORPORATION
REPORT OF BACTERIOLOGICAL EXAMIMATIOW
GAIQf-lOBAJa: W&TER CORPORA.TICSI -
REPORT OF BACTERIOLOGICAL EXAHMATION >
Swipltf
Point of Collection
^rff^
^cr (rH,*.AA9
Sampl# Number
/
(
V
Residual Chlorine
^eca
'fj
-P
«
o
o
•p
flj
H
a.
o-
C'A
\
1
Membrane Filter
?
«^
Tertian
2*
i Q
->
-1
-V
^,f
-4
/
Lauryl
Tryptose Broth
^
~t
c\;
_
_
„_
^ ,
„ .
^.
^
J-.
jn
to
-*
-
^
^
f
_»
„
«.
—
B. G. B.
From
24 hr.
Broth
Vi
^
c3
^
x:
to
-t
From
4P hr.
Br»th
Vi
x:
c?
^
JC
-------
GARY-HCBART WATER CORPORATION
REPORT OF BACTERIOLOGICAL EXAMINATION
859
GARY-HOBART WATER CORPORATION
REPORT OF BACTERIOLOGICAL EXAMINATION
Sample
Point of Collection
/2/9A/7-
f^^r £*je*t,e>
ID
fl)
t
/
V.
Residual Chlorine
Lf?
7*
0
ID
1
C-
\
)
Membrana Filter
7
—
— .
Portion
fL
O
"At
"'J
-V
Day //ffntfitA^' Pite £-U~-'/963*'
La'uryl
Tryptose Broth
«
^
/if
^.
_
^.
3
^
^>
-
.
«~
—
B, G. B.
From
24 hr.
Broth
*
^
1+
00
5 « 250 ml
4 - 100 ml
3 = 50 ml
2 = 10 ml
1 - 5 ml
From
48 hr.
Br»th
'S
—
3
/^,
*
PO
t
X
w
PC
X
V
o
9)
0
O
Formate-Ricemleate ]
48 hr, I
Pnrtion Examined
0 -- 1 ml
- 1 - 0.5 ml
- 2 - 0.1 ml
- 3 = 0.01 ml
- 4 * 0.001
Collform Ccnfirmed ]
#y~
//•
•i
§
h
1
o!
X
S.8*
\
i
i
i
j
-------
GARY-IOBART WATER CORPORATION
REPORT OP BACTERIOLOGICAL EXAMINATION
860
GARY-IOBART WATER CORPORATION
REPORT OF BACTERIOLOGICAL EXAMINATION
Sample
Point of Collection
Pi Art
£/*sY C. air, a GO
«
0>
!
XL
i_2!
v^*
Residual Chlorine
,/r 1
P /
u
a.
Membrane Filter
/f
,__
*»
Portion
•q
0^
/
rt>
-*
'¥
^_5
-^
Lauryl
Tryptos* Broth
Si
U_
¥•/•
*f
_>
^
*-
^
x:
00
—
—
^
*.
•»
B. G. B.
From
24 hr.
Broth
.3
^
$.•+
A+
A
^-
5 « 250 ml
4 - 100 ml
3 = 50 El
r—s ff ,72r~ 2 = 10 ir.l
From
48 hr.
3r«th
^
«
«
x;
N
*
n
Lactose fr«a£. M. B.
Formate-Ricenoleate
48 hr.
Portion Examined
0 -- 1 ml
- 1 = 0.5 ml
-2-0.1 ml
- 3 = 0.01 ml
- 4 * 0.001
•
Coliform Confirmed
—
¥/-
jai-f-
-
-
-
•^
^,
*
•3
§
a
* i
cu
*
//
i
i
:
-------
861
1 PLANT DESIGN INFORMATION
2 ENGINEER RUSSELL B. MOORE
CONTRACT OF COST $2,277,199.8?
4 TYPE OF TREATMENT GUGGENHEIM BIOCHEMICAL
5 DATE PLANT STARTED MAY, 1945
DESIGN POPULATION 64,800
TYPE OF SEWERAGE SYSTEM COMBINED
DESIGN FLOW (MILLION GALLONS PER DAY) 20.0
DESIGN MAXIMUM HOURLY RATE (MILLION GALLONS) 30.0
10 DESIGN STRENGTH OF RAW SEWAGE 150
n INDUSTRIAL WASTES OIL, PICKLING LIQUOR
12 PRIMARY SETTLING TANKS 320,000
13 DESIGN RATE * PRIMARY DETENTION PERIOD IN HOURS 1.15
14 AERATION UNITS (4) CAPACITY OF EACH IN GALLONS 509,000
15 DESIGN RATE-AERATION DETENTION PERIOD IN HOURS-20#
16 RETURN SLUDGE 2.04
17 FINAL SETTLING TANKS (3) CAPACITY OF EACH IN 407,000
GALLONS
18 DESIGN RATE - FINAL DETENTION PERIOD IN HOURS 1.7
19 FINAL WEIR LENGTH IN FEET 942
20 DIGESTION TANK DATA
21 EQUIVALENT POPULATION SUSPENDED SOLID BASIS 100,000
22 SUSPENDED SOLIDS RAW SEWAGE / DAY 20,000 Ibs.
23 SUSPENDED SOLIDS REMOVED / DAY 19,200 Ibs.
24 VOLUME SOLIDS TO DIGESTERS / DAY 14,400 Ibs.
25 VOLUME REQUIRED @ 25 CU. FT./LBS. VOLATILE ADDED/DAY
360,000 cu.ft,
-------
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
DIGESTION TANK DATA (cont'd)
CU. FT. / EQUIVALENT POPULATION
VOLUME STORAGE TANK 370,
STATISTICAL SUMMARY 1960-1961 -1962-1964
I960 1961 1962
POPULATION SERVED
(ESTIMATED) 64,800 64,800 64,800
SEVJAGE TREATED,
MILLION GALLONS 4,434,080 3,914,470 3,775,432
SEWAGE TREATED,
MILLION GALLONS
DAILY 12.123 10.718 10.342
SUSPENDED SOLIDS
REMOVED, POUNDS 3,735,355 4,472,709 4,976,506
5-DAY B.O.D.
REMOVED, POUNDS 2,952,290 3,460,636 3,735,822
GRIT REMOVED,
CUBIC FEET 2,100 2,030 1,140
SCUM REMOVED,
CUBIC FEET 1,006 1,129 1,360
*SCREENINGS REMOVED,
CUBIC FEET 1,335 1,157 1,294
REMOVAL OF SUSPENDED
SOLIDS, PERCENT 93.4 94.2 96.4
REMOVAL OF BIOCHEMICAL
OXYGEN 86.6 86.0 87.9
* SCREENINGS REMOVED FROM ALDER STREET
PUMPING STATION ONLY.
862
3.6
000 cu.ft. ^
1964
64,800
3,796,891
10.402
3,972,468
2,502,774
2,50C
1,946
1,356
94.7
87.6
-------
863
DESCRIPTION OP TREATMENT PROCESS
Stormwater and sanitary wastes flow, by
gravity, through a combined sewerage system to sewage
lift stations located at Alder Street in the Calumet
Addition to Indiana Harbor, and at 151st and Magoun
Avenue in East Chicago; the Alder Street pumping station
handling all wastes from the Indiana Harbor - Marktown -
Calumet sections of East Chicago and the Magoun Avenue
9 pumping station handling the remainder of the City's
10 wastes. Pumping stations located at Broad and Spruce
ll Streets in Marktown: Canal Street and the Indiana
12 Harbor Ship Canal: Michigan and Sheridan Avenue: serve
13 as relay stations for the Alder Street pumping station.
14 Mechanically cleaned fixed bar screens used to remove
15 floating and large suspended solids are in operation at
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
both pumping stations. Gruendler sewage shredders used
for shredding screenings are also in operation at the
Magoun Avenue pumping station.
In addition to stormwater pumps, the
City of East Chicago has in operation, three horizontal
dual speed sewage lift pumps, having a combined capacity
of 28 million gallons per day at 45« T.D.H., at the
Alder Street station, and three vertical motor driven,
open shaft, non-clog sewage pumps, having a combined
capacity of approximately 15 million gallons per day
-------
864
l against 38' T.D.H., at the Magoun Avenue station. These
2 pumps lift the sewage and pass it through force mains
3 to the sewage treatment plant at 152nd and Indianapolis
II
4 Boulevard.
Industrial-sanitary wastes, upon entering
the sewage treatment plant, first pass through two Chicago
comminutors; each with a capacity of 20 million gallons
daily. These units shred large particles making the
character of sewage more consistent and preventing the
10 II clogging of the numerous pipelines, pumps, and other
11 mechanical equipment located in the treatment plant.
12 In the event of emergency the sewage can bypass this
13 stage of the treatment process, flowing through a manually
14
15
16
17
22
23
24
25
cleaned fixed bar screen. After treatment, by the
comminutors, the sewage passes into a 30-foot square Dorr
Detritor which removes the heavier inorganic solids.
The sewage then passes through a 60-inch pipe to the
18 primary distribution well and to three Dorr primary
19 settling tanks. These tanks are designed to retain the
20 sewage for 1.5 hours; each having a capacity of 320,000
21 gallons. The effluent from these tanks then proceeds
to four aeration tanks; each with a capacity of 509*000
gallons. The aerators supply air at the rate of 3,470
cubic feet per minute and retain the sewage for two and
a half hours. It is at this point that the design calls
-------
10
12
13
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
865
for the application of secondary return sludge in an
amount of 20 percent of the volume of flow and intro-
duction of aluminum sulfate (alum) at the rate of .4
grains per gallon.
The aerated sewage then proceeds to
the three final settling tanks, each with a capacity
of 470,000 gallons, where it is detained for 1.7
hours. The finished effluent is then disinfected and
discharged into the Grand Calumet River:
PLANT EQUIPMENT INCLUDES A PAIR OF
11 WALLACE AND TIERNAN CHLORINATORS THAT ARE USED TO
CHLORINATE THE FINAL EFFLUENT.
Sludge, from the primary tanks, is drawn
14 off into two primary sludge digesters; a fixed cover
Dorr-Oliver and a floating cover Pacific flush tank.
Digested sludge is transferred daily to 2 Pacific flush
tank company secondary digesters. Digested sludge is
treated with ferric chloride and lime, and vacuum
filtered on two, 8' diameter - 10' length, Emico
filters.
The dewatered sludge is then conveyed to
a Nichols multiple hearth incinerator for final
destruction. This incinerator has a capacity of reducing
1*750 pounds of dry solids per hour and will destroy
sludge with a moisture content as high as 75 percent. All
-------
866
sludge from the secondary tanks returns to some point in
the plant process. Chicago screw impeller pumps move part
to the aeration tanks, and part to the primary tanks.
The plant originally was intended to be
constructed out of WPA funds, with a contractor retained
for supervision and furnishing equipment. However,
before construction was complete, this WPA support was
withdrawn, and the city was faced with the extremely
difficult task of completing construction in the face
10 of wartime restrictions and manpower shortages. The
11 plant has been in full operation since about the 1st
12 of June 1945.
13
14
15
16 * * *
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-------
TABLE 2
867
SEWAGE FLOW - WATER WORKS PUMPAGE
AMD
SOLIDS MATTER REMOVED
MONTHS
JANUARY
FEBRUARY
MARCH
APRIL
MAY
JUNE
JULY
AUGUST
SEPTEMBER
OCTOBER
NOVEMBER
DECEMBER
1 964 AVERAGE
1 962 AVERAGE
1961 AVERAGE
1960 AVERAGE
SEWAGE
FLOW
M.G.D.
10.1
9.3
11.1
12.9
12.5
10.5
10.5
9.7
8.6
9.5
9.5
10.2
10.. 4
10. 3s*.
10.7TS
12.1?7
WATER
WORKS
PUPMAGE
M.G.D. (1)
14.2
14. 4
14.5
14.9
16.0
16.3
16.5
16.4
16.3
15.0
14,4
14.9
15.3
16. 134-
14.959
12. 23*
SEWAGE
FLOW
GAL.
CAP 1 TA
177
163
195
266
219
184
184
170
150
167
167
179
185
160
165
206
FROM SEWAGE
POUNDS SUSPENDED
SOLIDS REMOVED
DURING THE MONTH (2)
TOTAL VOLATILE
422,454
439,723
346,229
401,421
349,029
217,351
201,425
246,946
292,710
466.023
362,880
317,688
331.039
414.709
364,784
358.500
308,391
294,614
249, 285
260,924
223.379
147,792
145,026
180,271
207,824
354.177
257,645
222,382
231,211
296,296
263,035
270,678
PRIMARY
DETENTION
PERIOD IN
HOURS (3)
2.3
2.5
2.0
1.8
1.-8
2.2
2.2
2.4
2.8
2.5
2.4
2.3
2.3
2.2
2.2
1.7
(1) FROM THE EAST CHICAGO WATER DEPARTMENT
(2) COMPUTED FROM SUSPENDED SOLIDS DETERMINATIONS OF RAW SEWAGE AND FINAL
EFFLUENT. POUNDS VOLATILE COMPUTED BY USING PER CENT VOLATILE OF RAW SEWAGE,
(3) WASTE SLUDGE INCLUDED IN COMPUTING PRIMARY DETENTION PERIOD.
-------
868
TABLE 3
CHARACTERISTICS OF RAW SEWAGE
MONTHS
JANUARY
FEBRUARY
MARCH
APRIL
MAY
JUNE
JULY
AUGUST
SEPTEMBER
OCTOBER
NOVEMBER
DECEMBER
1 964 AVERAGE
1962 AVERAGE
1961 AVERAGE
! 960 AVERAGE
10 YEAR AVERAGE
TOTAL LBS
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS IN
RAW SEWAGE
444,690
461,817
369,317
434,872
365,188
228,096
215,531
259,997
315,030
482,732
378,480
366,040
352,464
430,042
390,456
341 .645
380,045
POUNDS
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
PER CAPITA
DAILY
0.22
0.27
0.20
0.27
0.21
0.13
0.16
0.15
0.18
0.27
0.22
0.21
0.21
0.21
0.19
0.16
0.19
POUNDS
B.0.0.
PER CAPITA
DAILY
0.1;
0.19
0.18
0.10
0.11
0,11
0.15
0.16
0.14
0.20
0.15
0.16
0.15
0.17
0.16
0.13
0.16
POPULATION
EQU'VALENT
.(7 POUNDS
BCD/CAP/DAY
65,934
63,988
59,029
34,107
38,841
41,725
54,088
45,209
47,251
66,646
49,319
57,0*-*
50,661
68,056
63,487
52,373
67.183
AVERAGE
EQUIVALENT
.17 POUNDS
FAHRENHEIT
55
57
57
58
61
64
71
72
71
66
61
55
62
62
60
61
62
1950-1959
-------
TABLE 4
869
SETTI.EA3LE SOLIDS
MONTHS
-JANUARY
a-B.ltlARY
A".RC!I
APRIL
NaY
JUNE
JULY
AUGUST
SEPTEMBER
OCTOBER
NOVEMBER
DECEMBER
19£4 AVERAGE
1962 AVERAGE
1%1 AVERAGE
1.960 AVERAGE
10 YEAR AVERAGE
RAW
SEWAGE
C,«s
.<*.
4.3
7.4
6.0
5.2
5.2
4.7
4.3
2.9
6.7
9.2
6.7
5.1
5.6
5.4
5.4
2.6
3.1
PRIMARY
EFFLUENT
C.C.
0.1
0.4
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.1
0.1
0.5
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.4
S9.9
99.9
00. 6
99.9
99.9
99. 9
99-9
99.9
99.9
*9.9
9P.7
9S>.6
1950-1959
-------
TABLE 5
870
SUSPENDED SOLIDS AND PER CENT ROMOVAL
MONTHS
JANUARY
ff&RURRY
AKKCH
/WRIL
MAY
JUNE
JULY
AUGUST
SEPTEMBER
OCTOBER
NOVEMBER
DECEMBER
1964 AVERAGE
1S52 AVERAGE
1961 AVERAGE
10 YEAR AVERAGE
RAW
SEWAGE
P.P.M
060
208
176
139
113
121
101
101
141
198
164
128
144
165
145
110
PRIMARY
EFFLUENT
P.P.M.
54
68
57
49
53
60
48
52
60
57
80
51
58
53
55
76
PER CENT
REMOVAL
PRIMARY
TO RAW
66.3
67.3
67.6
623
53.0
50.4
52.4
47/5
57.4
71.2
51.2
60.1
58.2
67.1
62.3
30.7
FINAL
EFFLUENT
P.P.M.
8
10
11
10
5
5
5
8
8
5
7
7
7
6
8
6
PER CENT
REMOVAL
COMPLETE
TREATMENT
55.0
95.1
93.7
S2.3
95. 6
95.9
95,0
92.1
y*.3
sn.s
35.7
S4-.5
W.7
96.4
#*.2
.94. «r
1950-1955
-------
TABLE 6
871
MONTHS
JANUARY
PEBHUARY
MARCH
APRIL
WAV
JJlltS
JtfLY
AUGUST
SEPTEMBER
OCTOBER
NOVEMBER
DECEMBER
1 964 AVERAGE
1 962 AVERAGE
1S61 AVERAGE
i960 AVERAGE
10 YEAR AVERAGE
RAW
SEWAGE
P.P.M
124
i4e
no
52
59
81
98
95
112
143
106
114
101
135
124
91
106
PRIMARY
EFFLUENT
P.P.M.
61
70
61
32
28
28
41
52
53
61
58
71
50
66
64
76
73
PER CENT
REMOVAL
PRIMARY
TO RAW
50.0
50. 0
>4*.5
58.5
52.5
65.4
58.2
45.3
52.7
57.3
45.3
37.7
49.8
51.1
47.5
16.5
30.6
FINAL
EFFLUENT
P.P.M.
19
n
12
8
6
7
10
10
17
19
16
16
13
16
18
11
6
PER CENT
REMOVAL
COMPLETE
TREATMENT
84.7
87.1
89.1
84.6
89.8
91.4
89.8
89.5
84.8
a6.7
84.9
85.9
87i'6
87.5
86.8
86.6
94.1
-------
TABLE 7
872
PER CENT VOLATILE SUSPENDED SOLIDS
MONTHS
JANUARY
FEBRUARY
MARCH
APKIt
HAY
JUNE
JULY
AUfrlttT
SEPTEMBER
OCTOBER
NOVEMBER
DECEMBER
T?64 AVERAGE
1962 AVERAGE
1961 AVERAGE
1960 AVERAGE
10 YEAR AVERAGE
RAW
SEWAGE
73
67
72
65
64
68
72
73
71
76
71
70
70
72
72
73
74
PRIMARY
EFFLUENT
75
71
69
63
68
6S
62
74
64
77
65
72
69
75
74
74
72
MIXED
L 1 q.UOR.
62
66
69
67
66
64
65
65
66
73
67
66
67
64
63
61
66
RETURN
SLUDGE
63
66
68
67
63
64
64
64
62
71
67
66
66
63
63
62
65
1950-1959
-------
TABLE 8
873
GRIT-SCREENINGS-SCUM
HOWTHS
JANUARY
FI3RUARY
ftMCN
/Vftll
MY
JURE
juur
AUtKT
SEPTEMBER
OCTOBER
NOVEMBER
DECEMBER
19«4 TOTALS
1962 TOTALS
1951 TOTALS
1960 TOTALS
10 YEAR AVERAGE
f.jjo .
GRCT
Z70
116
60
255
338
310
358
14
189
136
183
271
2,500
1 ,140
2,030
2,iOO
3^006
, r.rcT nrMQVED
scxeiH
96
75
321
72
105
51
108
189
99
81
120
39
1,356
1,360
1,157
1,335
1,853
91
120
222
78
166
132
156
156
246
174
120
285
1,956
1,294
1,129
1,006
2,114
1950-1959
GRUENDLER SEVftGE SHRE0DERS IN OPERATION AT MAGOUN AVENUE PUMPING STATION
THROUGHOUT 1952. ALDER STREET PUMPING STATION REMOVED MANUALLY.
-------
TABLE 9
pH
MONTHS
JANUARY
FEBRUARY
**RCH
AflWt
WAY
JUNE
JIM
Aitt«ST
CF DT^VMftf £3
*> t JT f ' v fW» ™
OCTOBER
NOVEMBER
DECOIKR
/9J¥ AVERAGE
1962 AVERAGE
1961 AVERAGE
1940 AVERAGE
10 NEAR AVERAGE
RAW
SEWAGE
7.6
7.4
7.3
7.4
7.4
7.1
7.1
7.1
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.4
7.2
7.5
7.5
7.4
7.4
PRIMARY
tffUSIff
7.6
7.6
7.5
7.6
7.6
7.4
7.4
7.4
7.3
7.2
7.1
7.5
7.4
7.4
7.5
7.4
7.4
MIXED
LIOJJOS
7.3
7.3
7.3
7.3
7.4
7.6
7.4
7.4
7.2
7.3
7.2
7.2
7.3
7.2-
7.3
7.2
7.2
RETURN
7.2
7.2
6.8
7.1
7.2
7.2
6.9
7.2
7.0
7.1
7.1
7.1
7.1
7.1
7.1
7.1
7.1
FINAL
ETFLUENT
7.5
7.4
7.5
7.5
7.6
7.5
7.5
7.6
7.0
7.3
7.2
7.3
7.4
7.5
7.5
7.5
7.3
1950-1959
-------
TABLE 10
875
MIXED LIQUOR - RETURN SLISDGE DATA
t
MIXED
SUSPENDED
SOL 1 DS
MO/TWS P.f.M.
4MMY
FEBRUARY
fURCH
APRIL
HAY
1 AMJF?
'^JuN
JULY
Auwsr
.SEPTEMBER
OCTOBER
NOVEMBER
OECEMflER
]&*/ AVFPAC
1961
1372
1471
1570
1597
1557
1598
1744
1967
19i»7
1568
1584
JE1634
1962 AVERAGE 1901
1961 AVERAGMfcSI
79W> AVERAt
10 YEAR
£2195
1790
L 1 QJJOR
SETTLEABLE
SOU 05
30-MINUTES
120
136
149
130
145
149
140
138
144
149
163
148
144
137
127
123
132
RETURN SLUDGE
SLUDGE
INDEX
61
101
103
85
93
92
90
81
74
91
103
95
92
75
69
61
75
WASTE RETURN
SLUDGE SLUDGE
M.G.D. M.G.D.
