PROCEEDINGS
VOLUME 1
Conference
In the matter of Pollution of
the Interstate Waters of the
Grand Calumet River, Little
Calumet River, Calumet River,
Wolf Lake, Lake Michigan
and theirTributaries
                          MARCH 2-9,1965
             HEALTH. EDUCATION. AND WELFARE

-------
                                    9O5R6511OA

 1                    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT

 2                             OF

 3                HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE

 4

 5                            ****

 6

 7            Conference in the matter of pollution of

 8            the Interstate waters of the Grand Calumet

 9            River, Little Calumet River, Calumet River,

10            Lake Michigan, Wolf Lake and their tribu-

11       -     taries (Indiana-Illinois).

12

13                            *»*»

u
                  MR. MURRAY STEIN, Chairman
15

16                            ****

17

18                               McCormick Place
                                Banquet Room
19                               9:^5 o'clock a.m.
                                March 2,
20                               Chicago, Illinois

21

22

23

24

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
 CONFEREES:

    MR. H. W.  BOSTON,

         Department of Health, Education,  and Welfare,
         U.  S.  Public  Health Service,  Division of
         Water Supply  & Pollution Control,
         Regional Program Director,  Illinois

    MR. BLUCHER A.  POOLE, Technical  Secretary, and
    MR. PERRY  MILLER,

         Stream Pollution Control Board,
         State Board of Health,  Indiana.

    MR. CLARENCE W. KLASSEN, Technical Secretary, and
    MR. RICHARD NELLE,

         State Sanitary Water Board,  Department
         of  Public Health, Illinois.

    MR. FRANK  W.  CHESROW, President,  and
    MR. GEORGE A. LANE,

         The Metropolitan Sanitary District
         of  Greater Chicago, Illinois.
Any slides and charts referred to, but not  inserted  in the
record, are on file at the United States Public Health Service,
Department of Health, Education,  and Welfare, Washington, D.C.

-------
  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
                          INDEX
STATEMENTS;
     MR. MURRAY STEIN, Chairman                            4

     HON. RICHARD J. DALEY, Mayor, City of Chicago        10

     HON. PAUL DOUGLAS, U. S. Senator, State of           16
        Illinois, presented by Mr. Kyran McOrath

     HON. DANIEL ROSTENKOWSKI, U. S. House of
        Representatives, presented by Mr. Kyran
        McGrath                                .           27

     DR. FRANKLIN YODER, Health Officer, State of
        Illinois                                          33

     MR. H. W. POSTON, Regional Program Director,
        Division of Water Supply and Pollution Control,
        U. S. Public Health Service, Department of
        Health, Education, and Welfare                    38

     MR. MAURICE LE BOSQUET, Special Assistant to
        the Chief, Division of Water Supply and
        Pollution Control, U.S. Public Health Service,
        Department of Health, Education, and Welfare      43

     MR. A. J. WAKEFIELD, representing HON. CHARLES
        A. MOSHER, U. S. House of Representatives,
        State of Ohio                                    191

     MR. MAURICE LE BOSQUET (continuing)                 194

     MR. WILLIAM Q. KEHR, Project Director, Great
        Lakes-Illinois River Basin Project, U. S.
        Public Health Service, Department of Health,
        Education, and Welfare                           278

     MR. H. W. POSTON, Summaries and Conclusions         281

     COL. JOHN C. MATTINA, District Engineer, U..S.
        Army Corps of Engineers, Chicago, Illinois       289

     MR. K. L. KOLLAR, Director, Water Industries
        and Engineering Service Division, U. S.
        Department of Commerce                           308

     MR. CLARENCE W. KLASSEN, Technical Secretary,
        State Sanitary Water Board, Department of
        Public Health, Illinois                          313

-------

1
2
if
3
4
5
6

7
8

9

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
3-A
STATEMENTS: (Continued)

DR. GERALD ATLAS, Director, Medical Services,
Chicago Park District
MR. GLEN W. METCALFE, Supervisor of Sanitation,
Chicago Park District, Chicago, Illinois
LETTERS, COMMUNICATIONS, REPORTS, ETC.