0.082
1.73
0.83
0.42
0.25
0.21
0.45
0.43
1.01
0.97
0.85
0.79
0.72
0.07'
0.06
0.13
0.15
3.175
3.821
3 .977
4.043
4.052
4.003
3.997
4.020
3.950
3.920
4.210
4.104
4.020
3.751
3.140
3.939
3.283
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
P. P.M.
7923
4588
5366
6423
6460
6285
6226
6906
10280
9599
6363
5511
6728
7373
8586
9407
6991
PER CENT
RETURN BY
VOLUME
30
41
25
31
31
38
39
43
49
42
45
42
40
35
30
33
25
AVERAGE 1950-
1959
-------
TABLE 11
8?6
ABERATION DATA
MOA/THS
JAMARY
FEBRUARY
MARCH
APRIL
MAY
JUNL
JUT
AUWST
.SEfTEflBER
OCTOBER
NOVEMBER
DECEMSEK
J#Y JWCJWWe
WfeAvEXAK
7961 /W&RAGl
n& AKM£g
SEWAGE FLOW
THROUGH
AERATORS
M.G.D.
13.9
13.1
15.1
16.9
16.6
14.5
14.5
13.7
12.6
13.4
13.7
14.4
14.4
14.0
13.8
1S.O
RETURN
SLUDGE
AERATORS
M.G.D.
3.175
3.821
3.977
4.043
JJ.052
4.808
3.P97
W-.020
3.950
3.920
4.210
4.220
4.020
3.751
3.140
3.939
PER CENT
RETURN
SLUDGE BY
VOLUME
22.8
29.1
26.3
23,9
24.4
27,6
27.6
29.3
31.3
29.3
30.7
29.3
28.1
26.5
22.8
25.0
WASTE
SLUDGE TO
PRIMARIES
M.G.D.
.082
0.173
0.800
0.419
0.420
0.440
0.453
0.430
LOOS
0.965
0.853
0.255-
0.613
0.078
0.064
.132
AERATION
DETENTION
PERIOD
HOURS
3.5
3.7
3.2
2.9
3.0
3.4
3.4
3.6
4.0
3.7
3.6
3.5
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.1
FINAL
DETENTION
PERIOD
HOURS
3.2
3.1
2.5
2.3
2.3
3.0
2.9
3.1
3.5
3.1
3.1
3.3
2.9
3.3
3.2
2.9
10 YEAR AVERAGE
1950-1959 16.7
3.283
19.8
.159
3.0
2.6
-------
TABLE 12
877
AIR CONSUPTION
MONTHS
JANWfiY
FEBRUARY
r^RCH
APR'i.
MY
JUM£
JUU
AUGUST
SEPTEMBER
OCTOBER
NOVEMBER
DECEM0E*
I fl*4 AVERAGE
1962 wmez
1961 AVERAGE
J960 AVERAGE
JO YfAK AVERAGE
AIR
MILLION
CUBIC FEET
PER DAY
8.283
4.144-
8.682
8.6)1
8.?85
8.S34
8.713
&.86S
8.652
8.7
-------
873
TABLE 13
COMMINUTORS
MONTHS
JANUARY
fEMUARY
MAKCH
A?RR
WAV
JWE
>W4V
Mf&ttT
•SEPTCMaeR
OCTOBER
jWEMfltt
D£C£«BER
1 964 TOTALS
1962 TOTALS
1951 TOTALS
I960 TOTALS
10 YEAR AVERAGE
TOTAL HOURS IN OPERATION
COMMINUTOR NO. 1
744
696
744
720
744
264
744
744
720
745
720
744
8329
5945
6002
8275
5656
COMMiNUTOR NO. 2
744
6 36
744
720
744
672
3*8
7
-------
TABLE 14
879
AIR BLOWERS
TOTAL HOURS IN OPERATION
MONTHS
JANUARY
FEBRUARY
MARCH
APRIL
MAY
JUNE
JULY
AUGUST
SEPTEMBER
OCTOBER
NOVEMBER
DECEMBER
1564 TOTALS
1962 TOTALS
1961 TOTALS
1960 TOTALS
10 YEAR AVERAGE
1950-1959
NO. 1.
AIR BLOWER
250
168
0
0
0
147
0
70
0
97
0
80
812
501
2634
2409
5440
NO. 2.
AIR BLOWER
427
168
0
0
0
128
0
60
0
96
0
95
974
505
2570
2607
5201
NO. 3
AIR BLOWER
123
112
0
0
0
147
0
62
0
99
0
31
574
521
2678
2397
5468
DIESEL
ENGINE
123
472
744
720
648
501
744
653
720
599
720
674
7318
8030
4723
-------
TABLE 15
880
RETURN SLUDGE PUMPS
MONTHS
JANUARY
FEBRUARY
MARCH
APRIL
MAY
JUNE
JULY
AUGUST
SEPTEMBER
OCTOBER
NOVEMBER
DECEMBER
1964 TOTALS
1962 TOTALS
]961 TOTALS
1560 TOTALS
10 YEAR AVERAGE
PUMP NO, 1 .
744
696
744
720
744
720
744
744
576
505
718
744
8399
8760
7154
8598
7024
TOTAt HOURS IN OPERATION
PUMP NO. 2.
744
622
000
000
000
24
000
000
144
745
96
000
2375
6633
6931
6303
5807
PUMP NO. 3
24
74
744
720
744
695
744
744
720
745
720
744
7419
7175
3076
4094
6536
PUMP NO. 4
7W
€95
744
720
744
720
744
744
720
240
648
744
8207
3442
8761
6637
6308
1950-1959
-------
881
TABLE 16
DETftlTOR AND CLEANING MECHANISM
TOTAL HOURS IN OPERATION
MONTHS
JANUARY
FEBRUARY
MARCH
APRIL
MAY
JUNE
JULY
AUGUST
SEPTEMBER
OCTOBER
NOVEMBER
DECEMBER
1964 TOTALS
1962 TOTALS
1961 TOTALS
1960 TOTALS
10 YEAR AVERAGE
DETRITOR
744
696
744
720
646
47?
425
121
598
665
691
744
7265
7265
7113
8058
5282
CLEANING MECHANSIM
744
696
744
720
646
471
425
121
598
665
691
744
7265
7265
7112
8083
5281
1950-1959
-------
TABLE 17
882
RAW SLUDGE TO DIGESTERS DATA
MONTHS
JANUARY
FEBRUARY
MARCH
APRIL
MAY
JUNE
JULY
AUGUST
SEPTEMBER
OCTOBER
NOVEMBER
DECEMBER
TOTALS
1 964 AVERAGE
1962 AVERAGE
1961 AVERAGE
VOLUME
1000
GALLONS
1237
1052
1198
987
1170
1249
1425
1096
512
615
716
656
11913
993
1149
1109
DRY
SOLIDS
PER CENT
4.5
4.5
3.8
3.6
4.7
4.4
3.8
4.0
4.0
3.0
3.8
3.9
4.0
4.1
3.6
DRY
SOLIDS
1000 LBS.
388
395
380
296
459
458
452
366
171
200
227
213
3617
329
387
334
VOLATILE
SOL IBS
PER CENT
61.7
60.8
68.0
57.6
56.6
53.7
55.0
55.9
59.5-
62.6
66.4
58.5
59.5
60.7
62.2
VOLATILE
SOLIDS
1000 LBS.
240
240
258
170
260
246
247
205
102
125
151
125
2129
194
234
207
PH
6,5
6.6
6.9
7.1
7.1
7.1
7.2
7.2
7.0
7.1
7.1
7.1
7.0
6.4
6.3
-------
883
CM O
• •
UN lf>
CO
UI
ca
ft
Ul
o
CO K\
O
Q 00 — 1
GO o
_J — J HI
^ It
O
X
Ul
z
o >3
UJ
z
_J
_i _i
— o o —
1— CL CO U.
3
I'-
ll H
co
§*"•** •«•
CM O
O *""
ui o
C3
See
Ul ->
-I HO
CO _l tO
in
S!
n
1*0
1
1
1
1
o
in
K»
in
CM
i
i
t
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
1A
CM
CO
•i
f-
CM
1
1
1
1
O
ID
K\
f£
r
1
1
|
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
in
CO
•,
v—
o
o
o
CM*
^"
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
CM
cc
o
o
. GO
T- CO
Ok
vo
1^ CO tO
SCO CO
»<>&
•v CO •
in o\ o\
in »- «-
<— 10
u
Ul
ce
to
ce
cc
CD
Ul
o
on
Ul
>-
n
1
<£
ce
ui
ca
I
Ul
(O
ce
ui
ca
g
o
cr
ui
eo
ui
o
Ul
ui
ui
< CM »-
o OS e»
kl
-------
TABLE 19
884
GAS ENGINE OPERATION
MONTHS
JANUARY
FEBRUARY
MARCH
APRIL
MAY
JUNE
JULY
AUGUST
SEPTEMBER
OCTOBER
NOVEMBBR
DECEMBER
1964 TOTAL
1962 TOTAL
1961 TOTAL
MAXIMUM
MINIMUM
AIR BLOWN
HOURS IN CU. FT. GAS GAL OIL IflOO's CUBIC
OPERATION CONSUMED. CONSUMES FEET OF AIR
334
408
744
720
407
496
744
649
720
600
652
659
7,133
8,030
4,769
744
298
493,900 1,219
....... ... 7 £07
25,200 5,634
277,00 2,246
317,010 2,535
200,700 5,275
5,801
6CCQ
________ 5 7Qf)
179,400 5,965
_______ f. <;i?
1,493,201 59,026
4,422,100 68,775
2,802,349 34,355
743,300 8,148
0 1,692
129,762
145,639
269,132
365,173
136,638
178,740
270,003
237,910
259,405
218,817
263,064
248,888
2,723,171
2,706,513
1,623,600
299,922
107,145
FUEL COMSl/MEfl
PER 1000 CU. FT.AIR
GAL. OIL. CU.FT.GAS
.01
.02
.01
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.01
3.80
o.efc
2.03
1.78
0.75
0.58
3.80
0.58
-------
TABLE 20
SUMMARY SHOWING MONTHLY SAURY AND PAYROLL DISTRIBUTION
885
MONTHS
JANUARY
FEBRUARY
MARCH
APRIL
MAY
JUNE
JULY
AUGUST
SEPTEMBER
OCTOBER
NOVMEBER
DECEMBER
1964 TOJALS
1962 TOTALS
SEWAGE
TREATMENi
PLANT
4,000.00
3,750.00
4, 324. 75
4,000.00
4,000.00
5,526.05
4,991.12
5,141.68
5,227.44
4,555.50
4,643.20
4,773.85
54,933.59
180.973.59
f GENERAL
MAINTENANCE
9,218.92
11,215.92
11,564.01
11,689.75
11,433.41
13,319.13
11,801.37
11,203.37
12,230.73
11,405.43
13,039.41
15,593.66
143,745.11
SEWER
DIVISION
5,727.83
7,759.97
7,450.81
8,425.30
8,494.69
12,605.56
9,340.82
8,570.83
8,588.32
8,074.93
7,581.12
8,911.35
101,531.53
107.559.38-
ALDER
AVENUE
PUMPING
STATION
1,781,24
1,900.00
1,900.00
1,900.00
1 , 900. 00
2,398.08-
2,294.55
1,900.00
1,900.00
1,900.00
1,900.00
1,900.00
23,573.67
25.500.00
TOTALS
20,727.99
24,62F.S9
25,239.57
26,015.05
25,828.10
33,878.82
23,427.66
26,815.88
27.946.**9
25,935.86
27,163.73
31,178.86
323,783.90
=51 1.037. 97
TRANSFER OF THE JURISDICTION OF THE BUREAU OF PUMPING STATIONS TO THE BOARD
OF SANITARY COMMISSIONERS EFFECTED JANUARY 1, 1953. THE OPERATION AND
MAINTENANCE OF ALL PUMPING STATIONS - SANITARY AND STORM WATER - ASSUMED BY
THE SANITARY DISTRICT AS OF JANUARY 1, 1953
TRANSFER OF THE JURISDICTION OF THE SEWER DEPARTMENT TO THE BOARD OF SANITARY
COMMISSIONERS EFFECTED JANUARY 1, 1961. THE CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE AND
REPAIR OF ALL CITY SEWERS. ASSUMED BY THE SANITARY DISTRICT JANUARY 1, 1961.
-------
TABLE
SOHHARY SHOWING OTHER UTILITY COSTS (1)
886
MONTHS
JANUARY
FEBRUARY
MARCH
APRIL
MAY
JUNE.
JULY
AUGUST
SEPTEMBER
OCTOBER
NOVEMBER
DECEMBER
1964
1962
SEWAGE
TREAT-
MENT
PLANT
$ 1,105.53
1,097.67
1,377.52
2,146.87
278.98
269.86
631 .84
520.40
555.90
597.97
573.00
1,042.54
10,198.08
4,138.75
ALDER
STREET
PIMPING
STAT.'ON*
9.41
9.94
9.41
28.28
43.50
22.81
26.38
23.88
25.15
26.19
25.38
25.99
276.32
384.23
MAGOUN
AVENUE
PUMPING
STATJ ON
6.41
6.41
6.41
17.13
27.47
17.55
21.85
19.16
19.16
19.16
19.16
19.16
199.03
203.70
MICHIGAN
AVENUE
PUMPING
STATION
1.70
1.70
1.70
1.70
24.37
14.45
14.45
14,45
14.45
14.45
14.45
14.45
132.32
151.73
REMOTE (2)
METERING
CHtMNiL
SERVICES
23.62
23,62
23.62
23.62
23.62
23.62
23.62
23.62
23,62
23.62
23.62
23.62
283.44
307.06
TOTALS
1,1'*6.67
1,139.31*
1,418. $6
2,217. «0
397. 9t
3W.29
773.14
601.51
638.28
£81.39
€55.61
1,125.76
11,089.19
5,185.47
(1) TELEPHONE ANO TELEGRAPH, REMOTE METERING CIRCUIT, GAS AND WATER.
(2) INCLUDES SERVICES TO MARKSTOW8, MICHIGAN AVENUE, CANAL STREET, AND ROXANNA.
PUMP STATION.
* TRANSFER OF THE JURISDICTION OF THE BUREAU OF PUMPING STATIONS TO THE
BOARD OF SANITARY COMMISSIONERS EFFECTED JANUARY 1, 1953. THE 6PERATION
AND MAINTENANCE OF ALL PUMPING STATIONS - SANITARY AND STORM WATER-
ASSUMED BY THE SAKITARY DISTRICT AS OF JANUARY 1, 1953.
TRANSFER OF THE JURISDICTION OF THE SEWER DEPARTMENT TO THE BOARD OF
SANITARY COMMISSIONERS EFFECTED JANUARY 1, 1961. THE CONSTRUCTION,
MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR OF ALL CITY SEWERS. ASSUMED BY THE SANITARY DISTRICT
JANUARY 1, 1961.
-------
TABLE 22
SUMMARY SHOWING MONTHLY FUEL OIL COSTS
887
MONTHS
JANUARY $
FEBRUARY
MARCH
APRIL
MAY
JUNE
JULY
AUGUST
SEPTEM3ER
OCTOBER
NOVEMBER
DECEMBER
1964 TOTALS
1962 TOTALS
SEWAGE
TREATMENT
PLANT
561.35
459,42
817.60
841.26
400.00
450.00
400.00
700.00
400.00
700.00
400.00
846.98
6,956.61
8,309.94
ALDER STREET MAGOUN AVENUE
PUMPING STATION PUMPING STATION TOTALS
466.92 1S6.80 1,225.07
_ oc xo cou 7«
•XKC on --- 1 173 SQ
_,__ _ gitf 07
__ 400 00
___ „ ii5Q QA
______ |iQo 00
700 00
iiQQ GO
700 00
500 cn ...... £7? 50
71? 00 ...... 1 558 Qfi
1,757.42 384.83 9,098. 86
1,400.34 661.91 10,372.19
TRANSFER OF THE JURISDICTION OF THE BUREAU OF PUMPING STATIONS TO THE BOARD OF
SANITARY COMMISSIONERS EFFECTED JANUARY 1, 1953. THE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
OF ALL PUMPING STATIONS - SANITARY AND STORM WATER - ASSUMED BY THE SANITARY
DISTRICT AS OF JANUARY 1, 1953.
TRANSFER OF THE JURISDICTION OF THE SEWER DEPARTMENT OF THE BOARD OF SANITARY
COMMISSIONERS EFFECTED JANUARY 1, 1961. THE CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE AND
REPAIR OF ALL CITY SEWERS. ASSUMED BY THE SANITARY DISTRICT JANUARY I, 1961.
-------
to
«S
CO
£
CO
CO
o
o
ce
Ul
§
ELECTRIC 1
IRY SHOWING
Sfe
V)
_1
£
o
«£ « z
u ui z o
•M* ^^ MM ^B
- >§£
Z < o- v>
o
0 0 Z
ce z o
_l Q. H
o 3 P
1- OL to
Z
Z Z 0
gi£
ce. a. co
go z
Z 0
*: SI K
£ a. co
(3 Z
H Z 0
_J LU — —
z tr 3; -=f
h-
O CO CL, CO
C3 Z
z LU z o
0 Z 0- 1-
O UJ 2t <£
rf > r> t-
x
00
o
l>«
5
0
vo
»—
ID
CM
8
IO
1
O»
CM
0\
JANUARY
o
VO
tn
CO
r*
VO
0
in
CM
in
m
o
in
in
o
•
r»
in
o
CO
o
to
5
o
o
CM
VO
O
0
«o
CO
in
o
i*»
CO
o
I-.
FEBRUARY 1
•a-
r»
CM
in
r«>
4-
0
in
CM
in
in
in
to
in
o
o
CM
o
in
r-
$
ro
CM
O
CM
O
O
CO
vo
o
3-
o
r»-
CM
Jo
&
Ol
o
CO
in
CO
ro
.
Z
vo
s
_)
i
<£
CO
in
CO
in
(O
cr
0
in
CM
in
o
o
in
to
o
o
58
o
0
8
in
•
w
CO
O
O
VO
r»
in
o
CO
CO
in
00
Ol
to
o
CO
o
iO
CM
%
«-.
r-
*
UJ
-?
VO
d-
in
in
«o
o
in
CM
tn
O
o
in
10
0
o
to
in
0
o
o
CM
o
in
$
CM
in
vo
o
d-
vo
i*.
CM
d-
in
o\
$
>
_i
-s
o
f^
IO
o
ID
CM
in
0
o
in
to
o
in
CM
m
o
o
o
CM
CO
00
r>
CO
CM
CM
to
CD
VO
C>
CM
CO
vo
l*»
**
AUGUST 1
CM
r^
d-
m
vo
to
0
-
CM
r*"
o
CM
o%
to
o
v~
lf\
O\
to
O
1
>n
CM
£
o
s
o
in
in
t->
*
VO
to
o\
0\
-*.
i5
0 0
0 t-
CO
>-
DC 0
-
UJ *~
< K »
Ul Z r>
=> CC >-
«SS
UJ 0 3
i£5|
0 O U.
— o
O < CO
— oc d
(- W
Q —
UJ G£
o: F co
UJ ^ >-
£»5
|— Ul -
u- a: LU
sss
gis
-------
TABLE 24
889
SUHMARY SHOWING MONTHLY CHEMICAL COSTS
ALUMINUM FERRIC
MONTHS SULFATE LlHE CHLORIDE
JANUARY 968.25 2,676.23
FEBRUARY 9fiO 00 RQfi 00 --
MARTH .... __._.. -- ... .
APRIL .... ......
MAY .... ...... _.
JUNP .... _ — ...
Mil V - . .....
AilfttKT - ..... ......
CCpTCMRCD __ _ .- . ........
Of TORFR ... ...... ........
KinwrMRPD _ ..... .
ncr PMRPP .... ...... ........
1964 TOTALS 960.00 1,864.25 2,676.23
1963 TOTALS 4,014.00 3,247.50 5,781.06
LIQUID MURIATIC
CHLORINE ACID
8
7 en
.... 89 50
774 80
97*4 AH ....
U1 9 50 ....
961.80 90.00
460.00 3.38
TOTALS
3,644. 48
i gfi3 5Q
82 SO
274 80
974 80
412 20
6,552.28
13,505.94
-------
890
TABLE 25
BUDGET FOR 196*4*
BUDGET CLASSIFICATION
FOR
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SANITATION
SANITARY MAINTENANCE AND GENERAL EXPENSE FUND
PERSONAL SERVICES $ 339,417.60
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 189,785.00
SUPPLIES 32,750.00
MATERIALS 11,200.00
CURRENT CHARGES 25,675.00
PROPERTIES 7,000.00
TOTAL $ 605,827.60
SANITARY DISTRIST BOND FUND
CURRENT OBLIGATION S 355,855.00
DEBT PAYMENTS 574,000.00
TOTAL $ 929,855.00
6RAND TOTAL — ALL FUNDS $1,535,682.60
* TRANSFER OF THE JURISDICTION OF THE BUREAU OF PtWPING STATIONS TO
THE BOARD OF SANITARY COMMISSIONERS EFFECTED JANUARY 1, 1953. THE
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF ALL PUMPING STATIONS - SANITARY WATER-
ASSUMED BY THE SANITARY DISTRICT AS OF JANUARY 1, 1953.
TRANSFER OF THE JURISDICTION OF THE SEWER DEPARTMENT TO THE BOARD
OF SANITARY COMMISSIONERS EFFECTED JANUARY 1, 1961. THE CONSTRUCTION,
MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR OF ALL CITY SEWERS. ASSUMED BY THE SANITARY
DISTRICT JANUARY 1, 1961.
-------
891
1 EAST CHICAGO SANITARY DISTRICT Dr. John B. Nicosia
Mayor
2 5200 Indianapolis Blvd.
East Chicago, Indiana 46312 Cornel A. Leahu
3 Superintendent
4 February 26, 1965
Conference Regarding V/ater Pollution
In the Calumet District March 2, 196|>,
Honorable Gentlemen:
In retrospect to the previous statistical
data, I wish to bring forth this additional information.
10 The dissolved oxygen demand of the East
11 Chicago Municipal Sanitary District effluent, as dis-
12 charged into the Grand Cilumet River and the Lake
13 Michigan Basin, is on the average for the year 1964, 3*163
14 in population equivalent (PE).
15 The average coliform density of the East
16 Chicago Municipal Sanitary District sewage treatment
17 plant effluent, as documented by impartial laboratory
18 analysis of the Gary-Hobart Water Corporation, discharged
19 into the Grand Calumet River and the Lake Michigan Basin,
20 was, for the month of February 1965, in the order of 7.2
21 per 100 ml. Bacterial disinfection of this magnitude
22 indicates an extremely successful treatment process.
23 The Sanitary District, at the behest of
24 our tireless Mayor, Dr. John B. Nicosia, is presently
25 studying feasibility reports and negotiating with industry
-------
892
the possibility of diverting industrial wastes (phenolics,
ammonia, nitrates, nitrites, cyanide, to the District for
final treatment. Studies at present indicate this may be
accomplished by settling in a deep lagoon, aerating and
chlorinating, prior to discharge into the Grand Calumet
River and the Lake Michigan Basin.
This report and statistical data and the
Sanitary District of the City of East Chicago, Indiana,
is hereby respectfully submitted to the Honorable Dr.
10 John B. Nicosia, Mayor, The Sanitary Commissioners,
11 Honorable Secretary Anthony J. Celebrezze of the
12 Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Honorable
13 Murray Stein, Chairman of the conference, and the
14 Indiana State Board of Health, this 2nd day of March,
15 1965.
16 /S/ Cornel A. Leahu, Superintendent
17 East Chicago Sanitary District
18
(Text continued on Page 908)
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-------
893
•9QTO Nl SdWnd 33QmS
rtVU 33UH1 JO 3NO
H011VXS DNIdW/ld
iS aSQltf W04f.i
-<
n
») TJ H
m » x
2 — a
O 2 C
•j> m
z a
-<
«
M m o
•o -\ x
m -4 m
z r-
o-o
m z •»!
«/i -n
It O
•H a
-4
r- a
Z CO
O H
^f «.
> OJ
z c
3t -1
at —
• o
z
-1
o
CM
•o
a
H --> S
0 £ >
^ CO
"O CO -1
a H m
— m
2 __ to
3> S> r-
a co C
-< o o
c n
a -« ni
co — • m
-* o z
a §5 -l
— rn
o> o a
c *n to
-1
— H X
o o m
z -l a
> m
S r-
-o o
a <
— m
2 a
3>
|£
ni
™»
a
z
0 H
O
"•
Z 3
o m
0 J>
2 to
— C
z a
o m
•n
r
o
C
T> a' H
x m x
r- 2 a
o o e
a <•
— mo
z rn
m o -»
a a
3> — —
0 H -1
o to o
m • a
o
H
H 0-
O
n
O
z
-l
30
o
f
m o
t»
z
H
H
X
-I
O
13 -I
O X
— a
z o
-I C
r> o
C X
e
•o
o
e
2 m
a
-<
o
o
o
a
M
-------
894
r r r
INTRODUCTION OF AIR TO
GIVE SEWAGE SPIRAL FLOW TO
INCREASE LENGTH OF CONTACT
WITH OXYGEN (AIR) IN TANK.
SECONDARY REDUCTION PROCESS BY
GUGGENHEIM BROTHERS
NEW YORK, N.Y.
RETURN SLUDGE
REMOVED HERE
ADOUT 30% OF
TOTAL PLANT
FLOW.
THRU ONE OF
FOUR RETURH
SLUDGE PUMPS
IN BUILDING,
SCHEMATIC CROSS-SECTION OF
' SEMftfiE TREATMENT PLANT
EAST CHICAGO, INDIANA
HON. DR. JOHN B. NICOSIA
MAYOR
CORNEL A. LEAHU, SUPERINTENDENT
SANITARY DISTRICT BOARD
OF
COMMISSIONERS
PETER E. AUKSEL
AMERIGO G. GIANN IN I
CARLOS BORGE
MARTIN A. KARR, ESQ.
ATTORNEY
-------
-------
1 CONNECTED POPULATION liT •/, -joo
H
O
r
OVERALL
•
•si
—
S C
-
3 E
fs
Z$
f>
5l
r 3
N U
m
' I
3
3
OTHER OPERATING COSTS ~Z,7'%-°4
SECONDARY
bi
•s
*<>
1 AVERAGE S. S. REMOVED... /fj3 fJT LBS. PER DAY
OTHER UTILITIES /^37?.ie>
CHEMICALS >'(.*?. To
PRIMARY
O1
^
1 Utnc.^HI_ l«i wnnn«. ,w.. EQUIVALENT
| ..-n^r -nn ».w '» . %7 '* 1 =•= -r O n *3.?8F. POPULATION
PLECTRICITY PURCHASED /j ?« ?. 7o
TREATMENT
IB
p
0
CO
VI
)
1
r
V
>
r
n
3
o ~C
* -0 V
3
^^
-tx
1 ^
*1
J
^
S^
»J
^ ^
*
D^l
D » i
fr . L
< -0
O SJ N.
r c^ <"-
u] i
UJ '
|
*u
5-
0 °
>f M
(N
X*
•O 3J
C
"n "^
>^
%«
i
£
rs
<
<^
?*
"^
%
*
Q
«
31
Ml
**t
tu'
S
?
^
-t,
0
KI
1 ?•*
u --x
u U>
s r-
*r
A) *•*
t. -t
D
(J
N
•XI
N]
X*
i|
^
X
UJ
s
^J
! nt
^ -0
O h>\
XI -~
as
^
•^
u ^
o *-•
•-O ••$
2\ a*
•i.i.
i, r-
a 0
tw U)
O >->
III "J
fc^N
i?SJ
£ ^
fc, ^.
*3 >5
¥«
*"* •£•.
f ?
•*J N
?5r
•A^
?2
K*>
N N,
£<
J^
s f
-O *\
33
£
i $L>
^
« ^
H
< ^
is,
i N
J3 >J
t
ft
s^
N 2
< »
x t!
*s^
s*
si
*5J
VJ
^
rx
4
^>
Z
O
£
VJ
-t
O
0
~n
-C
-t.
J3
U)
o
^
"\
*i
?
<
o
^
OJ
5
f
? -
-G •*
C^ -J
S °
Si^
\A ^
^
So *.
~^l x
to
«-. n
»ci r-
3 t
"» 0
s^
• 1
^ *
a Q
0 n
-/
i<\
2
^
rn \
P *
&&
*
J ^j Sj
) Nl «0
0 0
:s
U UJ MJ
a o
^ -0 - N
J NJ
~ ?f
^?;^
^ S1 •N
k^t.
>I Tsl sj
^ L*\ s
N kj
-o --a ^
XJ oQ -»
<) tX «
^ 0 W
^K
•O -Q
^S
>.v,
^
45
-0
•^4 (K
^^
^ ft
§
O O
<
^
^
?
<
^
9
^
'
X
<1
*1
o
a
«
N
Ho
•^
"1
oc
S)
~
«1
o
^
^
«.'
^>
tX)
i
Q
)
-1
1
*
U
a
Vj
1
Lj
S
*"0
afl
a
0
^
N|
--*
J->
-0
Li
f-
?
N
^
a
«
^
*
*
C
n
0
s?
-*,
«
Vj
-0
N
Li
Q
Ui
£•
Lu
?
-ft
s
^
c
5
s
<
s
2
X
IN
<
^
jl
m
?0
~4
O
S
»j
-^
-
*o
-^
-0
o
0
=0
<
~«j
o
-o
s
••
-t
IM
o
p
1
I
-o
s
14
"K
^
^
£
i
z
f
s
uu
li
<
•*,
^
2
£
T°
0
?
Ul
<
S:
*
f
§•
f
S
o
Cxi
t\
o
o
Z
^
ft
-*
1
a
i:
<•>
"
MJ
OJ
-S
M
*
UJ
S
S
i?
Vl
o
I
J^
»
£
u
^
^
^
^
•4
o
*
-1
XI
9
•*s
tx
"
Ul
It
W)
-0
-o
y
Og
oj
w
N
MJ
'?
>
|=-
-n
-0
i
0
3
*
Vj
<
t\
<
5
t
-0
UJ
U»
lo
^5-
^
*
i
0
t.
2
NJ
O
^
L?
^
k
^
"V
U
>
-Ci
,
1
^
w
>
a
-t,
0
^
i
K!
m
N
X
U
CK
•s:
^
S"
V
>Q
BJ
Jj
5o
-
SLJ
i
°«
-o
>
£
r
•-o
VI
Al
U)
^
^
^
S
S!
«->
^~
5:
LI
(N
•C
•fc. *** *•
3 ? ^
p* t i
-0 *> *
u -^ -t
^ ^ 4=
U, w^ u
3j
^
Nl
^3;
Hi,«s <~
L» ^j L
i>^«
*- ^ s
ci<\ ^ B
o m -<
i^»"
tX) c><] ~
i <• ^_
is'i
w v*»,aj
~~. W IN
!x ^
j Xj
^ ?T PE^1
i. GALLON or
_e>
*c PC"^D H"s
C
ut
c
N HOUHS
^ TO DICESTEHS
,! GAL. X 1000
TO DIGESTERS
. cu n x tooo
GAS CU FT PER
LB VOL ADDED
„ «) D of) r[LTEn
HOURS
J S^ BED SLUDGE OW
"^
*\ OJ C E
S* LIME
0
^ IRON
"• » ALUM
UVE
^ RAW
^ PRIMARY
10 LIQUOR
>H RETURN
"^ SLUDGE
^ HNAL
j RAW
^ PRIMARY
JJ FIN'L
SLUoet
CONDT
SEWAGE
TREATMENT
I
O
0
p
o
WEATHER
1 GENER/
INFORMAT
2
1 GRIT
I CHAMBER
MT,
1 =
§5
! AERAT
O
Z
Tl
|
SLUDGE DISPOSAL
o
n
o
ANALYTICAL DATA
\ CORNEL A. LEAHU SUPER
MONTHLY REPORT OF OPERATION
EAST CHICAGO, INDIANA SEWAGE TREATMENT
GUGGENHEIM BIOCHEMICAL TREATMENT
NTE:.T:£?
-------
-------
«5;»jS;S-j lO"'1-; •"'•«! ; ^ho'-e^i M j Mil i^NV^-o; ; rKs
kllTtiS!
js.^jjg£*
"i "ip
t*:S
H^|i 1
' '. i I .
I
•!*£?!"'"'*! ?:
:li
M :
III!
M* z
* H X 8 II W , - .. ..
Uii.li tiinii;
§ S S 5 2
? » S S S
Slj !6 i"
01? l-l i;4 O l«
> . 15 :; !? 'B
|!"
ii!
' ' £ «O <,>JX O" ! i
0 ->^ 21 ,WRAW
sIi/oGe-<7l
! :
^p^^^^^^^,^^«^ b^ /JSSa1.0^ !
: i tfrStl'-M ^ -•„««=,«„«
SfeVS. ","'",'.
-^ Ol -^* *0 ' ' '
D
S<5
! U G*SPrtooucTi»W ' JJC
i ^ eu, «-.*,« %)
; i ! ! ' i : : «•! o«ueeo ' ^ I
' | ' «• ew, rr< x >oee }
**$***$*$$$
?' f' * *'"f ?'
S"fe W: «l/PE«*
s £* ** **"7 '''^
^ ! 30UID3
' , Q surmiff
^ A SLUOO
^ - , GAL. tc
! ^, TOT/tL
M' oioe*
ilT^rfT
**##- C^L. X (WO
tATA*ST~ ft
E WITHprtjIWJM
IO*tf
SOLIP5 IN
co «-uoae-^i
1
1
j
i
i
1
. ( i ' , , t 1 ! * TXdML wot, SOI.JDC
| ' ' ' , , | w iNDicesTfo SLUDce~#
I n -pj 5 > 05
i- ;| | if
^5
i ;« |»
^ 5 5S
1
. ,
S? >J >
** '* x
•aiel
-------
» s
3 S
s 3
3 *
! i
5 ?
!
S
-
z
i
i
s
n
;
<
*• ;
i
\\
j
i
» '
*
K -
;
u
t
•
5
1
g
1
t
i
fi
i
i
!
e
H
n
i
i
[
I.
t
n
-)» -? S.T.P.
*\*""~" '^7^'j
'?'
i j i
-------
«,? 5t^S >vJ iP ~ '5 -o <» *-a o^,^,-*^^,— , , &AI ot MO*«T«
E ^ «">5Hl£;-Jll^r!«rn^^|H,3:1l^1^,-ni-l DAY OF w.»tc "
| , | | 'V P-ftfCI^I7j|TI««- WCHfS
------- An error occurred while trying to OCR this image.
-------
•x
V)
\
^
i it» f"*
£s?
^»s
X,
3;£x,
ps?
•A £s. -4
*s- •"
^ iw -^
£ o «
« IN ^
!•« ^ ^
yi ^ -t
lu W cw
>1 ^ >J
^ -o °
wl^
II
"k x6 XI
-t 00 0,
000
i3 ««
X X|
U, »
°l« ^
il X
^ 00 0
Su 0
321
IK
^ a
-o (A
5j o-
^ *
=!*
^
0
oC) CN
Uj ^
0 0
<^xl
•ts "
?£
^v
0 »J
M^
a~*
o
0
0
I
n
N x
O 0
x
^5;
ȣ
53
*J **
-^
Sj <
<•*
SJ ?»
Is- J:
s;$
W fc.
t*\ <
DO E^
-fl ^
-t «
t» U
Q Q
< -*
Ul *
u o
y, «.
^
-o
G*.
I
AJ
S
^ 5
-S oQ
w^cA
A-t
N ^
* C-
^ -fc
-« -t
< *
X. N
NI x;
v, H
li K<
u s
Q 0
"f^ -X
&Q 1-
O> Is
Jo ^
~4 ^
0 I
~~
t
IL, s
ft '
0
J^
o
5
NJ
^
-h
>•
1-JJ
XI
x**
^
41 o
-0
^ Uj
Ci
s^
"<
" V
** -t.
't3
0 0
J N
m
j »
3 ?
- \
*1N
S X
1 Q
.t
V
^*l
** xj
~l x(
e\ so
v\ xi
IX s6
?$
!s K
^ t
J?
°1 -t
o4^*
Nl *<1
P
5u 01
OO DO
-^
^ KI
Jo "-
--. o
Si;
° a
X is,
0 »
-sj ?S
xj N
«x.
ss
.
IUL^
^^
5-5
£H
^jS,
^l
X ~fc
XI Cs
-fc Uj
^
Ono,
U, .(.
b o
b rx
iS
L) -^
sj ^
uJ *->
-«
-sj U
0 •
H
^
5!
N
s^
s;
a
0
s.
V1
-0
-0
ts.
-^
oo
•^
Ui
Q
0
j
U
o
*;
Cr
fr
»
5
t
«
ie
^
N
i
^5
Vi
0
^
Ul
*s
O
00
£
0
SJ
Ul
0
^ i
"I V
N O
x t
x c-
J-t
\| V
s ^
*' (J
ft S.
^^
* ^
"^ -J
"* &
0 c
N C
V. V
M \i
•^ *
rx Q
t x
«x
N '
I
c
V] V
* c
- -a
^
\ **
^
v°*
^ -«
g
J •*.
> oQ
:?
^
o s?
> -s
8?
0
j «»
g Ul
1 ^
J ^
^
0
0
*J -t
3 s^
t«
D
9
S
cQ
tv
<
C;
*
•Q
Ul
Uj
^
fx
^
00
5
1
0
(\
"1
s
t.
^
<.
o
k
M
Hi
S
4.
Oc
DO
"1
0
XI
0
^
*
UI
(-
»
06
0
v,
U)
Q
*
•^
0
ft
°>
0
o
SI
^
0
--o
^
N
vt.
*
$
i-
il
Q
a
0
IM
"N
«
S
^
5
NI
^
tt
^
5
c\
V
V)
"N
•<
$
oo-> S t
x
0
*5
?
t\
U]
£
^
Ul
X
-fc
xi
U
"»
ts
o
Vj
t;
(S
x
X
s
o
!
-
OQ
0
*
-
Ul
Q
2
"^
£
9
Nl
0
a
OO
U)
«
X
RAW
PRIMARY
RAW
PlNAL
•PRNTNT
AVC
SUSPEND-
ED SOLIDS
f P M
PERCENT
VOLATILE
SET TEST
3O MIN
'«""'
EO SOLIDS
PERCENT
VOLATILE
AERATION
FINAL
NO. 1
NO Z
NO 3
NO 4
NO 1
NO 2
NO 3
NO 4
NO 1
NO. 2
NO. 3
NO, 4
Z
0
z
P
ro
2
0
U
z
P
iv
z
0
z
P
U
z
0
8*
g«
On
-§
"3
X
•O
O
5c.
mjz
O
0
Z
O
73
C
D
0
D
C
D
m
D
m
S3
cn
m
C
m
SINVIV
i
i?
O
o
/i
T3
o
rn
Z
1/1
2
3:
rn
o
•n
S
S
^
PENDED S
O
6
s;
d
r-
^
1
S
,
Z
Z
^
O
5
>
o
•n
S
o
0
VI
O
o
z
m
r
J*
r~
m
^
c
c
Pi
33
Z
R
O
c
0
m
m
z
X
m
ra
O
o
R
£
O
r
-I
3>
m
%
z
o
X
11
g
asiss
H
CO
"0
m
z
m
z
~H
rn
H
O
n:
O:
G^ "
n'
r
z-
J> *
£;
jt
in4
>^
(D
m
c
7^ (
m-
H
T)
r~
2:
H
- 0
-° 2
s
2
j
1
r
<
D
n
t)
^
TI
D
D
TI
•U
>
H
~)
2
3
_»
I
-------
OD
^
0?
------- An error occurred while trying to OCR this image.
-------
V ^C
-------
V?
Q
N
«
. ^
^
i
a
r
^
-o
-o
>n
aj
.
W
«
?
^
Q
0
p
^
Sx
1
n
..
N.
H
S
I
^
t
1
p
s!
§
3
3
x
P
s
^
N
s.
Q
^
^
t
«A
3
X
:-
Z
>
n
IX)
0
J
2
z
n
•*
\j
fc;
»
^
Vj
ii
^
??
v,
»:
^
>
X
J
z
>
-------
908
i MR. LEAHTJ: Are there any questions?
2 MR. KLASSEN: Yes, one phrase that you used, Mr.
Leahu, interest!] me.
You said the sewage treatment effluent
has better characteristics, as I recall your statement,
than the water out in the lake.
Do you want to amplify on that just a
little bit? What do you mean by "better characteristics"?
MR. LEAHUi Better characteristics in respect,
10 Mr. Klassen, judging from the Gary-Hobart Water
11 Company, the most probable number counts on coliforms
12 coming into the raw water intake — the average in the
13 neighborhood of 288 on the most probable number — we
14 average 7.2. Another thing, our suspended solids are
15 at a very low level. We do not have to have heavy
16 waste material such as rage, lumber, garbage that is
17 dumped out by boats on the lake and things such as that.
18 We have no fish coming out of our
19 effluent which also can clog an intake water pipe of a
20 water treatment plant.
21 MR. KLASSEN: This statement, I was trying to
22 correlate with one that the Mayor made — that the bathing
23 beaches in the lake are never closed. Do we conclude
24 from that that it is safer to swim in the effluent of
25
-------
2
3
4
5
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
909
your sewage treatment plant than out in the lake?
MR. LEAHU: Presently, yes.
(Laughter.)
MR. KLASSEN: Thank you.
MR. POOLE: Bear with us just a little longer.
6 I I am going to call on Mayor A. M. Katz
of Gary at this time. Mayor Katz.
MAYOR KATZ: Mr. Poole, Mr. Chairman, distinguished
conferees, ladies and gentlemen, I suppose it might be
10 said that the bellicose mayor has already testified
11 and the docile one is about to testify, but I do think
12 that Mayor Nicosia has pointed out a matter that was of
13 great concern to us in northern Indiana, the apparent
14 lack of the presence of many of the industries in the
15 City of Chicago, their presence here to testify as to
their particular problems and, of course, a study of
the agenda that has been distributed would certainly
give ground to the fears that we had.
However, the explanation has been given
and I trust that they will be held to account for their
distributive share of the pollution that I think all
of us in all truthfulness realize does exist.
I would like to take this opportunity
to congratulate this committee on its efforts to assemble
pertinent information relative to the conservation of
-------
910
one of man's most essential elements, water.
It is necessary for the future welfare
of our nation and its people, that a program for the
preservation of our Nation's water supply be developed
and implemented, and in order to bring this about,
procedures such as we are involved in today, are
essential and necessary. This effort is to be applauded
by all — for from efforts such as this, the problems
of communities throughout America are being focused
10 into their proper perspective.
If it were not for the efforts of the
12 Muskie Hearings of 1963> and the assistance which
13 became available as a direct result of those hearings,
14 I am sure, the strides now being made in air pollution
15 control would still be discussed in terms of future
16 action.
17 Historic data as to man's needs for
18 water for his own personal use, and of the need for
19 water for the growth and development of our industrial
20 and business community is well known.
21 What we are and should be concerned with
22 today, is the development and implementation of action,
23 both immediate and long-range, for the abatement of
24 man's negligence in the treatment of his water supply,
25 and the abatement of the abuse of man's water facilities,
-------
911
I represent the City of Gary, Lake
County, Indiana, the largest industrial community located
in Northern Indiana. Our greatest asset is our location
at the southern tip of Lake Michigan, which represents
our single source of water supply. Without this supply
of water our community could not support its citizens,
nor could it sustain its industries. The protection
and the safeguarding of our supply of water is of
prime importance to our community.
10 We are a city of over 178,000 people
11 who respect our neighboring communities, and try to the
12 best of our ability, to control the treatment of waste
13 waters from our City into the common carrier.
14 We are proud of our city and its
15 industries; we are also aware of our failures and
16 limitations in the control of water pollution. We
17 have done much, as I will explain later, yet we know
18 there is much more to be desired in total control of
19 wastes.
20 All the sewage of the City of Gary is
21 handled by the Gary Sanitary District. The Gary
22 Sanitary District is a municipal corporation constituted
23 by authority of the original Sanitary District Act of
24 1917. It was organized in 1938, and the first meeting
25 of the Board of Sanitary Commissioners was held on May
-------
912
i 16,1938.
2 Prior to that date, considerable work
3 had been done by the City Engineering Department in
4 developing plans for sewage disposal in the City of
5 Gary.
6 A Sanitary District is established for
7 specific purposes — to collect liquid wastes, and to
8 bring these wastes through intercepting sewers to a
9 treatment works. After treatment, these wastes can be
10 discharged into a drainage outlet without polluting the
11 outlet or causing a nuisance. To state this more
12 precisely, a Sanitary District is administered solely
13 to protect public health.
14 Gary, being a second class city, has a
15 Board of Sanitary Commissioners, three in number. The
16 City Engineer is a member of the Board by virtue of his
17 office. The other two members are appointed by the
18 Mayor. All members are appointed for four years except
19 the City Engineer, whose term is concurrent with that
20 of the Mayor. No two members' terms of office expire in
21 the same year.
22 Under the Sanitary District Act, the
23 Board of Sanitary Commissioners has broad powers. It
24 can hire engineers, attorneys, levy taxes for operational
25 expenses, and issue bonds to carry out construction
-------
913
projects in connection with its responsibilities. It
also has the power of eminent domain. The Board has
exclusive authority to expend district funds. Bonding
power was originally limited to two percent of the
assessed valuation of a district. Later this was
raised by legislative acts to four percent, then to
six percent, and finally to eight percent, where it
stands at the present.
9 I! In Kay 1938* the Board was organized.
10 Plans were completed rapidly. Contracts were awarded
11 and construction work began on interception sewers
12 and on the main treatment plant. The city was fortunate
13 in obtaining a Federal Grant covering forty-five per-
14 cent of the cost of the work, not including the cost of
15 the plant site. This grant amounted to $2,166,133.00
16 and the district issued the first bonds in the amount
17 of $2,652,000.00.
18 Work completed under this construction
19 program included the main treatment plant, rehabilitation
20 of the Miller Plant, Marquette sewage lift station and
21 main interceptor sewer from Alley 9 East to the main
22 treatment plant.
23 Also, a small interceptor sewer from
24 Coifax Street to the main treatment pfent, Pierce Street
25 interceptor system, 16th Avenue interceptor, 25th Avenue
-------
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
914
relief sewer, a crossing over the Little Calumet River,
Side interceptor in Massachusetts Street from 42nd
Avenue south to 52nd Avenue. Eighteen general contracts
were awarded for the various units noted and were com-
pleted at a total cost of $4,371,579.50. The treatment
plant was formally accepted and placed into operation
in August 19*10, approximately fifteen months after
start of construction.
With completion of the work noted
above and with the issuance of $2,652,000.00 in bonds,
remaining bonding power was only approximately
$32,000.00. It was impossible to consider any further
construction until a reserve had been built up in the
bonding power. With the increase of the bonding power
from two percent to four percent, it was possible to
start planning additional sewer capacity.
In 1955 bonds were issued in the amount
of $2,250,000.00 and these funds were used to construct
the Rhode Island relief interceptor and South Broadway
relief interceptor. As noted heretofore, bonding
power was increased successively until the present
level of eight percent was reached. These increases
enabled the Gary Sanitary District to maintain an
almost continuous construction program, building sewage
lift stations as well as sewers, and to expand the
-------
915
capacity of the main treatment plant. Pages 10 and 11
indicate the bonds issued by the Gary Sanitary District
to date, showing dates of issuance, amount of each
issue, and a description of the work completed with
these funds.
Total bonds issued to date total
$28,660,000.00 and at present the reserve bonding
power is between two and three million dollars.
Page No. 12 of this report shows results
10 obtained for the year 1963 in the removal of suspended
il solids in the main treatment plant. Page No. 13
12 indicates results obtained in reducing a five-day
13 biochemical oxygen demand. We use data from 1963 as
14 this is the latest year for which such data was avail-
is able. The main treatment plant went on primary
16 treatment in 1964 with the full knowledge and approval
17 of the Indiana State Board of Health.
18 It will be noted that the average removal
19 of suspended solids for the year 1963 was 98.26 percent.
20 Suspended solids in the final effluent, annual average
21 was 11.6 PPM. Five-day biochemical oxygen demand
22 reduction was as shown on page no. 13. These results
23 were obtained without chlorination.
24 There is presently under construction
25 at the main treatment plant, a chlorinating assembly
-------
916
l which will permit chlorination of the final effluent.
2 This is financed by a portion of a $4,590,000.00 bond
3 issue. Cost of this project is $355,000.00. With this
4 assembly completed, sterilization of final effluent
5 will be effected. This addition gives the City of Gary
6 a completely integrated sewage treatment works.
7 The Gary Sanitary District is proud of
8 its record of performance in the years that the main
9 treatment plant has been in operation. The tremendous
10 expansion of the services rendered by the District, the
11 growth of the system, and the continuing extension of
12 the District's facilities to the Gary area, are vivid
13 proof that the Gary Sanitary District has made great
14 progress in the elimination of pollution, and has
15 developed a progressive program of maintaining a high
16 level of environmental sanitation.
17 The Gary Department of Health has been
18 analyzing the bathing beach waters of the City of Gary
19 for the past six years. These determinations were for
20 the purpose of evaluating and comparing the quality of
21 the bathing beach area to acceptable surface water
22 standards.
23 The methods used are the prescribed
24 standard methods for determining coliform densities and
25 reporting them as MPN of coliform per 100 ml. In
-------
917
addition to this, our laboratory has run total bacterial
plate counts as a secondary control. These determinations
are all biological in nature, as these have been the
limits of laboratory facilities.
Our results have thus far been satis-
factory, as our analyses show, a vast majority of the
samples collected and analyzed have less than 1000
coliform per 100 ml.
During the past four years, in cooperation
10 with the Indiana State Board of Health, the Cities of
11 Hammond, East Chicago, Michigan City, and the Porter
12 County Health Department, we have coordinated a study
13 of the biological quality of the lakefront waters from
14 the Indiana-Illinois state line to the Michigan state
15 line. The primary purpose is to give the participating
16 agencies, an opportunity to evaluate an overall picture
17 of the lakefront. Also included in this report is a
18 copy of the 1964 results, pages 15 and 16.
19 We have noticed a decided increase of
20 algae over the years accumulating on our bathing beaches.
21 Many complaints are received during the summer months
22 of "oil slicks" in the water. We have noted some game
23 fish washed on our shores, and you may remember the sea
24 gull incident of three years ago.
25 Our facilities at the present time are
-------
918
not equipped to do more than the basic bacteriological
studies. We do no chemical or sediment analysis of the
water in our area. We have done no chemical analysis of
the rivers which pass through our city. We are aware
of these limitations and are studying possibilities of
expanding our laboratory facilities to include this
phase of analysis.
As you can determine from this report,
we are aware of waste water disposal and the problems
10 it creates in our area. We have made great progress in
11 situations over which we have direct control and con-
12 sider our Sanitary District an outstanding example of
13 what a city can do in meeting the needs of the
14 community.
15 At the same time, however, we admit
16 we do have situations over which we cannot report at
17 the present time, nor over which we have any control —
18 problems created by industrial wastes. We can only
19 accept the report issued by the Health, Education, and
20 Welfare Department that these do exist and to what
21 degree.
22 It is my intention in the very near
23 future, to appoint an Advisory Committee to investigate
24 the problem of water pollution within the City of Gary,
25 and to advise as to action or legislation which might
(Text continues of Page 926)
-------
REPORT OP A. MARTIN KATZ, MAYOR OP GARY, INDIANA
BONDS ISSUED BY THE GARY SANITARY DISTRICT
919
Date
Purchased
12/1/38
1/1/55
7/1/56
1/1/57
1/1/57
7/1/59
1/1/62
Series Issued Amount
1938 Sewer Bond $ 2,652,000.
1955 Sewer Bond $ 2,250,000.
1956 Sewer Bond $ 4,089,000.
1957
Judgment
Funding
1957 Sewer Bond $
104,000.
720,000.
12/1/58 1958 Sewer Bond $ 100,000.
1959
Sanitary Dis-
trict Bond $ 3,480,000.
12/1/59 1959
Sanitary Repair
Bonds $ 175,000.
1962
Sanitary Dis-
trict Bond $
600,000.
Purpose
Original Bond Issue.
Construction of Main
Plant, Main Interceptor
Sewers, South side inter-
ceptor sewers and Pierce
Street sewers.
Rhode Island Relief Inter-
ceptor and South Broad-
way Relief Interceptor.
Chase Street Interceptor
Sewers.
llth & 19th Avenue lat-
erals to Chase Street
Sewer.
Emergency Sanitary Sever
Repairs Alley 5 South
(East Side) and Storm
Drainage at Broadway &
51st Avenue.
East Side Interceptor
Sewer Replacement and
South Glen Park Relief
Sewer System.
Emergency Sanitary
Repairs - Alley 1W &
37th Ave., Alley IE Wsb-
ash R.R. to 6th Avenue
and 40th Avenue between
Alley 15E and Alley 163.
Emergency Repairs,
Georgetown Relief Sewer
System and Pumping
Station.
-------
HE PORT OF A. MARTIN KATZ, MAYOR OP GARY, INDIANA
BONDS ISSUED (CONT'D)
920
Date
Purchased
12/1/62
Series Issued Amount
1962 Sanitary $ 9/900,000,
District Bond
12/1/64
1964 Sanitary
District Bond
$ 4,590,000,
Purpose
Main Plant Expansion &
Modernization, Sewage
Lift Station, Miller
Storm Water Relief Sewer
System & Pumping Station,
42nd Ave. Storm Sewer
System and Pumping Sta-
tion, Repairs to 13th
Avenue Storm Sewer,
Chlorination Facilities
and repairs to Marshall-
town Pumping Station.
Total Amount of Bonds Issued (Brought Forward)
(This page)
(TOTAL)
$ 14,170,000.00
$ 14,490,000.00
$ 28,660,000.00
-------
REPORT OF A. MARTIN KATZ, MAYOR OP GARY, INDIANA
921
SUSPENDED SOLIDS AND PER CENT REMOVALS
1963
Raw Sewage Primary
Month P. P.M. Effluent
P. P.M.
January 620.2
February 480 . 2
March 543.9
April 1006.3
May 751.3
June 812.9
July 622.3
August 553.6
September 722.4
October 708.5
November 1020.5
December 642.3
Average 707.0
Maximum 1020.5
Minimum 480.2
1962 Average 595.9
1961 Average 550.0
1960 Average 508.6
1959 Average 431.2
1958 Average 467.6
1957 Average 379.3
1956 Average 293.9
1955 Average 213.9
1954 Average 271.9
153.9
116.2
152.6
167.2
162.3
195.7
110.7
111.2
151.9
200.5
359.0
153.2
169.5
359.0
110.7
142.5
128.8
144.1
125.4
121.9
131.4
143.5
110.2
111.3
Per cent
Removal
Clarified
To Raw
75.19
75.81
71.94
83.39
78.40
75.93
82.21
79.92
78.97
71.71
64.82
76.15
76.20
83.39
64.82
76.09
76.38
71.66
70.92
73.17
65.37
51.17
48.51
58.44
Secondary
Effluent
P. P.M.
12.3
15.8
13.8
14.6
11.4
10.8
6.9
9.4
9.2
10.6
13.2
11.5
11.6
15.8
6.9
10.8
12.5
14.1
14.8
13.4
18.1
25.3
12.1
17.2
'; Per cent
Removal
Complete
Treatment
98.01
96.72
97.46
98.55
98.48
98.60
98.87
98.30
98.73
98.51
98.71
98.21
98.26
98.87
96.72
98.18
97.70
97.22
96.57
96.97
95.23
91.38
94.47
92.78
-------
REPORT OP
5
Raw Sewage
Month P. P.M.
January 184*1
February 153.1
March 171.5
April 173.7
May 165.7
June 151.0
July 108.6
August 126.1
September 154.3
October 166.8
November 184.0
December 179.6
Average 159.9
Maximum 184.1
Minimum 108.6
1962 Averagel81.8
1961 Average225.3
1960 Average 216. 5
1959 Average243.4
1958 Average342.9
1957 Average 219. 6
1956 Averagel43.7
1955 AveragelOS.8
1954 Averagell2.4
A. MARTIN KATZ, MAYOR OP GARY, INDIANA 92
Day Biochemical
1963
Primary
Effluent
P.P*Mt
86.8
84.8
70.8
80.5
64.1
58.8
45.2
47.7
58.1
73.2
102.6
92.7
72.1
102.6
45.2
70.9
74.0
82.9
80.6
100.6
92.2
90.2
78.4
69.6
OxVaen Demand
Per cent
Removal
Clarified
To Raw
52*83
44.63
58.73
53.67
61.29
61.06
58.42
62.14
62.34
56.10
44.25
48.39
62.53
62.34
44.25
61.00
68.59
61.72
66.88
69.95
58.02
37.22
27.96
38.27
Secondary
Effluent
P. P.M.
10.7
12.9
11.4
9.8
5.9
5.9
3.7
4.9
6.6
5.2
4.4
5.6
7.3
12.9
3.7
10.7
13.7
12.4
19.0
18.9
19.2
11.5
11.8
11.2
Per cent
Removal
Complete
Treatment
94.18
91.60
93.33
94.33
96.47
96.07
96.50
96.14
95.69
96.88
97.58
96.88
95.47
97.58
91.60
94.11
93.82
94.25
92.21
94.75
81.25
92.00
86.94
88.47
-------
REPORT OP A. MARTIJI KATZ, MAYOR OP GARY^/lNDIANA
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
Calumet Beach
Whining
Public Beach
East Chicago
PubLie teach
Marquett* Park
Lak« Street
Wells Street
(Porter)
Ogden
(Porter)
(L«Port«)
Dun«5 St«t«
West Beach
Washington Park
Outer Drive
Long Be«ch
Michi»na shores
-------
REPORT OP A. MARTIN KATZ, MAYOR OP GARY, INDIANA
LOCATION OP SAMPLE
SAMPLE NUMBER
Michiana Shores 11782
'(Knee Deep)
Michiana Shores 11783
(Waist Deep)
Long Beach, Stop 31 11784
(Knee Deep)
Long Beach, Stop 31 11785
(Waist Deep)
Outer Drive, Wash. Park 11786
(Knee Deep)
Outer Drive, Wash. Park 11787
(Waist Deep)
Washington Park Beach 11788
(Knee Deep)
Washington Park Beach 11789
(Waist Deep)
West Beach, Mich. City 5*
(Waist Deep Only)
Bartlett's Beach 6*
(Waist Deep Only)
Beverly Shores 11790
(Knee Deep)
Beverly Shores 11791
(Waist Deep)
Dunes State Park 11176
(Knee Deep)
IXines State Park 11177
(Waist Deep)
Ogden Dunes, East Bndy. 11178
(Knee Deep)
M.P.N,
430
430
930
750
930
2400
230
430
930
750
930
9.10
210
9.10
430
BACTERIA
COUNT
460
520
1010
700
2100
1100
70
100
240
240
500
30
870
840
3280
-------
REPORT OP A. MARTIN KATZ, MAYOR OP GARY, INDIANA £25
LOCATION OF
SAMPLE
SAMPLE
NUMBER
M.P.N,
BACTSRIA
COUNT
Ogden Dunes 11179
East Bndy.
(Waist Deep)
Lake Street Beach 11184
(Waist Deep)
Lake Street Beach 11185
(Knee Deep)
Wells Street Beach 11186
(Waist Deep)
Wells Street Beach 11187
(Knee Deep)
Marquette Park Beach 11182
(Waist Deep)
Marquette Park Beach 11183
(Knee Deep)
East Chicago Pub-
lic Beach
(Knee Deep)
11190
Whiting Public Beach 11189
(Knee Deep)
Hammond Beach
(Knee Deep)
11188
* These Samples Examined in
Michigan City Health Department
Laboratory.
430
430
430
930
430
430
230
430
750
2400
2700
2310
1700
1950
2900
660
750
18,760
98,400
T.M.C.
-------
926
be necessary in controlling the indiscriminate disposal
of liquid wastes.
We, in the City of Gary, seek a cooper-
ative solution with our industries to the mutual problem
of industrial wastes. We realize fully our obligations,
and I am sure, an amicable solution will be found.
This, gentlemen, concludes my report.
I again thank you for your efforts and your interest
in this matter, and may you be successful in your
10 efforts to preserve the water of the United States for
11 the use of future generations of Americans.
12 Thank you.
13 (Applause.)
14 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you. Thank you, Mayor Katz.
15 Please wait a minute and let me ask
16 if there are any comments or questions.
17 MR. KLASSEN: Yes, I wanted to ask the Mayor a
18 couple of questions here, maybe to amplify what is in the
19 report.
20 In the report here, Mayor, I did not
21 find it but I think it was in the Indiana Board and the
22 Public Health Service Report, the capacity of your
23 treatment plant, primary. So far, it was 80 million
24 gallons.
25 MAYOR KATZ: Eighty million gallons per day.
-------
927
1 MR. KLASSEN: Have you ever been up to capacity?
2 Have you ever put a capacity flow through your primary
3 treatment plant?
4 MAYOR KATZ: I have the Superintendent of that
5 plant with me today, Mr. Matthews.
6 Can you answer the question?
7 MR. MATTHEWS: Yes, we have not put the full
8 capacity through yet because our complete construction
9 program is just in the final hookup, and, as an example,
10 some of the subcontractors have some little connections
11 to make.
12 But previously, on the design of 40
13 million gallons per day, I pumped 58 million gallons
14 through the 40 million gallon plant.
15 MR. KLASSEN: What is the maximum flow that you
16 have put through your primary units?
17 MR. MATTHEWS: The primary units?
18 MR. KLASSEN: Yes, I understand they are 80
19 million gallon capacity. I am wondering what the
20 maximum flow is you put through there.
21 MR. MATTHEWS: I wouldn't know because we haven't
22 had a chance to try it out yet.
23 The reason— we have doubled our first
24 capacity of 40 million. I have put 58 million through
25 those four first primary tanks, but I have never been
-------
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
8
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
928
hooked up with enough pumps yet to oee how much we can
put through the entire primary treatment plant.
MR. KLASSEN: Well, in other words, your primary
treatment plant of 80 million gallons capacity is not
in operation at the present time?
MR. MATTHEWS: No, sir, only singly,
MR. POOLE: What is your daily sewage flow?
It is not anything like 80 million
MR. MATTHEWS: We are right now, due to the
extended drought periods in this part of the country,
we have been experiencing for some years, our flow is
around 30 million gallons per day, right now, complete.
MR. KLASSEN: Well, what I am leading up to is
the next question that concerns the State of Illinois,
particularly.
When do you start bypassing and where do
you start bypassing at times of rain. Apparently, you
are not taking the full flow from your primary plant and your
overflow from your combined sewers. You are going to
someplace without treatment.
MR. MATTHEWS: Well, sir, that is handled in this
way: We have Brown and Brown regulators, and where the
large trunk sewer is connected to our interceptors,
those work automatically, but they never close off
entirely and we take enough sewage, all we can; but
-------
929
there is no positive figure that I could give you,
after operating there 25 years, where you start to
bypass your float chambers,you know.
Your problem — you are probably familiar
with the Brown and Brown gauge. As the water level
rises in the sewage, the gate tends to close off and
there you have it, but I say, we have not had the
opportunity yet.
We have 162 million gallons capacity
10 in raw sewage pumps in the plant hooked up right now
11 and we will never be short of pumpage capacity.
12 MR. KLASSEN: I am not as concerned about the pumping
13 capacity as I am concerned about using your treatment
14 plant to its maximum capacity at time of rain so that
15 you minimize the amount of combined sewer overflow in
16 the streams that go into the State of Illinois.
17 MR. MATTHEWS: That will be determined a little
18 later. As I said, we are not hooked up to use the total
19 capacity right now. We do know we have 80 as a minimim
20 there.
21 MR. KLASSEN: Well, I guess that is as good an
22 answer as I can get. But it is not too satisfactory,
23 in view of the glaring reports that were given here of
24 everything that Gary has done and that you are expending
25 every effort to protect the waters.
-------
8
930
Now, you tell us you don't know how much
you can take and you are not hooked up to take it and if
this is what you want to go in the record, this is —
MAYOR KATZ: Well, we are also telling you what
we have under construction and will be able to do when
this construction is completed.
You are looking for results from some-
thing that isn't completed yet.
9 MR. KLASSEN: All right. Then that is the answer.
10 When will it be completed?
11 MR. MATTHEWS: Probably in June.
12 MAYOR KATZ: I believe the chlorination plant
13 will be completed in June also, is that right?
14 MR. MATTHEWS: Well, I couldn't say chlorination.
15 He is talking about.
16 MR. KLASSEN: Mayor, I want to get —
17 MR. MATTHEWS: To give you another answer, we have
18 treated in that ^million gallon plant which in '38 was
19 designed as an equivalent population load of 175*000,
20 I have carried over a half a million on six out of ten
21 areas, equivalent population loading there.
22 But we are taking care of considerable
23 pollution so as you know, when you carry a load like
24 that, and more than once, because we had the opportunity
25 to treat a very strong sewage, up over 500 parts per
-------
931
million in the chlorofier.
MR. KLASSEN: Well, do you anticipate, then, when
your plant is all completed and everything is the way
it is laid out here, what percentage of your wet
weather flow will be taken to the plant before you
start bypassing?
7 This is what I am coming to.
8 MR. MATTHEWS: I am going to give you an answer.
9 I made a computation that if all the main trunk sewers
10 were flowing full, 2^ hours a day, the discharge into
11 the river would be one billion gallons, round figures.
12 Now, we have got 80 million capacity.
13 You make your own answer to that one yourself.
u MR. KLASSEN: I am asking you the question. I
15 am not giving you your answers. You answer it.
16 MR. MATTHEWS: Because you can't answer it.
17 MR. KLASSEN: Well, all right, you can't answer it.
18 If you can't then, I am not — I don't
19 know your facts.
20 One other thing: Have you ever considered
21 taking all of the wastes from U.S. Steel? I understand
22 that you take the sanitary wastes. How about the other
23 wastes that we have indicated here in the report?
24 That is, has the city ever given this
25 consideration?
-------
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
932
MR. MATTHEWS: We have given it enough considera-
tion that if we took all the pickling liquor through
our plant, we'd be out of business, that one item. So
we don't take any of it.
MR. KLASSEN: All right, that is all I have.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: May we have your first name for
the record, sir?
MR. MATTHEWS: Sir?
CHAIRMAN STEIN: May we have your first name?
MAYOR KATZ: William, William Matthews.
MR. MATTHEWS: William Matthews.
MR. KLASSEN: By the way, one other question here:
When is the last time you constructed combined sewers,
new combined sewers in Gary? What year?
I'm particularly interested in a com-
16 bined sewer that is taking new flow, not necessarily an
17 interceptor. I am interested in the extension of the
18 Gary sewer system, whether it is on purely the separate
19 or the combined plan and this is why I was asking my
20 question.
21 When is the last sewer extension on
22 the combined plan that you made in Gary?
23 MR. MATTHEWS: I believe it is 1959, but I am not —
24 I ought to be able to answer that question, but remember,
25 consulting engineers come in and handle that construction
-------
933
l work and I am operating. I have nothing to do with the
2 consulting engineer's program.
3 MAYOR KATZ: My recollection would be 1960, Mr.
4 Matthews.
5 MR. MATTHEWS: How much?
B MAYOR KATZ: I960.
7 MR. MATTHEWS: 1960.
8 MR. KLASSEN: In other words, as late as I960,
9 you were still building combined sewers in Gary?
10 MR. MATTHEWS: Yes, sir.
11 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Are there any further comments
12 or questions?
13 MR. POSTON: I'd like to make a comment to the
U effect that it has been very difficult for me to
15 understand the expenditures of large amounts of money
16 for construction of waste treatment works and then,
17 when it becomes necessary to do some maintenance or
18 repairs, there isn't a provision to provide temporary
19 treatment.
20 I think water pollution control works
21 are one of the utilities which do not try to maintain
22 a continuous service, and I know of many cases where
23 there have been results which have caused a great
24 commotion.
25 I am thinking of the construction of new
-------
plants, water utilities, they don't shut down their
operation to wait for another day. They don't quit
serving their customers, the telephone utilities, the
power and light utilities all maintain continuous
service, and I think it should be expected from the
water pollution industry, the control Industry, to pro-
vide similar service to maintain water quality and main-
tain clean water.
9 MAYOR KATZ: Are you speaking specifically or
10 generally, sir?
11 MR. BOSTON: This is generally, and I think it
12 applies in most cases of sewage treatment works, when
13 they build a new works, they will start to bypass a plant
14 that is then doing a job, maybe sometimes for months,
15 until they can get new construction under way.
16 I think that provisions can be made
17 and should be made to continue this operation so that
18 you don't provide additional pollution loads to our
19 streams.
20 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Do we have any further comments
21 or questions?
22 If not, thank you very much, Mayor Katz.
23 We were very happy to hear fromyju.
24 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Judging from you and the style of
25
-------
935
your other Mayor, I don't think anyone in Indiana is
being shipped today.
3 (Laughter.)
4 MAYOR KATZ: I don't think so either, but perhaps
the attempt was started.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: I don't think there was any
attempt, either.
I think we will stand recessed for
lunch until a quarter after two.
10 (Applause.)
ll (Whereupon, the meeting
12 was adjourned until 2:15
13 o'clock p.m., this date.)
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-------
1
2
3
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
936
A.E.TERNOON IS E § £ £ 0 N
CHAIRMAN STEIN: May we reconvene?
I wonder If we may ask Mr. Miller to
get up again and resume and see if we have any comments
or questions.
MR. KLASSEN: I just wanted to ask Mr. Miller a
question or two.
The report indicates the kind of progress
that we knew resulted from your Board's action in Indiana,
and I am sure that you undoubtedly have the same problem,
the problems that we do in Illinois, and I just wanted to
ask you about the operation of these facilities.
There is nothing in the report to
indicate, first of all, that the facilities are operating
and this isn't too far-fetched because we have found
this in Illinois where facilities have been put in and
when your back is turned, they don't operate them.
I just wondered whether you are
19 receiving monthly operation reports from these various
20 plants that you have listed here in your very complete
21 report?
22 MR. MILLER: We do not receive operation reports
23 for all of the plants that are listed in the report;
24 but by and large, from the large industries, we do
25 receive these reports, particularly on the facilities
-------
937
that have been installed in recent years.
We don't have them complete for all
sewers that may be in the plant.
MR. KLASSEN: That is the only thing I want to
ask Mr. Miller.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Do you have some further
questions?
8 MR. KLASSEN: No.
9 MR. BOSTON: I would like to ask Mr. Miller if
10 he would feel free to share these industrial and
li municipal waste treatment plant reports, the amount
12 of waste discharged to the stream, quantities and so
13 forth, with us in the Public Health Service, Depart-
14 ment of Health, Education, and Welfare?
15 MR. MILLER: Wally, I think — do you want to
16 answer?
17 (Laughter.)
18 MR. KLASSEN: This is the advantage of having
19 your boss here.
20 (Laughter.)
21 MR. MILLER: Wally, I would say that the operation
22 reports that we have are generally sent to us in a
23 classified basis, confidential, and as such, we have
24 them for review, but I am not able to give them to you
25 for your use.
-------
938
This is not true of all of them, but it
2
is true of a large share of them.
3 MR. POSTON: I would assume, then, that at a later
4
date, it will be up to Indiana municipalities and the
Health Department to show progress if there's any
c
progress made at some future date.
7
We want to know what accomplishments
Q
have been made. It will be up to them to show this
progress.
10 MR. MILLER: Yes, except that I might say that on
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the municipal plants, they are required to submit
operation reports. These are open files.
They have given this information to us
in the past and will continue to do this.
The only thing I would say, I think the
proof of the pudding should be in the eating and we
should be able to tell the accomplishments by stream
sampling and monitoring, and I would hope that we would
get to the point in this wherein you might not need
the individual outfall data.
MR. POSTON: Well, I feel it is very difficult
to assess a particular pollution condition unless you
know the amounts and kind of wastes being discharged to
the stream from specific industries, to make an engin-
eering evaluation of a particular situation.
-------
939
1 I think these bits of information are
2 required and would be needed for our technical people
3 to come up with some assessment of progress.
4 MR. MILLER: I would agree that such data is
5 valuable and needed in an engineering evaluation. But
6 here again, I think the real results and the place where
7 we must make the accomplishment is in the improvement of
8 the overall water quality and this, I hoped we could do.
9 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Well, I think I can understand
10 this now, because when you talked about the Hammond
11 Sanitary District, the municipality on page 32, you
12 said, "It will return the Little Calumet River flowing
13 into Illinois into a sanitary condition."
14 While you talked about all the industries,
15 you never said that, and I didn't know whether your
16 admission — omission of this meant that even though
17 they did this, it wouldn't be in a satisfactory
18 condition, but maybe it's because you got confidential
19 material and you couldn't tell, so we will never know.
20 (Laughter.)
21 MR. MILLER: Well, again, I would say to you that
22 it is most difficult on the industrial ones to break
23 them as adequately and inadequately and here again, we
24 operate under the Indiana Stream Pollution Control Law
25 on the principle of maintaining the quality of the
-------
940
water in the receiving waters and not on effluent
standards; and for this reason we are concerned
with the quality of the water.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Perry, let me ask you this —
I think we need this for the conferees, and
Hayes Black was supposed to come, and I respect
you and Hayes in Public Service as much as anyone.
Hayes indicated to us that the effluent discharges
and it seems to me that you have really indicated it
10 also — are not bad. I wonder if you'd care to
11 expand and clarify that a little because I
12 really think we need guidance on this,
13 Perry.
14 MR. MILLER: I think the real problem here,
15 as far as I see it, is that there is no question in
16 my mind that the Indiana Stream Pollution Control
17 Board needs this data to assess the problem and to
18 know how to approach the problem, and where the work
19 needs to be done.
20 We need this further to help us in
21 the approval of new facilities, as they come up, to
22 determine what is doing an adequate job and what is not
23 doing an adequate job.
24 The other question that I have, and I
25
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
941
say this from a State's viewpoint, we very definitely
need this data.
Now, my only question and answer to
Wally was that I wondered whether you, in assessing what
had been accomplished, needed this data to determine
what can be accomplished as far as the watercourse is
concerned.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Well, again I have to say here,
Perry, that I have to rely certainly on the technical staff,
as you can see by the way that you say you need data and Mr.
Black who is our senior industrial ace says we need the data.
Now, the point is: If these are closed files
and we do need the data and it is your policy not to release
it — I don't read it necessarily in your law that you have to
keep this data secret — if it is your policy to keep this
confidential and Mr, Black says we need it, I hope we can
work out a mutual agreement since there have been cases
when we just had to spend a lot of public funds.
If our technical people say that this data is
essential then they must get boats and get outside the out-
fall pipes and keep taking the samples until we get the needed
information. Now, it would seem to me that a proper husbandry
of public funds should permit the free flow of data, and I am
not talking about trade secrets or going back into the plant
or rummaging in the files and trying to get secret
-------
1 information; I am talking about effluents that come out
2 of the pipe into public waters. I think that our
- 3 technical people say we have to have that and this is
4 not going to be made available by Illinois — or Indiana
5 Illinois has always made it available.
6 (Laughter.)
7 If this is not going to be made available
8 by Indiana, we are just going to have to go out and get
9 it, and the trouble is it is going to cost us a lot of
10 money and that is your money as well as ours.
11 MR. POOLE: May I get into this argument?
12 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Yes.
13 MR. POOLE: We have certain confidential data. I
14 will admit to all of you here that Mr. Miller knows more
15 about the number of plants that have submitted it than
16 I know.
17 I have the impression that it was a
18 relatively small group of industries when you consider
19 the total group of industries.
20 Our policy has been that information
21 that is submitted to us in confidence is kept that way.
22 On the other hand, I hope to lean pretty heavily on
23 the Chairman's view that anything that goes into public
24 waters ought to be available to anybody that has got a
25 real interest or a right to inquire about those public
-------
942
1 waters.
2 Now, we do debate this thing. It's been
3 done in other conferences, the rest of the afternoon,
4 but I would like to say to you, Mr. Stein, that if it
5 is one of the conclusions of this conference and it has
6 been recommended by H.E.W. that effluents data be
7 submitted and maintained in open files, we do the very
8 best we can to make an adjustment with the people that
9 have been ,giving us data in confidence in the past so
10 that the future data will be maintained in open files.
11 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you.
12 MR. KLASSEN: I just want to give you our
13 philosophy here.
14 My own philosophy about this question
15 of operation reports—we feel that the waters are the
16 property of the people and certainly the public. The
17 people, have a right to know how their property is
18 being used and what is being misused, and we have been
19 fairly successful in carrying out this philosophy; but
20 this is the basis on which we justify the fact that we
21 should know — the people have a right to know, the
22 public has a right to know — how their property is
23 being used and that it is not being misused.
24 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you.
25 Are there any further comments or questions
-------
943
l of Mr. Miller's presentation?
» 2 MR. KLASSEN: I have a couple more.
3 I read your report here and followed it,
4 Mr. Miller, with a good deal of sympathetic understanding
5 because after all, Illinois and Indiana have maxxy mutual
6 problems; and while we might operate a little differ-
7 ently, the objective of your organization and ours, we
8 know, is the same.
9 On page 3^> there was a statement here,
10 "Local developers continue to construct combined sewers
11 with outfalls to the Calumet River."
12 Is there a — well, first of all, does
13 Indiana permit the construction of new combined sewers
14 with outfalls?
15 MR. MILLER: No. The answer to that is no.
16 I think part of that was during the
17 litigation. Developers down there continued to build
18 combined sewers.
19 MR. KLASSEN: Are there means by which steps could
20 be taken that you could put a halt, practically, to this?
21 I can tell you what has been very
22 successful in Illinois.
23 When we find such a sewer that is being
24 built illegally, we merely notify the Federal Housing and
25 Veterans Administration not to give any commitments in
-------
944
1 that area and this usually is more effective than state
2 and court action, because this hitting the pocketbook of
3 the developer and the materials people and the financial
4 people.
5 And I thought I might pick up some new
6 ideas that you would have. This approach is getting a
7 little threadbare, but it still works.
8 MR. MILLER: I would say we do the same thing on
9 the subdivisions that come to us. FHA requires
10 approval of these before they construct them, and in
11 this way we do get separate sewers in the subdivisions,
12 and we have been working on this; and the other thing
13 is on plan approval for sewers, these come to the
14 Stream Pollution Control Board and the Indiana State
15 Board of Health, and they require approval of the
16 Board's before they can obtain the financing, and in
17 this way, we have some control over them.
18 MR. KLASSEN: One other question of a technical
19 interest as well as putting something in here. I think
20 that this is a very complete report.
21 It is on page 20, the statement, "The
22 lagoon effluents will seep horizontally through 250
23 feet of slag.
24 What has been your experience in the
25 material seeping through the brine or this deposit of
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
945
slag in the way of either picking up material that will
increase the pollution or being successful in so-called
screening everything out or filtering everything out?
Has this been a successful means of
keeping waste contained?
MR. MILLER: I think in this instance we believe
that it will be a successful means of containing the
waste.
This, I believe, depends upon the nature
of the waste, and as we cited in the report with the
pickle liquor, this did go through the slag and out into
Lake Michigan, so it is dependent somewhat upon the
nature of the waste with which you are involved.
MR. KLASSEN: That is all, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Are there any further comments
or questions of Mr. Miller?
Well, thank you very much for a very
comprehensive report.
MR. MILLER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Mr. Poole.
MR. POOLE: Next on the list we have the
Merrillville Conservancy District. I believe Mr. G.
A. Fort has a very brief report for this district.
MR. FORT: Mr, Chairman, conferees, ladies and
gentlemen, this is a report on how a fast growing,
-------
946
l unincorporated area has won the fight against pollution
2 from septic tanks.
3 The purpose of this report is to set
4 forth information relating to the Sanitary Sewer System
5 being constructed by the Merrillville Conservancy
B District, Lake County, Indiana, with $2,710,000 in bonds,
7 issued by the Merrillville Conservancy District.
8 The bonds are issued under the provi-
9 sions of Chapter 308 of the Laws of the State of
10 Indiana, passed at the 1957 Session of The General
11 Assembly, and an ordinance of the Merrillville
12 Conservancy District adopted September 13> 1963, to
13 provide funds to pay the construction cost of the pro-
14 posed Sanitary Sewer System.
15 The bonds are direct obligations of the
16 Merrillville Conservancy District, Lake County,
17 Indiana, payable out of unlimited ad valorem special
18 benefit taxes being levied and collected on all taxable
19 real property in the district.
20 The Merrillville Conservancy District
21 was established on December 28, 1962, by action of the
22 court of Judge Felix A. Kaul, Circuit Court, Lake
23 County, Indiana, and was created for the purpose of pro-
24 viding sewage collection and treatment. The district
25 can be identified as an area of some 3.2 square miles
-------
94?
located in Ross Township, Lake County, Indiana, to just
north of Highway US 30 and extending east and west of
State Road #53, better known as Broadway. The terrain
is generally flat to rolling in sections. The area is
drained by Turkey Creek which forms the headwaters of
Lake George which flows into Lake Michigan.
The project has been approved by the
8 following State agencies:
9 Flood Control Approval Letter, Dated
10 July 29, 1963J
11 Stream Pollution Control Board: Dated
12 July 19, 1963;
13 State Board of Health; Dated July 19, 1963.
14 Merrlllville is an urban community
15 situated in the great industrial complex of Lake County.
16 It, like many other suburban communities, was developed
17 without a central sewage system. Each house is served
18 by its own individual sewage disposal system. Many of
19 these individual systems were designed and constructed
20 without any regulatory control. The Lake County Health
21 Department Septic Tank Ordinance was not passed until
22 the late 1950's.
23 Many of the homes in this area have
24 inadequate sewage disposal facilities and consequently
25 are polluting streams in this area and are creating
-------
948
i health hazards for themselves. Because of soil condi-
2 tlons many of the residents are unable to correct their
3 failing septic tank systems. The soil in this area is
4 a clay type which does not permit satisfactory percolation.
5 A survey of tests by the Indiana Stream
6 Pollution Control Board on December 6, 1963, found that:
7 1. Raw and inadequately treated sewage is being
8 discharged to Turkey Creek and its tributar-
9 ies from sewers originating within the
10 Conservancy District.
11 2. Low dissolved oxygen values and high coliform
12 bacteria concentrations found downstream from
13 the sewer outfalls within the Conservancy
14 District indicate the streams are polluted
15 and serious health hazards exist.
16 Twelve key points within the district
17 were samples with the following coliform results:
18 3 points 40,000 to 430,000 Coliform mpn/LOO ml
19 7 " 1,000,000 to 9,000,000 " " " "
20 2 " 24,000,000 to 46,000,000 " " " "
21 A sanitary sewer system is the most
22 satisfactory answer to the abatement of the health
23 hazards, stream pollution and contamination of ground
24 water.
25 Adequate sewage disposal for the protection
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
949
of public health is the most serious problem facing
this metropolitan area. Health precedes all other
needs such as transportation, schools and industrial
activity. If the entire southern Lake County area is
to continue development and growth, adequate sewers and
sewage disposal are most necessary. This district serves
as a hub or focal point for future expansion of Lake
County. This district could serve as a model and guide
to others, pointing the way to the solution of the
sewage disposal problem, particularly for unincorporated
areas. It could through its facility expand and provide
sewage disposal service to the surrounding area.
The present construction will include
approximately 154,850 feet of 8 to 30-inch diameter
sanitary sewers, a sewage pumping station will discharge
the sewage into the Gary Sanitary District Sewer System.
The Gary Sanitary District will provide the treatment
and final disposal of the sewage. Operation of sewer
system is scheduled to start approximately July 1, 1966.
The initial operation will have a flow of 500,000 gallons
of sewage/day with an immediate growth load of the next
5 years expected at 2,000,000 gallons/day including
expected services to adjacent areas now using small
treatment plants. The pump station will be capable of
handling 8,000,000 gallons per day to assure adequate
-------
950
1 capacity for this fast growing area.
2 In January, 1965, the Merrillville
3 Conservancy District was notified by the United States
4 Department of Health, Education, and Welfare of a
5 $181,7^0 grant toward the construction of the pump
6 station to handle sewage into Gary. No grant has been
7 made for the 29 miles of interceptors covering the
8 polluted area described above.
9 ]n conclusion, the Conservancy Act of
10 Indiana has been established on this project as a means
11 to provide a growing unincorporated community an
12 economical and much needed centralized sewer service.
13 Having been with this project since its formation, it
14 can be said that the trials and tribulations are many
15 especially in the financial area because of having to
16 depend on the taxation support of low to average income
17 families. Projects like this can easily fall by the
18 wayside without the financial aid of the proper state
19 and Federal agencies.
20 Thank you.
21 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you, sir.
22 Are there any comments or questions?
23 Mr. Poole.
24 MR. POOLE: Next, I am going to call on Cities
25 Service Oil Company, and I believe Joe Baum, who is their
-------
951
1 waste disposal coordinator, will speak for them,
«k
2 MR. BAUM: Mr. Chairman, conferees, ladies and
3 gentlemen —
4 CHAIRMAN STEIN: I wonder before you start, can
5 Lou Berglar of Republic Steel come up.
6 MR. BAUM: I am Joseph S. Baum, coordinator of
7 waste disposal for the Refining Division of Cities
8 Service Oil Company.
9 My report to you today is to tell you of
10 the progress made in pollution abatement at the Cities
n Service Oil Company's petroleum refinery located at
12 4900 Cline Avenue, East Chicago, Indiana.
13 This plant is a 55,000 barrel per day
14 refinery processing sweet crude. It is a refinery
15 employing only skimming and cracking operations. The
16 manufacturing processes include crude distillation,
17 delayed coking, fluid catalytic cracking, catalytic
18 reforming and alkylation.
19 The water supply is obtained from Lake
20 Michigan and is used on a once-through basis. Con-
21 sumption, in 1964, varied from 60 million gallons per
22 day (mgd) in the winter to a maximum of 95 million
23 gallons per day in the summer. Approximately 96 per-
24 cent of this water is used for cooling purposes only.
25 There are three separate sewer systems
-------
952
i within the refinery:
2 A. The sanitary sewer collects and discharges
3 domestic wastes to the East Chicago Sanitary
4 District.
5 B. The cooling water is collected in a separate
6 sewer system and this water does not come in
7 contact with petroleum products. To insure
8 against accidents or breakdowns, such as
9 tubular leaks, the cooling water sewer dis-
10 charges through an oil-water separator to
11 protect against the escape of any oil.
12 C. The third sewer system collects process water
13 and discharges through an oil-water separator
14 of American Petroleum Institute (API) Design.
15 The cooling water and process water Join
16 as the final effluent is discharged into the Grand
17 Calumet River.
18 The East Chicago refinery was built in
19 1929. During the first 16 years of operation only one
20 major change occurred and that was the addition of an
21 Alkylation Unit for the manufacture of aviation gaso-
22 line. Strong sulfuric acid is used in the process;
23 however, there is no pollution problem from this source
24 as the spent acid is returned to the manufacturer by
25 pipeline.
-------
953
During the next 15-year period, from
1945 to I960, many changes were made in processing units
and waste treating facilities. In the early part of this
period the plant completed a $20,000,000 modernization
program. It was at this time that the company began its
aggressive approach toward pollution abatement.
Pollution control was a major factor in the design and
selection of all new operating units. During this
period the following improvements were made:
10 1. Built new oil-water separator of API design
n to improve oil and solids separation from
12 process water.
13 2. Made process changes to eliminate acid
14 treatment of certain petroleum distillates.
3. Built an internal water circulating system,
16 at the new Delayed Coking Unit, to prevent
17 coke fines and other contaminants from
18 entering the sewer system. Coke fines are
19 finely divided particles which are slow to
20 settle and consequently were isolated from
21 the sewer system.
22 ^. Built treating unit to remove oily wax from
23 water used at the delayed coking unit.
24 5. Additional sewers were installed for segrega-
25 tion of wastes and increased capacity.
-------
954
1 6. Boiler water treating sludge was removed from
2 the sewer and pumped to isolated ponds.
3 7. Also, many antipollution features were built
4 into the new process units.
5 The cost of the water treating facilities,
6 during this period, to improve the quality of the plant
7 effluent, amounted to $1,203,000.
8 The foregoing has been presented to
9 show early developments in pollution abatement and the
10 company's interest in meeting its obligations. The next
11 period I plan to cover is 1960 through 1964. I have
12 limited this to a five-year period because this period
13 is more closely related to the current problem, "the
14 quality of Lake Michigan water."
15 In July I960, modernization of the
16 cooling water separator was completed. The separator
17 was redesigned to meet present day practices for maximum
18 separation of oil and solids which included an automatic
19 cleaning mechanism for their removal. Also included in
20 the design was the addition of an effluent weir with
21 approximately a four foot waterfall. This waterfall
22 permits aeration of the total plant effluent and
23 increase the oxygen content by approximately 50 percent
24 of the oxygen deficit. The cost of this improvement
25 was $200,000.
-------
12
13
14
15
17
955
January 1961, marked the beginning of
operation of a newly installed spent caustic neutralizer.
This eliminated the dumping of waste caustic to the
sewer system. In this operation the waste caustic is
neutralized with acid. After neutralization and settling,
the acid oils or phenolic type compounds are separated
and sold.
In the period of January 1961, to April
I!
9 1964, a total of 1,883,000 gallons of waste caustic were
10 collected and neutralized. The cost of this installa-
n tion was $112,000. This operation was changed in April
1964, and will be covered later in this report.
In October 1961, a sour water stripper
was installed to remove sulfides, ammonia and phenolics
from the catalytic cracking unit accumulator waters.
16 The stripper removes an average of 3700 pounds per day
of sulfides for a 99.9 percent removal and 1500
18 pounds per day of ammonia for a 98.5 percent removal.
19 The stripped water is then fed to a crude oil desalting
20 unit where the phenolics are extracted by the crude oil.
21 This total operation removes approximately 96 percent
II
22 of the phenolics or 160 pounds per day. The cost of
23 this installation was $96,000.
24 In November 1961, improvements were
25 made on the delayed coker blowdown system to permit
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
956
better separation of troublesome oily emulsions and
retain these emulsions within the operating unit. These
improvements cost $30,000.
In December 1962, an automatic
cleaning mechanism was added to the secondary chambers
j
6 | of the API separator. Similar equipment had previously
been installed in the inlet and primary chambers of the
separator when it was originally built. In the second-
ary chambers the retention time and efficiency were
gradually lowered as the solids would slowly build in
the chambers. The addition of the cleaning mechanism
is to keep the solids continuously removed and thus
take advantage of the maximum settling time built into
this unit and consequently attain maximum efficiency in
oil and solids removal from the process water. This
addition to the separator cost $31,000.
In April 1964, the plant began selling
the spent caustic and consequently the caustic
neutralization plant was shut down. By sale of the
total quantity of waste caustic there was further
improvement by eliminating all wastes from this
operation. The amount of spent caustic collected and
sold from April 1964, to the end of the year amounted
24 to 956,000 gallons.
25
The plant policy has and will continue
-------
957
to be, "attack the problem at the source and not allow
wastes to enter the sewer system." This has been a
very effective method to control the quality of the
plant effluent and this policy applies to all operations
5 | within the plant. On occasions it is necessary to
chemically clean certain operating equipment. This
work is performed by outside contractors. The contracts
8 I covering this work stipulate that the cleaning wastes
9 must be hauled away and not permitted to enter the
10
11
12
13
25
sewer system. There are other wastes from in-plant
operations that require special handling. An isolated
spoils area has been provided for the disposal of such
wastes.
14 | Although great strides have been made in
15 abating pollution, we do not want to leave the impression
16 that our job is done. Pollution abatement is a problem
17 requiring continual vigilance and we will continue to
18 seek improvement. Future plans for improvements in
19 1965 include:
20 1. The condensed water from the delayed coker
21 overhead product accumulator, though small
22 in volume, contains sulfides and ammonia.
23 This water will be sent to an existing sour
24 water stripper for removal of the sulfides
and ammonia.
-------
958
1 After completion of this project the
2 plant will be removing, from all process unit
3 accumulator waters, 92 percent of the sul-
4 fides, 89 percent of the phenols and 91 per-
c cent of the ammonia.
6 2. A pH analyzer will be installed on the plant
7 process water leaving the API oil-water
8 separator. This will assist the plant in
9 detecting any abnormal conditions occurring
10 within the plant.
n 3. Installation of an automatic sampler on the
12 plant final effluent water. In the past, the
13 plant has relied on spot samples for the
14 evaluation of the final effluent. It is our
15 belief that a more accurate evaluation can be
16 made on a 24-hour average sample.
17 4. We plan a pilot plant test run on a method
18 to further remove minute traces of oil from
19 plant process water.
20 Because of major improvements in the
21 past, the Cities Service Refinery recognizes that they
22 are entering into a period when additional attention is
23 required and future improvements will be more difficult
24 to achieve. To keep abreast of this problem the plant
25 has reorganized and strengthened its waste disposal
-------
959
group. Recently a new man was added to spend full time
on pollution abatement. It is his responsibility to
coordinate all pollution abatement projects within the
plant and serve as liaison on all related problems.
In conclusion, I should like to add that
the Cities Service Oil Company has recognized its
responsibility and obligation to improve the quality of
the plant effluent water and this has been done. We
have worked closely with the State of Indiana in making
10 these improvements and this cooperation will continue
11 in the future.
12 This concludes my report.
13 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you, Mr. Baum.
14 Are there any comments or questions?
IS MR. KLASSEN: I have a couple, Mr. Chairman.
16 I noticed on the top of page 2, you say,
17 "the cooling water and process water join as the final
18 effluent is discharged into the Grand Calumet River."
19 According to some rapid calculations
20 here, this is a dilution of about 18 to 1 to your
21 waste load.
22 I am wondering, and I haven't had time
23 to run through this, whether you plan to report your
24 final effluent results and therefore your efficiencies
25 and waste removal in parts per million?
-------
960
i If so, this tremendous dilution makes it
2 look awfully good in parts per million. I would suggest,
3 which I think I will do when the conferees meet, that it
4 points up the importance of pounds of contaminant.
5 In other words, it masks it somewhat when
6 there is this tremendous dilution and it is dilution with
7 the same water that you are putting it back into.
8 The other point that I want to inquire about
9 is — I don't see anything in here about temperatures.
10 Roughly 95 percent of your waste discharge is from
11 the cooling processes. Do you want to make some comment
12 on what is the temperature of your discharge?
13 MR. BAUM: I'd like to comment on both of your
14 remarks.
15 The temperature — I will take your last
16 one first.
17 The temperature of our total effluent
is will run in the range of 90 degrees, possibly between
19 85 and 90 degrees.
20 Now, on the amount of water, it is my
21 feeling that the thing that we are interested in is
i
22 concentration in water.
23 When we go out to survey a stream, we
24 talk concentration. We go to the Public Water Service
25 Drinking Water Standards. They are all expressed in
-------
961
1 concentration. So If you have concentration in your
effluent, that meets requirements. You are satisfying
a need.
MR. KLASSEN: I wish I could agree with you, but
I don't because on this basis, it might be cheaper and
certainly give you a more effective picture by pumping
more lake water into your effluent discharge.
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Right.
MR. KLASSEN: And this would make your effluent
look good on concentration but it would not reduce the
total amount that you are putting into the outlet
stream.
MR. BAUM: Well, I thought I had certainly shown in
my report that the thing that I had done to remove
products from our waste, is to help the situation that
you are talking about.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: No, I think, as I understand
Mr. Klassen's question, in my mind, he makes a point.
He is talking in terms of cooling water.
Let's forget the cooling water for a
minute. If your theory is correct and you have an
effluent, you don't have to have any cooling water. All
you have to do is draw up some clean water from your
source, mix it with the effluent, reduce your concentra-
tion and say you've got it made.
-------
962
MR. BAUM: Well, I don't think that that is quite
what I am saying.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Well, I think this is the point
that Mr. Klassen raised. I just wanted to clarify this.
MR. KLASSEN: I want to emphasize this: My
question has nothing to do with the excellent progress
and the real job you have done. I am merely raising
this not for you, but for the rest of the industries;
because, more and more, I would say the control agencies
10 are interested in the total pounds or amounts, rather
11 than the concentrations because this doesn't give a true
12 picture.
13 MR. BAUM: Well, that is the point that I am
14 trying to make; that I — let me give you a ridiculous
15 idea in trying to bring out my point.
16 Here we have Lake Michigan, and I believe
17 it is about 22,400 square miles. If you assume an average
18 depth of 50 feet and then calculate this out on a one part
19 per million BOD, you will come out with a population
20 equivalent for Lake Michigan of something in the order
21 of 11 billion people.
22 Well, it doesn't mean anything. Now,
23 if the concentration is satisfactory, one part per
24 million which I think was in Mr. Gerstein's report,
25 that if he had water that is one or one-half part per
-------
963
million at the crib inlet, that he was in very good
condition. So it seems to me that concentration is all
important in that you can't — I am not saying that
you can't use pounds per day in certain cases, but I
do think that pounds per day cannot be a guiding factor
in all situations.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: I have two points here: one, as
8 I see this and as I have listened to this, we don't get
9 this wonderful average in disbursing everything
10 entirely through Lake Michigan.
n I think as the Department of Health,
12 Education, and Welfare report indicated along with the
13 Chicago experience — Hy Gerstein indicated — this pollution
14 goes in slugs in the waves and in groups through the
15 lake.
16 The other point that I get — and I
17 again am looking for something here if we divorce
18 ourselves completely from Mr. Klassen's concept, the
19 only thing you have to do in order to meet a concen-
20 tration concept is to get in enough water from your water
21 supply and dilute your waste and then put it out. If all
22 we are doing is measuring the concentration and Just
23 getting enough dilution, you have the concentration
24 without providing any kind of treatment facility.
25 I am not saying that you are doing this,
-------
964
and I want to make this clear. I think the Cities
Service Plant has, it seems to me, a very good program
and has a real enviable record of waste disposal.
It is only when you get to the good
ones that you can ferret out these fine points. I
do think Mr. Klassen has a real philosophic point here.
Because if you can get waste and if before you discharge
it, you can put that in with some fresh water source,
you can adjust that concentration to suit yourself.
10 MR. BAUM: Well, it sounds easy, but that is not
11 cheap. You don't pump that water for nothing.
12 (Laughter.)
13 CHAIRMAN STEIN: You might not. It might be a
14 little easier pumping it and diluting it than treating
15 it. Because if it weren't cheaper, I can see why some
16 people say "dilution is the solution to pollution" and
17 want to use the public water supply to provide that
18 dilution.
19 If it weren't cheap, they wouldn't go to
20 too much trouble pumping it out.
21 MR. KLASSEN: I think basically we are talking
22 about whether or not we subscribe to the concept of
23 using a fresh water resource in lieu of treatment. I
24 think this is what we are talking about, and, again, I
25
-------
5
6
7
965
want to emphasize you just happened to be the first
one up here that we could ask, and it certainly is no
reflection on the excellent job your refinery has done,
believe me.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Are there any further questions?
MR. POSTON: Is it my turn?
CHAIRMAN STEIN: By the way, I'd like to emphasize
again that I do think that the record of your company is
9 indeed enviable. This is pretty good.
10 MR. BAUM: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
11 MR. POSTON: I notice that on page 5 you have
12 eliminated all of the waste from the operation. The
13 amount of spent caustic has been corrected and sold
14 from April of '64 to the end of the year amounted to
15 956,000 gallons, and I noted that you had made the
16 point of the cost of your treatment previously.
17 Would you care to give how much savings
18 was made by way of selling this material?
19 MR. BAUM: Well, we didn't save in either case;
20 it cost us money.
21 MR. POSTON: To sell?
22 MR. BAUM: Yes, both. It cost us to neutralize,
23 in even — we operated at a loss to dispose of the
24 phenolics which we did receive a price for.
25 We do receive and save a little bit by
-------
966
selling the total caustic, the waste caustic, but to us,
getting rid of a product completely and not having the
3 Ioperation within our plant is worth the extra expenditure.
MR. POSTON: One other question: Does Cities
Service have any objection to giving the operation
6 I effluent data, data of the amounts of specific chemicals
discharged to the watercourse?
MR. BAUM: I don't have — I didn't bring any data
9 | of hours along with me. The only data that I have
10 looked at was the data you have taken on your 24-hour
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
composite sample, and I did write down the comparison
of our effluent with the stream that we were going into.
Just as a comparison, because they were
both 24-hour samples taken at the same time, if you care
to, I would review those. There is only about five
of them. It will be very short.
MR. POSTON: Okay, I'd be glad to hear that.
18 MR. BAUM: These samples were taken by the Great
19 Lakes-Illinois River Basin Project when they were working
2o in our area.
2i The samples were taken on October 24,
22 1 1963. They sampled our effluent and then, at the same
23 time,, they sampled the Calumet, Grand Calumet River,
24 but it is 100 yards downstream of where our effluent
25 enters, so our effluent does influence the downstream
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
967
sample to some extent, because we don't know how much
mixing you get from our effluent in a hundred yards.
However, the data taken was the Grand
Calumet River. On ammonia, it contained 5.1 parts per
million.
The Cities Service effluent contained
1.7 parts per million or only about a third as much.
On BOD, the Grand Calumet River contained
9.5 parts per million; and the Cities Service effluent
contained 4.8, or only half as much.
The dissolved oxygen in the river was
2.1 parts per million; the dissolved oxygen on the
Cities Service effluent was twice as high. It was 3.9
parts per million which makes the dissolved oxygen
a higher content, better for our effluent.
Oil in the Grand Calumet River was
12 parts per million. On the East Chicago effluent,
it is 6 parts per million or half as much.
Phenolics, it was 305 parts per million
20 in the Grand Calumet, this is 191 parts per million in
21 the Cities Service effluent.
22 I think this illustrates the effective-
23 ness of our method of trying to treat these wastes and
24 get these down lower and meet our obligation of trying
25 to upgrade our effluent.
-------
968
l MR. POSTON: I think that is all.
2 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Well, thank you very much, Mr.
Baum.
4 (Applause)
5 MR. POOLE: Next on the list is the duPont Company
and I guess Mr. J. M. Devins, Plant Manager, is going
to represent duPont.
MR. DEVINS: Chairman Stein, conferees, ladies
and gentlemen, my name is John M. Devins. I am manager
10 of the duPont Company Plant in East Chicago, Indiana.
n The plant is located on the north shore
12 of the Grand Calumet River between Kennedy and Cline
13 Avenues.
14 The plant began chemical manufacture
15 in 1893 and has been in continuous operation for the
16 past 72 years. We currently employ 440 people. The
17 principal products are inorganic chemicals: sulfuric
18 acid, hydrochloric acid, sulfamic acid, silicates,
19 and chlorides of zinc and ammonia. Fluorocarbon
20 products and small volumes of organic herbicides are
21 also produced.
22 Our current wastes entering the
23 Calumet River contain very little organic matter; they
24 are largely inorganic in nature. From our studies we
25 conclude that these wastes have no material effect on
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
17
23
24
25
969
the water quality of the river. Sanitary sewage is
pumped to the East Chicago Sanitary District Treatment
Plant.
DuPont regards pollution abatement as
an essential part of every process. Technical studies
on pollution control are conducted simultaneously with
the research and development of every new product.
The design of a manufacturing unit always includes
provision for pollution control.
Facilities for preventing losses or
recovering valuable products are an important factor
in remaining competitive. Whenever possible, we treat
our waste streams for recovery of valuable products.
In addition, we have made a determined effort to abate
any remaining pollution. Following are some examples:
16 In 195^* we installed equipment to neu-
tralize diluted acid contained in a salt solution from
18 our silicate operation. The solubility characteristics
19 of this solution required a detailed technical study to
20 design equipment that would perform reliably. These
21 facilities are operating satisfactorily.
22 In 1955, when design of a new sulfamic
acid plan was undertaken, our plans were discussed
with the Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board before
construction began. Our waste discharge program was
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
970
approved, and a permit for this operation was issued.
The permit requires monitoring of the discharge stream
and a report is made regularly to the Indiana Stream
Pollution Control Board.
A very recent addition to pollution
abatement facilities is in conjunction with the manu-
facture of organic herbicides. Early in our planning
of this new product line, we approached the Pollution
Control Board and developed a waste disposal program
involving rigid controls. A permit was issued and
performance reports are submitted to the Board
regularly.
Now I would like to discuss the matter
of controls:
We continuously sample our main process
effluent, chemically analyzing the samples for traces
of products. Not only does this guard against pollution
of the Grand Calumet River, but it provides us with a
means of detecting operating irregularities and thus
enables us to make corrections promptly.
On two occasions, in I960 and in 1962,
we studied the water quality of the Grand Calumet River
in the vicinity of our plant. The studies were carried
out by engineers under the direction of a pollution
abatement specialist. Intensive study was made from a
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
971
point one half mile upstream of the plant to the
Indiana Harbor Canal -- about one mile downstream.
In these studies hundreds of samples
were collected for chemical analysis. We also checked
our plant outfalls by measuring flow rates and chemical
composition, and compared this total with the changes
in concentration of each constituent in the river between
upstream and downstream sampling stations.
In general, the two methods of
measurement were in agreement and satisfied us that the
monitoring program was accurately controlling the waste
load from the plant.
Two areas where supplemental control might
be beneficial were disclosed by these studies,
specifically in sulfur dioxide and zinc wastes. Engineers
were assigned to study recovery methods for both of these
materials. After considerable technical effort, we
developed means of recovering these materials. Con-
struction of facilities has been underway during the
past year and will be in operation very shortly. When
this new equipment is operating, we plan to make another
survey of the river as a part of our continuing pollution
23 control program.
24
25
Now, in summary, the duPont Company has
taken a positive approach to preventing pollution of the
-------
972
Grand Calumet River. We have cooperated fully with
the Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board in the
design and construction of pollution abatement equipment.
The performance and maintenance of this equipment is
regularly monitored. Surveys of the river substantiate
that we have an effective control program.
7 Thank you.
8 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you, sir.
9 Are there any comments or questions of
10 Mr. Devins?
11 MR. CHESROW: To what extent are you now dumping
12 chlorides into the river?
13 MR. DEVINS: I read a report in the Hammond Times
14 that we were dumping 90,000 pounds of hydrochloric acid
15 in the river. This is not true.
16 MR. CHESROW: How much are you dumping?
17 MR. DEVINS: We are dumping none.
18 MR. CHESROW: None at all?
19 MR. DEVINS: None at all, and we have worked with
2o the Indiana Pollution Control Board and obtained a permit
21 which has been discussed earlier in this conference to
22 dump the acid, that one of the provisos was that we would
23 try to sell the acid and I can report that we are selling
24 the acid.
25 MR. CHESROW: Are you recovering all your acid?
-------
2
3
973
MR. DEVINS: Pardon?
MR. CHESROW: Are you recovering all your acids?
MR. DEVINS: Well, we make and sell acid and the
only acid loss that we have would — I would define it
as a yield loss, so we do have some.
MR. CHESROW: To what extent? How much was —
what is the percentage of loss?
8 MR. DEVINS: Pardon?
9 I MR. CHESROW: The percentage lost.
10 MR. DEVINS: I don't have the exact figure, but
11 it is very low. I could get that information.
12 MR. CHESROW: Does the Indiana Board control the
13 loss, keep tab on your loss?
14 MR. DEVINS: Yes, we make reports to the Indiana
15 Pollution Control Board on our losses.
16 MR. CHESROW: Thank you.
17 MR. POSTON: VJe had pictures of duPont shown on
18 Tuesday by Mr. Le Bosquet—of the duPont Company with a
19 whitish appearing waste going to the Grand Calumet
20 River, and I wondered whether you saw that slide or
21 whether
22 MR. DEVINS: I did not, Mr. Poston.
23 MR. POSTON: Well, I'd like to show this slide
24 and see if you could identify what this material might be
25 I see from some of our results, there are
-------
974
some 40,000 pounds daily solids going to the river, and
I wondered if this were part of it and what this might
be.
MR. DEVINS: I believe that is the picture that
is in the back of the room, is it not?
6 MR. POSTON: Yes.
7 MR. DEVINS: That is the slide of the picture in
the back.
Well, I have a summary of our various
10 wastes here going to the river, and I would say that
11 that is probably a sulfate salt, some sulfate, calcium
12 sulfate, perhaps.
13 MR. CHESROW: And referring to the slide, the
14 percentage of wastes that are disposed of in the river,
15 are they controlled at their source?
16 MR. DEVINS: Pardon, sir?
17 MR. CHESROW: Do you measure them? You? controlling
18 factor is — is it at the source that it goes into the
19 river?
20 MR. DEVINS: Yes, we control at the source and we
21 also check the outfalls.
22 MR. CHESROW. You do check the outfalls?
23 MR. DEVINS: Yes.
24 MR. CHESROW: Do you have the figures available as
25 to the percentages, at the outfall and at the source, please?
-------
975
1 MR. DEVINS: I could make these available. I
2 think I'd have to do a lot of calculating to convert
3 them into pounds per day or parts per million.
4 MR. CHESROW: Roughly, roughly, would you
5 venture a guess?
6 MR. DEVINS: Pardon, sir?
7 MR. CHESROW: Would you venture a guess?
8 MR. DEVINS: A guess on what, now?
9 MR. CHESROW: On the percentages.
10 MR. DEVINS: Well, the increase in the concentra-
11 tion of constituents in the river is the result of
12 discharge from the duPont plant —
13 MR. CHESROW: From the duPont plant only.
14 MR. DEVINS: — is in terms of a few parts per
15 million.
16 Now, I am not —
17 MR. CHESROW: Is it as low as that?
18 MR. DEVINS: Yes, it is low.
19 MR. CHESROW: All right, thank you.
20 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Do you have any further questions
21 or comments?
22 MR. POSTON: No, I think that is it.
23 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you very much, Mr. Devins.
24 Mr. Poole.
25 MR. POOLE: Next, we have Mr. A. J. Shulter of
-------
6
7
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
976
U.S.S. Lead Refinery, and I don't know whether Mr. A.
J. Shuler or Mr.,Warner is going to represent them.
MR. SHULER: Mr. Chairman, conferees, ladies and
gentlemen, I am A. J. Shuler, not Shulter, Plant
Engineer of U.S.S. Lead Refinery in East Chicago.
MR. POOLE: I beg your pardon.
MR. SCHULER: This plant is located on about the
79 acres of land on the north bank of the Calumet River
immediately west of Kennedy Avenue.
•
Approximately 10 acres of this 79 acres
is improved with roadways, railroad tracks, buildings
and production facilities. None of the area within 300
yards of the north water edge of the Grand Calumet
River is improved.
The total employment of this plant is
small, normally about 120 employees.
This plant has been engaged in the
refining of nonferrous metals since 1906.
The U.S.S. Lead Refinery, Inc., is using
water from the Grand Calumet River for cooling metal
moulds and for circulating in water jackets. This
water is then returned to the river. The water from this
river is also used for our fire hydrant system.
We are concerned that the river water be
of good quality.
-------
V
I
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
977
The average amount of water obtained for
these purposes from the Grand Calumet River is less
than 1/4 million gallons per day and, as mentioned
above, this small amount of water is returned to the
river.
We know of no way in which nitrogen,
phosphorus or cyanide compounds, bacteriological
8 || pollutants, oil, acidic or alkaline materials or trash
are discharged to the Grand Calumet River from our
plant.
Conforming to the wishes of the various
interested agencies, this plant constructed a separate
sanitary sewer system in 19*1-7 at a cost of $26,585.00.
All domestic wastes pass through this system to the
East Chicago Sanitary District sewage treatment plant.
There are no combined storm and domestic sewerage systems
in this plant.
We appreciate the opportunity of pre-
19 J senting this information to the committee.
20 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you, Mr. Schuler. Are
21 there any comments or questions?
22 MR. KLASSEN: You have no industrial wastes, then;
23 I only domestic wastes?
24 MR. SCHULER: We have a small amount of what might
25 be called industrial waste which goes to the East Chicago
-------
2
3
4
5
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
25
978
Sanitary District.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Are there any comments or questions?
If not, thank you very much, Mr. Schuler.
MR. POOLE: Thank you, Mr. Schuler.
Next is General American Transportation,
Dr. Gregoire Gutzeit, Senior Scientific Advisor, who will
handle their presentation.
DR. GUTZEIT: Mr. Chairman, conferees, ladies
9 I! ana gentlemen, I am not going to mention the sanitary
wastes which are connected to the East Chicago treatment
plant,
Plant No. 2 of General American Trans-
portation Corporation is located on Railroad Avenue in
East Chicago, Indiana, Its function is to maintain and
repair units of the large tank- car fleet, owned and
leased by the Corporation, as well as contract mainten-
ance of conveyances previously manufactured for and sold
to customers.
Cleaning of these tanks may be required
for various reasons, but mainly in order to perform
needed repairs, or to start shipment of a different
product which frequently is the result of a seasonal
change.
24 The method of tank- car cleaning depends
obviously on the last commodity carried. However, the
-------
979
i liquid wastes which contribute to stream pollution are
generally produced by draining, steaming, and/or
rinsing.
Steaming can be carried out with or
without the introduction of additional detergents or
solvents. In the former case, a so-called "syphon" is
used; that is, a T-shaped attachment which serves the
purpose of dispersing water, a detergent solution,
9 I! kerosene, or caustic soda solution into the steam jet.
10 Kerosene is used to facilitate the removal of heavy
il petroleum products. Caustic soda solution is injected
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
to saponify vegetable oils, animal greases and similar
glycerides. Wet steam is applied to acid and alkali-
tanks. Detergent solutions are helpful with materials
such as rosin, tar oils, etc.
Liquids resulting from simple drainage
mixed with the wash waters and steam condensate, repre-
sent the fluid waste of these maintenance plants.
Slide one, please:
This slide shows the steam on both sides.
There are tank-cars in the center and the drainage flume.
All right.
Due to the large number of products
shipped in bulk and to traffic fluctuations, this waste
is extremely complex and variable. However, its daily
-------
980
volume, and therefore its contribution to the total
pollution load of Lake Michigan Basin, is quite small.
The maintenance shop in East Chicago
has been in operation since 1937. Until 1948, the waste
was discharged into a large settling pond, about one acre
area by an average 8 feet deep, and the overflow of
the latter was received by the Indiana Harbor Canal.
In late 1948, at the request of the Indiana Stream
Pollution Control Board, studies were initiated with
10 the purpose of designing a treatment system. However,
the problem was further complicated by three factors
12 which are only encountered in old, established car
13 maintenance plants:
14 1. The cleaning tracks and receiving flumes
15 had been built more than ten years previously,
16 and were unsuitable for segregating the cars
17 into separate classes, according to the
18 commodity last carried, which is a practice
19 we apply in new plants.
20 2. The space available for the treatment system
21 was minimal, and thus dictated the choice of
22 methods requiring compact equipment.
23 3. The East Chicago Municipal Sewage Works have
24 constantly refused to accept any type of
25 industrial waste for secondary treatment,
-------
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
981
regardless of the degree of pretreatment, and
I have been happy to hear today that this
policy may have changed.
(Laughter.)
Under these circumstances, it was obvious
that only a compromise solution could be reached.
A survey of the waste's character and
volume was carried out from November 1, 1948, to April
30, 1949, in East Chicago as well as in another of the
Corporation^ maintenance shops in Masury, Ohio.
In East Chicago, a grand total of 1,611
cars, distributed as follows, were cleaned during the
six months' period.
23.66 percent of these cars had been
used to ship solid commodities which do not contribute
to water pollution.
The remainder had been last loaded with
various commodities which I tabulated.
44 percent of them being petroleum
products, oils, fats, et cetera; others being acids,
alkalies, organic chemicals and so forth.
Another 18-day survey in September,
1948, of cars loaded with liquid commodities indicated
an even broader observation. The tabulation is
attached to our statement. That is Table II.
-------
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
982
A recent 5-day sample collection was
made from February 9th to February 15, 1965. During
that period, a total of 65 cars were cleaned. However,
eight tank-cars contained solid materials and five
5 held products volatile at steam temperature so that
6 only 52, or an average of slightly over 10 tanks per
day contributed to the production of liquid wastes,
mineral, vegetable and animal oils and/or greases
represented again the most frequent loadings, 30 cars
or about 58 percent. (Cf. Table III)
For the purpose of estimating the
volume of the liquid wastes, based on an eight-hour
operation for 25 days per month, water and steam con-
sumption were checked twice over 60-day periods in the
Corporation's Masury, Ohio, maintenance plant. It was
found that a maximum of 312.5 gallons of water including
steam condensate was used per car hour or 2,500 gallons
per car per eight hour day. However, all the positions
on the cleaning tracks are practically never occupied in
any single day and only about 50 percent of the racks
capacity is used over a long period.
In East Chicago Plant No. 2, the expected
total cleaning load, including cars having last shipped
solids or gases, has been and still remains an average
of 15 cars per eight-hour day. This represents a maximum
-------
983
l of 37 cars and 500 gallons per day.
2 The treatment system was therefore
planned for a maximum volume of 50,000 gallons per day
4 of liquid wastes. This figure, as printed, was more
5 than twice the capacity actually required.
6 This is shown by the flows measured
7 when the plant was in normal operation.
8 For instance, during the year 1959* a
9 total of 5*784,750 gallons of waste was treated,
10 representing 19*282.50 gallons per working day at 300
11 days per year or 15,848.63 gallons for a 365-day year.
12 The maximum occurred in March with an
13 average volume of 20,175 gallons per day. During the
14 six-month survey period, weekly composite samples were
15 collected and analyzed. Because of the particular
16 nature of the waste, no BOD determinations were made.
17 Instead, chemical oxygen consumed was measured after
18 sludge settling and gravity separation of free oil.
19 The following data indicate the
20 character of the raw waste. The results are in parts
21 per million.
22 Raw waste, this is a C.O.D. figure, the
23 first figure, acid chromate, silver catalyzed, 3,000 to
24 6,000; after sludge settling and oil separation, 256 to
25 1,340.
-------
984
Ether extract, 594 to 1,771; after
sludge settling and oil separation, 20 to 160. Phenols,
8 to 32; and after sludge settling and oil separation,
8 to 24.
Suspended solids, 2,600 to 3,100; after
settling, 600 to 1,700.
Laboratory testing of possible treatment
methods, adaptable to the existing conditions, showed
that chemical precipitation or coagulation followed
10 by clarification, would reduce the oxygen consumed to
11 about 30 to 150 ppm; the ether extractables to 5-15 ppm;
12 and the suspended solids to 20 ppm or less.
13 However, phenols or other stable aro-
14 matics were not affected. Experiments with chemical
15 oxidation of phenols, using chlorine dioxide, Indicated
16 possibility of achieving reduction from about 20 to 2
17 ppm, although reagent consumption appeared very high.
18 On the basis of these investigations, a
19 treatment system was designed in 1949 and built in 1950
20 with a theoretical capacity of 50,000 gallons per day.
21 The original plant incorporated chemical
22 oxidation of phenols, a solution of chlorine, dissolved
23 oxygen controlled by a recently developed phenol-
24 monitoring device was fed into the final outlet line.
25 In 1952, the Board of Sanitary Commissioners,
-------
985
City of East Gary, was again requested by General
American Transportation Corporation to allow the pre-
treated waste to be fed into the city sewers. On the
basis of previous policy decisions, this proposition was
rejected by letter dated June 10, 1952, stating that
only domestic sewage would be accepted.
Consequently, the treated waste had
to be discharged into the Indiana Harbor Canal.
Unfortunately, due to the complex
10 nature of the waste, chlorine dioxide consumption proved
11 totally inconsistent and always excessively high.
12 It had, therefore, to be discontinued
13 both for economic and technical reasons. Further,
14 operating experience indicated the need for modification
15 of the system.
16 The present flow-diagram can be
17 summarized as follows: Slide 2.
18 The raw waste from tank-car cleaning
19 operations flows directly into the large settling pond
20 over one acre by an average of eight feet deep.
21 Through a submerged pipe, surrounded
22 by a cylindrical baffle retaining the supernatant oil,
23 the waste is pumped into two open oil separators of
24 standard construction, connected in series; then, into
25 three associated holding and equalizing tanks of 10,000
-------
986
gallons capacity each, steam heated.
From there, it flows into the large pre-
settling tank where it is neutralized by a large lime
slurry or by sulfuric acid, as the case may be.
5 The waste can be alkaline or acid.
6 The total aluminum sulfates required
for flocculation and absorbed is indicated by prelimin-
ary laboratory tests and is also fed into the pre-
9 settling tank and returned to the pond.
10 The overflow is pumped at the rate of
11 75 to 80 gallons per minute into an eleven-foot diameter
12 clarifier where the remainder of the aluminum sulfate,
13 as well as some additional lime, are fed within a con-
14 trolled pH range, between 6.5 and 8.
15 The clear effluent is discharged into
16 the Indiana Harbor Canal, while the sludge is returned
17 to the pond. The latter is cleaned each winter by an
18 outside contracting firm and the accumulated sludge is
19 hauled away.
20 Slide 3, please.
21 This shows the pre-settling basin, and
22 in the back the accelerator, the control building.
23 Slide 4: This shows the interior of the
24 control building with the controller, phenol controller
25 and pH. There is still the chlorine dioxide equipment.
-------
98?
During the initial operation of this
system, two composite samples of the effluent collected
at different periods gave the following analyses.
O.C., chemical oxygen consumed, 182.4;
ether extract, 45.0; phenols, 21.8; suspended solids,
12. This is a high sample.
A low sample: chemical oxygen consumed,
30.0; ether extract, 6.8; phenols, 23.2; suspended solids,
0.01.
10 As can be seen, the operational results
11 of the waste treatment system confirm reasonably well
12 the findings of previous laboratory work.
13 Slide 5, please.
14 That shows the waste, the raw wastes on
15 the left side and on the right side the chloride over-
16 flow.
17 A composite sample of raw waste from the
18 pond collected recently over a 5-day period from
19 February 9, to February 15, 1965, was analyzed for a
20 number of pollutants, some of which have not been
21 formerly reported.
22 The concentration of these components
23 was also determined in the treated effluent. As could
24 (I have been expected, phosphorus is substantially removed
25 » as an insoluble precipitate.
(Text Continued on Page 993)
-------
GENERAL AMERICAN TRANSPORTATION CORPORATION
(Dr. Gregoire Gutzelt)
988
TABLE Cl
tHSOlUtLEl
AGIOS
SOLUBLES
Dm
9/24
9/25
9/2S
9/27
9/29
9/30
tlO/3
10/4
10/6
10/7
10/8
10/10
10/13
10/14
10/15
10/1S
10/21
10/22
PtT«oLiu«-P»oo.-CiuriiCAL»-Fm, ETC. 0«e.-l*oiu. AUALies-Oae*
22 1
1 21
1 J 1
1
2
2 1
2
1
1 1
1 1
1
2
t
1 1
J_ JL J-
732 95 11
CKEMICALC-OTHE*
2 I
1
1 1
1
2
1
2
1
3
1
2
1
__ __
4 16
PHCNOI
3
1
1
1
1
—
-------
GENERAL AMERICAN TRANSPORTATION CORPORATION 989
(Dr. Oregolre Gutzeit)
TABLE III
(Last Load)
Date Commodity Remarks
2-9-65 Syrup
Crude Soya Bean Oil
Steep Water
Reclean Water Wash
Reclean Water Wash
Reclean Water Wash
Reclean Water Wash
Caustic Soda
Ined. Tallow
Sulfuric Acid
Ref. Vegetable Oil
Ined. Tallow
#2 Fuel Oil
2-10-65 Diesel Fuel
Sulfuric Acid
Crude Soya Bean Oil
Light Residual Fuel
Neats1 Foot Oil
Methanol
Black Strap Molasses
Tar Solid
Tar Solid
Lube Oil
Crude Soya Bean Oil
Lube Oil
Lube Oil
Diesel Fuel
Sulfur Solid
Plastic Roofing Cement Solid
2-11-65 Crude Vegetable Oil
Ined. Grease
Chemical (?)
Naphtha Volatile
Lard
Pet. Naphtha Volatile
Fuel Oil (Heavy)
Diesel Fuel
Carbon Bisulphide Volatile
Sulfur Solid
Tar Solid
Plastic Roofing Cement Solid
-------
99C
GENERAL AMERICAN TRANSPORTATION CORPORATION
(Dr. Gregoire Gutzeit)
TABLE III
(Continued)
(Last Load)
Date Commodity Remarks
2-12-65 Lube Oil
Lube Oil
Crude Vegetable Oil
W/fo Pet. Oil
Phosphorus Trichloride
Phosphorus Trichloride
Phosphorus Trichloride
Phosphorus Trichloride
Fuel Oil
Carbon Bisulphide Volatile
Molten Sulfur Solid
2-15-65 Fatty Acid
White Oil
Molasses
Ined. Grease
Triethanolamine
Synthetic Resin
Fuel Oil
Naphthalene
Ammonia Volatile
Sulfuric Acid
Ined. Grease
Ined. Tallow
Diesel Fuel
* C.O.D. of Composite for 5 Days* - 3300
* Silver Catalyzed Chromic Acid Method (8)
-------
GENERAL AMERICAN TRANSPORTATION CORPORATION
(Dr. Gregoire Gutzeit)
TABLE III
(Continued)
SUKMARY
(Feb. 9 - Feb. 15, 19<55)
C.O.D. of 5-Day Composite Cample: 3300
991
Liquid & Soluble Number
Commodities of Cars
Lube Oil 7
Inedible Animal Grease 6
Crude Vegetable Oil 5
Refined Vegetable Oil 1
Diesel Fuel 4
Fuel Oil 5
Neats1 Foot Oil 1
Fatty Acid 1
Liquid & Soluble
Commodities
Sugar Syrup
Steep Water
Caustic Soda
Sulfuric Acid
Methanol
Black Strap Molasses
Phosphorus Trichloride
Triethanolamine
Synthetic Resin
Number
of Cars
1
1
1
3
1
1
4
1
1
-------
- 0 GENERAL AMERICAN TRANSPORTATION CORPORATION
— P (Dr. Gregoire Gutzeit)
~ Y
City of East Chicago, Indiana
DEPARTMENT OP PUBLIC SANITATION
152nd and Indianapolis Blvd.
East Chicago, Indiana
June 10, 1952
General American Tank Car Corp.
4405 Euclid Avenue
East Chicago, Indiana
Attention; Dr. G. Gutzeit
Gentlemen:
We have given careful consideration to your company's request
for permission to make connection with and thereby to discharge
certain industrial wastes into the sewerage system of the City
of East Chicago, which wastes must eventually pass thru and
be treated by this plant.
In accord with past policy, the Board of Sanitary Commissioners
shall accept for treatment at the East Chicago Sewage Disposal
Plant any and all sanitary wastes. The Board, likewise in
accord with past policy, feels that industrial wastes, treated
or untreated, do not constitute a sanitary waste and as such
must be eliminated from the city sewerage system.
Knowing 'that you understand the past policy of this Board and
that you fully appreciate the Board's position in this matter
we remain,
Very truly yours,
BOARD OF SANITARY COMMISSIONERS
By Charles Sandor (signed)
President
C
~~ 0
~" P
-y
-------
993
Cyanide and heavy metals were absent.
Phenols were low in ppm. Total nitrogen was reduced
from 830 ppm to 570 ppm and tar residue from 15 ppm to
zero.
Future plans involve a systematic
settling program and a more complete analytical evalua-
tion.
Summarizing, it can be stated that the
waste from GATC Plant No. 2, while very complex and of
10 variable character, represents only a small volume,
11 mainly 0.02 MOD, and after treatment, contributes minimal
12 quantities of pollutants to the Lake Michigan Basin.
13 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you, Dr. Gutzeit.
14 Are there any comments or questions?
15 MR. POSTON: I'd like to ask the Doctor how the
16 disposal of solid wastes is accomplished; that is, the
17 settled material?
18 DR. GUTZEIT: Settled material is hauled away by
19 a contractor once every winter when those tars are pretty
20 solid.
21 MR. POSTON: You don't know the ultimate disposal
22 point?
23 DR. GUTZEIT: I don't know, and I don't think
24 any of our^plant people know. We just contract for
25 this.
-------
994
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
MR. BOSTON: They are hauled away, though?
DR. GUTZEIT: They are hauled away.
MR. POSTON: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you.
(Applause.)
Mr. Poole.
MR. POOLE: Next, we have the Blaw-Knox Company,
8 to be represented by Mr. R. J. Mauthe, Chief Plant
9 Engineer.
10
11
MR. MAUTHE: Mr. Chairman, distinguished conferees,
ladies and gentlemen, the East Chicago Works of
12 Blaw-Knox Company is located at 440? Railroad Avenue in
13 East Chicago, next to General American Plant No. 2.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
It is on the east side of the Indiana Harbor Canal
between Columbus Drive and Chicago Avenue.
Operations include steel melting, iron
melting, foundry and machining.
Normal employment is about 2,000, with
about 50 percent working the day turn, 30 percent the
afternoon turn and 20 percent working the night turn.
Operations are normally reduced to about 30 percent
on Saturdays and a standby crew on Sunday,
All water is purchased from the City ~
of East Chicago. Service water systems are largely
closed loops, with make-up water coming from the City
-------
995
and overflow going to the storm sewer. All storm
sewer systems empty into the Indiana Harbor Canal.
Sanitary sewer systems are connected to the City's
sanitary sewer.
About 1960, Blaw-Knox started a moderni-
zation and relocation program at East Chicago. Special
efforts have been made to connect sanitary units to
the sanitary sewer and stormwater lines to the storm
9 sewer.
10 A wet sand reclamation unit was in-
n stalled about five years ago in our No. 1 Foundry. A
12 settling tank and filter were provided to remove sus-
13 pended solids from the water. The clarified water is
14 then reused in the reclaimer, creating a closed system.
IS The water from a wet dust collector also goes to this
16 settling tank and filter. This system is under
17 continuous study to determine whether any of the fines
18 are bypassing the settling tank or filter and reaching
19 the storm sewer.
20 A number of wet dust collectors in our
21 No. 2 Foundry rely on a pair of 'settling tanks for
22 collecting suspended solids. Funds have been provided
23 to replace about 60 percent of this dust collecting
24 capacity with dry type units. The resultant lighter
25 load on the settling tank is expected to increase its
-------
996
l efficiency. The efficiency of the third wet dust
2 collector settling tank is currently being evaluated.
3 A large roll grinder has been relocated
4 and provided with cascade settling tanks to remove
5 grinding sludge from the coolant. The coolant is
B recirculated from the last tank back to the grinder,
7 creating a closed loop. We plan to relocate the two
8 remaining grinders and provide more efficient coolant
9 clarification facilities for them.
10 In conclusion, we plan to continue our
11 efforts to confirm specific flow connections, diverting
12 the flow to the sanitary sewer where indicated. As
13 indicated above, we are checking our clarification
u equipment and are attempting to improve its efficiency.
15 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you, sir.
16 Are there any comments or questions?
17 MR. POSTON: I note that you have some 2,000
18 employees. I wondered what happens to the sanitary
19 wastes or sewage from your plant.
20 MR. MAUTHE: I mentioned earlier in the talk here
21 that all of it goes to the City's Sanitary Sewer.
22 MR. POSTON: I see. I didn't catch that. Thank
23 you.
24 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you very much, sir.
25 Mr. Poole.
-------
997
MR. POOLE: I have a letter here 1'rom American
Steel Foundries, Transportation Equipment Division,
signed by Mr. Alex Morris, Works Engineer for the
American Steel Foundries, and I am quite relieved that
it is very brief.
6 It is addressed to me and I will read
7 it and furnish it for the record here.
8 "Mr. B. A. Poole, State of Indiana Stream
9 Pollution Control Board, 1330 West Michiean Street,
10 Indianapolis, Indiana, 46207.
11 "Dear Sir:
12 "Letter of January 29* 1965 request for
13 information on water pollution abatement. American
14 Steel Foundries Incorporated, Indiana.
15 "All sanitary sewers are connected to the
16 East Chicago Sanitary District.
17 "Process water is used primarily for
18 quenching and cooling. A survey was conducted by
19 the Industrial Waste Section, Division of Sanitary
2o Engineering, State Board of Health, State of
21 Indiana in the summer of 1962. A copy of this
22 report is attached. An analysis of this report
23 shows that of the 93,000 gallon per day flow, 482
24 ppm solids were measured. .7 ppm is given as
25 iron. We attribute the balance to he zirconium
-------
998
l oxide sand which is an inert material used in our
2 plant.
3 "We are interested in any supplementary
4 information which you might have concerning our
5 plant and would appreciate receiving such
6 information.
7 "Yours very truly, H. L. Jones, Works
8 Manager, by Alex Morris, Works Engineer."
9 I shall be glad to answer all or any
10 questions, Mr. Chairman.
11 CHAIRMAN STEIN: I wouldn't underestimate you.
12 MR. POOLE; Thank you.
13 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Do you want to call your next
14 participant, Mr. Poole?
15 MR. POOLE: The next one is Linde Division, Union
16 Carbide, Mr. R. L. Shaner, Regional Engineer.
17 MR. SHANER: Mr. Chairman, official conferees,
18 ladies and gentlemen, I am R. L. Shaner and represent
19 the Linde Division of Union Carbide Corporation in the
20 capacity of Regional Engineer,
21 We operate an air separation facility
22 at 4400 Kennedy Avenue in East Chicago, Indiana. Our
23 west property line is adjacent to the Indiana Harbor
24 Canal. The Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board has
25 designated Linde as a participant in this conference.
-------
999
Our principal operation is the production
of oxygen, nitrogen and argon. These are separated from
the air by means of a low temperature process. We also
operate a steam-electric power station for supplying a
part of the total power requirements of our facility.
Our gaseous products are distributed to our customers
by means of pipelines. Our liquid products are shipped
by special tank cars, tank trucks and semi-trailers to
9 most distant points.
10 Water is used in our process primarily
n as a cooling medium. The water we use is purchased
12 from the City of East Chicago. It is supplied to the
13 plant at rates of about 1 to 1.6 million gallons per
14 day. Water is recirculated through compressor collars,
15 condensers and cooling towers. Some water evaporates
16 in the cooling tower. This must be replaced with fresh
17 water. This process increases the concentration of
18 materials already present in the water. In order to
19 minimize the results of this concentrating effect, the
20 usual water treatment chemicals are added to the
21 recirculating water. Also a certain portion, generally
22 about one-quarter of the make-up, is discarded to pre-
23 vent further buildup of minerals.
24 A separate sanitary sewage system is
25 employed at our facility. This system is tied in to the
-------
1000
sanitary sewers of the City of East Chicago. Thus no
sanitary sewage Is discharged by Llnde into the Indiana
Harbor Canal.
Linde discharges cooling water into the
Indiana Harbor Canal as reported in Table VI-3b of the
Blue Report. We have been using an independent labora-
tory to study the problem of waste fluids disposal.
Our approach to the Stream pollution problem has been
one of contaminant elimination rather than treatment,
10 believing that this is a more satisfactory solution.
11 Recent actions to eliminate stream
I2 pollution include a permanent blocking of a drain line
13 from the ash-water pits of the power station, the
14 blocking of drains from the air compressor blowdowns
and the installation of a sump and pump to divert these
16 streams to a settling basin.
17 Plans are in progress to connect the
is overflow and blowdown lines from the cooling towers to
an enlarged settling basin. When this is
20 completed our outfall to the Indiana Harbor Canal will
21 be handling nothing but rain water from our roof
22 drains.
23 We will keep the Indiana Stream
24 Pollution Control Board apprised of our progress. All
25
-------
1001
data pertaining to this study will be available to that
Board.
Although our contribution to the problem
of stream pollution is relatively minor, money has been
spent and we plan to spend additional money and effort
toward the elimination of stream pollution.
7 Thank you.
8 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you, Mr. Shaner.
9 Any comments or questions?
10 When you say "recent actions," what do
11 you mean by recent?
12 MR. SHANER: Recent actions, well, they have taken
13 place within the past six weeks.
14 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Of February.
15 MR. CHESROW: What are the contaminants you refer
16 to when you say, "Our approach to the stream pollution
17 problem has been one of contaminant elimination."
18 MR. SHANER: This is eliminating the stream
19 pollution that is going into the Indiana Harbor Canal.
20 MR. CHESROW: But do you have contaminants in your
21 water?
22 MR. SHANER: We buy potable water and water for
23 our process from the City of East Chicago.
24 MR. CHESROW: Yes, and the water that is expended,
25 does it have contaminants?
-------
1002
l MR. SHANER: Only the same materials that were
2 originally in the water —
3 MR. CHESROW: Thank you.
4 MR. SHANER: -- from the City.
5 MR. CHESROW: Thank you.
6 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you very much.
7 You know, Mr. Klassen and I were
8 discussing how much of this work seems to be done in
9 February.
10 Mr. Poston, when did you put out that
11 Blue Report of yours?
12 MR. POSTON: That seems to be in February, too.
13 MR. KLASSEN: It has nothing to do with it, Mr.
14 Stein. This is the way we do it. You attorneys do not
15 realize it, but February is the time to do things.
16 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Valentine's Day.
17 MR. KLASSEN: And George Washington's Day.
18 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Lincoln's Day.
19 MR. POOLE: Next, we have Mobil Oil Company. I
20 don't know whether Mr. Keiper is here or Mr. J. W. Mann,
21 the Technical Department Manager.
22 Mr. Keiper.
23 MR. KEIPER: Mr. Chairman Stein, conferees, ladies
24 and gentlemen, I am Edgar D. Keiper, Jr., Manager, Mobil
25 Oil Company, East Chicago, Indiana Refinery.
-------
1003
l Gentlemen, before I start, inasmuch as
2 you made the remark about February, the date for doing
3 and accomplishing things, I'd like to point out that
4 we have accomplished something which will be discussed
5 here in our presentation in February; however, the
6 inception of such action was back early in 1963.
7 I have divided my presentation into
8 five sections which include a policy statement, a
9 description of our water antipollution systems, a review
10 of our past antipollution efforts, and a summary of
ll antipollution work which is planned or in progress.
12 First, concerning our policies and
13 practices, the Mobil Oil Company has always cooperated
14 with Federal, state and local agencies charged with the
15 responsibility of controlling water pollution in matters
16 within the jurisdiction of those agencies. We have
17 long been actively engaged in pollution prevention, and
18 we are fully aware of our legal and moral responsibilities
19 in this matter of water pollution control and abatement.
20 We strive continually to fulfill those responsibilities.
21 I feel that the survey recently com-
22 pleted by the Public Health Service is most constructive.
23 Their report gives us a rather comprehensive picture of
24 the whole pollution problem in the Chicago area. We feel
25 that those who participated in it have done an excellent
-------
1004
and useful job.
Second, regarding waste gathering and
waste treatment facilities, the sewer system in the
East Chicago Refinery can be divided into five
categories: sanitary; oily water; sulfide stripping;
non-oily water; and ballast. I'll briefly describe each
one.
The sanitary sewer system is completely
divorced from any other system. It collects effluent
10 from all sanitary sources such as toilets, wash rooms
n and shower installations and discharges into the East
12 Chicago Municipal Sanitary Sewer System.
13 The oily water system consists of
14 gathering facilities which serve all the areas of the
15 plant where the water is likely to be contaminated with
16 oil; for example, the processing units, the transfer
pump house, and the like.
18 The water collected then flows through
19 an API separator and then discharges into the Lake George
2o Branch of the Indiana Harbor Canal. The API separator
21 actually consists of two separators in parallel. Each
22 of the parallel separators has four sections in series
23 which are equipped with oil skimming facilities.
24 In addition, the primary section is
25 equipped with scrapers for solids removal and the exit
-------
1005
1 section is equipped with hay filters. The design
2 capacity of our API separator system is 4,000 gallons
3 per minute, which is about three times the normal flow.
4 This allows us to shut down each of the parallel
5 systems for maintenance. Moreover, it provides excess
6 capacity which prevents the system from overloading
7 during periods of high rainfall.
8 Our new sulfide stripper system which
9 went into operation about February 15th, consists of
10 gathering facilities which collect water containing
11 sulfides from the various oil water separators in the
12 processing area and a stripping tower where the water
13 is stripped of sulfides and ammonia. This water is
14 then pumped to the crude oil desalters where 90 per-
15 cent of the phenols are removed as the crude oil is
16 processed. This treated water then flows from the
17 desalters to the oily water system.
18 The non-oily system is primarily a
19 surface water drainage unit. It collects drainage from
20 roadways, roofs and the like, places where there is no
21 oil contamination. The net effect of this operation is
22 elimination of a source of oil to the canal.
23 By that, we mean by not overloading any
24 of the API separators, you get, of course, a more efficient
25
operation of the oily water system.
-------
1006
The ballast system, as the name implies,
provides facilities for recovering oil from ballast water
discharged by tankers at the refinery's boat dock.
Ballast water is pumped into one tank where oil separates
from the water by gravity. Accumulated oil is skimmed
to a second tank where it is allowed to settle before
being pumped to a storage tank for reprocessing.
In addition to these five systems, we
also minimize our effluent flow by cooling our process
10 units through closed loop circuits Make-up water to
11 replace losses from evaporation or minor leaks is drawn
12 from the Lake George Branch of the Indiana Harbor Ship
13 Canal.
14 Regarding historical review of steps
15 taken to prevent pollution, Mobil's East Chicago
16 Refinery, like most refineries these days, has been
17 revamped a number of times since its original construc-
18 tion. During every alteration, the pollution problem
19 was considered, and facilities were installed to cope
20 with it.
21 In the early 1940's we installed three
22 of the operations I described a moment ago. They were
23 the oily water system, the closed loop cooling system,
24 and the ballast water system. In 19^-8 a sanitary sewer
25 was installed to dispose of wastes which previously had
-------
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
1007
been treated in septic tanks.
In 1958 the non-oily water system was
installed to handle surface water drainage.
The latest addition to our pollution
abatement facilities is the sulfide stripper which we
placed in operation Just last month at a cost of $60,000.
Incidentally, all the systems I've just
mentioned were installed at a cost in excess of a million
dollars.
Fourth, improvements then to reduce
pollution since 1963; in the last 18 months, as part of our
continuing program, we have made several notable
improvements.
First, though our sulfide stripper has
been in operation only a short time, tests to date
indicate a reduction of 99-plus percent in sulfides, 45
percent in ammonia and 16 percent in phenols, and we
have confidence in the fact that these are conservative
numbers; and, of course, we are collecting data every
day we operate this facility.
Second, flow through the API separators
has been reduced 45 percent through various economies
in the use of water and this roughly is a difference
between slightly less than 4 million gallons a day down
to now about 2 million gallons a day.
-------
1008
i Fifth, concerning work planned and in
2 progress, currently, we are making a complete survey of
3 the refinery to first explore ways to eliminate other
4 possible sources of pollution; second, to further reduce
5 the total refinery effluent, and (3) continue to reduce
6 the flow through oily water systems.
7 Our employees are also becoming more
8 and more aware of pollution problems. They contribute
9 ideas on better ways to operate our process units, waste
10 disposal facilities and offer suggestions with regard
11 to mechanical improvements to further minimize water
12 pollution.
13 And finally, I'm pleased to report we
14 have a program to continually survey our effluent in
15 cooperation with representatives of the Indiana Stream
16 Pollution Control Board. We are confident that the
17 Indiana and Illinois Pollution Control authorities in
18 cooperation with private industry will be able to solve
19 the problems pointed out in the Public Health Service
20 report.
21 In summary, we feel that this statement
22 constitutes evidence that Mobil has been progressive in
23 the field of pollution control and abatement. Since the
24 time the survey data was taken, we have improved the
25 quality of our effluent by a reduction of sulfides,
-------
1009
ammonia and phenols, as well as oil.
Our continual investigations may reveal
other areas where we can make improvements. Finally,
let me repeat that we fully understand and welcome our
responsibilities as a corporate citizen of East Chicago
and of the Chicago area. Our aim is to constantly
strive to improve the quality of water discharged from
our refinery. This is more than a statement of good
intentions — it is a statement of our actual operating
10 policy.
ll Thank you.
12 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you, Mr. Keiper.
13 Are there any comments or questions?
14 You know, we have always had a long
15 history, I think, in this field of cooperation with the
16 oil industry.
17 I remember years ago when we were down
18 in Louisiana — Mr. Poole was there — and there was a
19 very dear old Congressman in charge of the district or
20 representing the district who is now deceased; but he
21 was the prototype of what most of us think of as the
22 southern politician. One of the oil representatives
23 whom he got to know fairly well was telling me that he
24 met him in the street and the old gentleman at that time
25 couldn't quite tell whether he was a Federal man or an
-------
1010
oil man.
And he went up to him and said,
"Congressman, how is that case coming along?"
And the Congressman looked at him and said,
"Well, you know, it's very complicated." He said, "Some
people are for it and some people are against it, but
I can assure you of one thing," he said, "We are making
8 progress."
9 (Laughter.)
10 Thank you, Mr. Keiper,
11 MR. KEIPER: Thank you.
12 MR. POOLE: For those of you, if any of you are
13 paying attention to your agenda, we are going to pass
14 Calumet Nitrogen Products Company, Director of Technical
15 Services of American Oil Company, Mr. Mallatt will
16 report for both of them at one time.
17 Next, we have Union Tank Car Company,
18 Mr. R. D. Glick, Plant Engineer.
19 Union Tank Car? Is Union Tank Car
20 representated in the room?
21 (No Response.)
22 Well, then, next on my list is the
23 Sinclair Refining Company, Mr. G. A. Elaine, Plant
24 Manager.
25 MR. ELAINE: Chairman Stein, conferees, ladies and
-------
1011
l gentlemen, I'd like to state that on page 20 of the
2 H.E.W. Report, you will find the results of their
« 3 testing and they compare substantially with our yearly
average.
The Sinclair Refining Company's East
Chicago Refinery is located on the north bank of the
Lake George Branch of the Indiana Harbor Canal, just
west of Indianapolis Boulevard.
9 This refinery has a rated crude capacity
10 of 114,000 barrels per day. Refining facilities include
11 all types of processing generally found in a modern
12 complete petroleum refinery. The present total force
13 at the refinery consists of approximately 1,445 people.
14 All water for processing and cooling
15 tower make-up purposes is pumped from a Lake Michigan
16 intake located in the vicinity of Indiana Harbor via
17 the 30-inch line to the refinery. All waste water
18 from the refinery is returned to the Indiana Harbor
19 Canal.
20 Now, some background on our refinery:
2i The Sinclair East Chicago Refinery
22 began operations in March of 1918 at the rate of
23 approximately 10,000 barrels per day of crude. A
24 single sewer system was constructed to handle all waste
25 water and a gravity-type oil separator of the best
-------
1012
design known at the time was installed. This treatment
was in accord with the general practice of the day in
the refining industry; however, later Sinclair recog-
nized the need for separate treatment of sanitary
wastes and constructed a system of sanitary sewers and
septic tanks.
This sanitary sewer system served the
refinery until 1945 when a completely new refinery
sanitary sewer system was built and extended to the
10 refinery boundary where Sinclair took advantage of the
n opportunity to use the newly expanded City of East
12 Chicago system. Consequently, since 1945, all of our
13 sanitary sewage has been handled through the East
14 Chicago system.
15 In 1945 the State of Illinois, the City
16 of Chicago, and the Sanitary District of Chicago filed
17 suit in the United States Supreme Court against the
18 State of Indiana, the Cities of Hammond, Gary, East
19 Chicago, Whiting, and 16 industries in Indiana,
20 including Sinclair, alleging the pollution of the south
21 end of Lake Michigan and the impairment of Chicago's
22 water supplies. By this time the Sinclair Refinery
23 had reached a crude capacity of 55*000 barrels per day.
24 The water requirement was approximately 34,000 gallons
25 per minute, consisting of 9,000 gpm from Lake Michigan,
-------
1013
and 25,000 gpm from the Indiana Harbor Canal. All of
this water, except a small amount lost by evaporation,
was returned to the Indiana Harbor Canal.
In the Illinois versus Indiana suit,
Sinclair was required to submit to the court a plan for
improvement of the waste disposal system. It was evi-
dent to Sinclair that any plan submitted to the court
should fit into a long range plan which could be
9 adapted to refinery expansion, new processing, and more
10 stringent effluent control requirements.
li Therefore, all phases of current
12 operations and future expansion possibilities were given
13 careful consideration before a decision was made. The
14 long range plan finally chosen by Sinclair consisted of
15 the following basic features:
16 First, maintain a completely separate sani-
17 tary sewer and disposal system. This feature of
18 the plan had already been accomplished.
19 Second, reduction of the overall volume of
20 the effluent to a minimum by the installation of
21 cooling towers for recycling all cooling and con-
22 densing water and reduction of process water
23 wherever possible.
24 Third, construction of an oil-water separator
25 of adequate size for the reduced overall effluent,
-------
1014
1 design specifications for the separator being
2 those recommended by the API Committee on Disposal
3 of Refinery Wastes.
4 Fourtn, treatment of wastes at their source
5 prior to their entry into the refinery sewer
6 system. This item was of particular importance
7 with the cooling tower system due to the effect
8 of concentration.
9 The decision to go ahead to build the
10 cooling tower system was basic to the Sinclair Plan
ll since it would have far-reaching effects on all existing
12 and future operations .\
13 Essentially, the decision was a choice
14 between cooling towers and oil-water separators. Either
15 choice called for large expenditures of capital and
16 the choice was complicated by the fact that a large
17 expansion program for the refinery was in the early
19 stages of development. The decision to go the cooling
19 tower route was made primarily on the basis of
2Q effluent handling considerations. The Sinclair manage-
21 ment recognized the fact that future trends in refinery
22 processing, effluent treatment technology, and
23 government requirements could not be predicted accurately
24 and it was their conviction that the refinery would be
25 able to do a better job with a small effluent than with
-------
1015
1 a large effluent.
2 The plan for construction which Sinclair
f
* 3 submitted to the court, after approval by the Indiana
4 Stream Pollution Control Board, was accepted by the
5 court. Construction was completed and Sinclair was
6 dismissed from the suit late in 19^9.
7 I will now discuss the details of our
8 effluent control facilities.
9 The total effluent control facilities
10 which were constructed prior to 1950 in accordance with
11 the Sinclair Long Range Plan, which also included the
12 court-approved projects, consisted of:
13 1. The new sanitary sewer system with connections
U to the East Chicago city sewer system.
15 2. Pour cooling towers with revisions to
16 operating units necessary to convert to the
17 cooling tower system,
18 3. Remodeling the Light Oil Treating Plant by
19 modification of operation and design to
20 eliminate wash water at that plant.
21 4. Construction of a new oil-water separator
22 of the current API design capable of handling
23 efficiently the reduced volume of the refinery
24 effluent.
25 5. Construction of a spent caustic treating plant
-------
1016
l capable of treating high sulfide spent caustic,
2 oxidizing the sulfides to thiosulfates.
3 6. Construction of an ammonia-hydrogen sulfide
4 stripper at the Fluid Catalytic Cracking
5 Unit capable of stripping efficiently the
6 sour accumulator waters from that unit.
7 7. Installation of a ballast tank with necessary
8 facilities for receiving ballast from ships
9 and discharging the water to the oil-water
10 separator after recovery of the separated
11 oil.
12 The cost of this construction completed
13 prior to 1950 was $2,151,000.
14 Since 1950, after we had completed our
15 approved projects in conformance with the Illinois and
16 Indiana suit, construction has been added in accordance
17 with the Sinclair Long Range Plan to accommodate new
18 processing units and to further improve the effluent
19 system. This construction consists of:
20 1. Four additional cooling towers.
21 2. A new and larger spent caustic treating plant
22 of improved design to convert sulfides to
23 thiosulfates.
24 3« A new ammonia-hydrogen sulfide stripper at
25 the Catalytic Cracking Unit of greater capacity
-------
*
f
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
1017
and efficiency to strip the sour accumulator
waters from that unit; and
Fourth, a larger ballast handling system
capable of handling the ballast from all
tankers and barges which load and unload at
the Sinclair docks. This system has ample
capacity for receiving all ballast water pumpings
as well as future tank farm storm runoff and
holding the water in storage until the oil
and water separate. The clear water from
this tankage is released to the canal.
Also, certain other oil-water wastes
such as ground water from well point and
tank farm drain tile installations are
handled through the ballast handling system.
The cost of the construction completed
since 1950 was $1,530,000, bringing the total construc-
tion cost of effluent control facilities to $3,681,000.
As a result of the construction and
improved operating procedures accomplished according
to the Sinclair Long Range Plan, the total refinery
effluent has been reduced from approximately 3^*000
gallons per minute, or 45 million gallons a day, to
approximately 3,000 gallons per minute, or approximately
4.3 million gallons a day, while the crude run has
-------
1018
increased from 55>000 barrels a day to 114,000 barrels
a day. The reduction in volume of the effluent is due
chiefly to the cooling tower system but also to economy
in the use of process water throughout the plant.
Oil in the effluent has been reduced to
a relatively low figure. This reduction is attributed
largely to the reduction in volume of the effluent.
The API separator has ample capacity for this low
volume.
10 Ammonia and sulfides in the effluent
11 have been held to a low figure even though increased
12 crude run and additional processing has increased
13 greatly the amount of these pollutants produced in the
14 refinery. The greatest source of sulfide and ammonia
15 in the refinery is the sour accumulator waters from the
16 catalytic cracking unit. The first stripper for these
17 sour waters was put in operation prior to 1950. The
18 new and more efficient stripper for these waters was
19 put in operation in I960.
20 Another important source of sulfide waste
21 is spent caustic which has been used to treat sulfide
22 bearing intermediate and product streams. The first
23 spent caustic treating unit was put in operation prior
24 to 1950. The new and more efficient unit was put in
25 operation in 1962.
-------
1019
1 The phenol content of the effluent has
2 decreased due to the segregation and sale of high
3 phenolic spent caustic and also due to the processing
4 of stripped accumulator waters over a cooling tower
5 and then through the crude desalters.
6 Our plans for the future: Sinclair
7 plans for the future are based principally on a continua-
8 tion of the Long Range Plan as discussed previously in
9 this report. This means, of course, maintaining a
10 minimum-volume effluent with the cooling tower system
li and treatment of specific wastes at their source. Also,
12 every effort will be made to improve the operation of
13 existing facilities. One item in this category has been
14 approved for an expenditure of $100,000 in 1965. This
15 item calls for construction of two 2,500 barrel tanks
16 especially designed for handling sludges removed from
17 the bottom of the API separator.
18 With this equipment, we will be able to
19 dispose of the oil-coated solids in the sludge more
20 efficiently and eliminate recycling of any part of these
21 solids back to the separator system. The efficiency of
22 the API separator will be improved and the oil and
23 suspended solids in the effluent will be reduced. The
24 present plans are designed to take care of future
25 expansion and new processing in a manner similar to
-------
1020
l present operations.
2 We feel that the reduction in quantity
3 of effluent and improvements in quality which the
4 Sinclair East Chicago Plant has accomplished over the
5 past years is evidence of a sincere effort in attacking
6 the problem and supports the expectation of further
7 improvement to come.
8 Thank you.
9 CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you very much, sir.
10 Do you have any questions or comments?
11 If not, thank you very much for your statement.
12 I think we have again reached the point
13 of diminishing returns and we will reconvene promptly —
14 and I mean promptly at 9'30 tomorrow.
15 If it is just Mr. Poole, I and the
16 stenographer here, I'm going to start.
17 (Whereupon, the Conference in
18 the above—entitled matter
19 was adjourned until March
20 5, 1965, at 9:30 o'clock
21 a.m.)
22
23
24
. - .;..,! ••-.-,.-, /gency
25 ^l^ ' "' ' " «
* U S GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE I96< 0—799-413
-------