TELEGRAM from HON. SIDNEY R. YATES, U. S.
House of Representatives
LETTER from HON. ROBERT MC CLORY, U. S.
House of Representatives
REPORT ON POLLUTION OF THE WATERS OF THE GRAND
CALUMET RIVER, LITTLE CALUMET RIVER, CALUMET
RIVER, LAKE MICHIGAN, WOLF LAKE AND THEIR
TRIBUTARIES, presented by MR. LE BOSQUET


















314

316


29

29



43
















-------
  !        CHAIRMAN STEIN:   The  conference is open.
  2                  This conference in the matter of pollution
  3   of the interstate waters of the Grand Calumet River, Little
  4   Calumet River,  Calumet River,  Lake Michigan, Wolf Lake
  5   and their tributaries, involving the States of Indiana
  6   and Illinois,  and the  Department of Health, Education, and
  7   Welfare,   is  being held under  the provisions of Section
  8   8 of the Federal  Water Pollution Control Act.
  g                  The purpose of  the conference is to
 10   bring together the State water pollution control agencies,
 u   representatives of the Department of Healtn, Education,
 12   and Welfare,  and  other interested parties to review the
 13   existing  situation, to appraise what progress  has been
 14   made,  to  lay  a  basis for future action,  and to give the
 15   States,  localities, and industries an opportunity to
 16   take any  remedial action which may be indicated under
 17   State and local law.
 18                  The conference  technique  is rather an
 19   old one.   It  is used informally by many  State  agencies
2Q   in the normal  conduct  of their busmeaa  in the field of
21   water pollution control.   The  conference system was pro-
22   posed by  the United States  Supreme Court as long ago
23   as 1921  in the  famous  case  of  New York versus  New Jersey
    involving interstate pollution.   I would  like  to  quote
25
24
    from this decision:

-------
                                                   5
 !                  "We cannot withhold the suggestion,
 2         inspired by the consideration of this case,  that the
 3         grave problem of sewage disposal by the large and
 4         growing population living on the shores or  New
 5         York Bay is one more readily to be most wisely
 6         solved by cooperative study and by conference and
 7         mutual concession on the part or representatives
 8         of the States so vitally interested in it than by
 g         proceedings in any court however constituted."
10                   And I don't think we have to emphasize
n   for the people of Chicago and Indiana and the lake states
 2   the aptness of that quote from the Supreme Court.
13                   We strongly support the conference
..   technique and we consider as successes those problems
15   which are solved at the conference table, rather than
16   in court.
17                   As specified in Section 8 of the Federal
lg   Water Pollution Control Act, the Secretary of Health,
    Education,  and Welfare has notified the official State
*y
20   water pollution control agencies of this conference.
21   These agencies are the Indiana Stream Pollution Control
22   Board and the Illinois State Sanitary Water Board.
                    Indiana will be represented by Mr.
24   Blucher Poole, accompanied by Mr.  Perry Miller.  Illinois
_c   will  be represented by Mr. Clarence Klassen,  accompanied

-------
                                                         6
    by Mr. Richard Nelle of the State Sanitary  Water Board;
 l
    and Colonel Frank Chesrow, accompanied  by Mr.  Lane  of
 2
    the Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater  Chicago.
 3
                   Mr. Lane, I'm happy to see that we have
 4
    another lawyer up here; we're surrounded  by engineers
 s
    and others.

 6
                   Mr. H. W. Poston of the  Chicago
 7
    regional office of the Department of Health, Education, and
 8
    Welfare, the Regional Program Director  for  the water
 9
    pollution control program, has been designates as

10
    conferee for the Federal Government.
11
                   My name is Murray Stein.   I  am  from
12
    Washington, D.C., headquarters of the Department of

13
    Healou, Education, and Welfare, and am  the  representative

14
    of Secretary of Health, Education, and  Welfare,  Anthony J.

15
16


17


18


19


20


21


22


23


24


25
Celebrezze.

               The conferees are privilege^ to invite

whomever they wish to participate in these proceedings.

               Both the States andthe Federal Government

have responsibilities in dealing with interstate water

pollution control problems.  The Federal Water

Pollution Control Act declares that the States have

primary rights and responsibilities ior taking action

to abate and control Interstate pollution, and

it has always been the policy of the Department of

-------
     Health, Education, and Welfare to give full recognition to
     this traditional role of the States, and to encourage them
     in these activities.
                    At the same time, the Department of
     Health, Education, and Welfare is charged o# law with
     its own specific responsibilities in connection with
     interstate pollution control problems.
                    The Secre<»vj ox health,  Education, and
     Welfare is required to call a conference such as this when,
10   on the basis or reports, surveys, or studies, he has
     reason to believe that pollution subject to abatement
12   under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act is
13   occurring.  The Act provides that pollution of inter-
14   state waters, which endangers the health or welfare
15   of persons in a State other than that in which the
16   discharges originate, is subject to abatement.
17                  The conference will be useful, we hope,
18   in providing a clear picture of the problem, in
19   delineating the progress which has already been
20   accomplished, and in indicating what needs to be done
21   to correct the problem in these interstate waters,
22                  All the conferees will be called upon
23   to make statements.  The conferees, in addition, may
24   call upon participants whom they have invited to the
25   conference to make statements.  At the conclusion of

-------
                                                          8
     such statements,  the conferees  will be given an oppor-
     tunity to  comment or ask questions, and at the conclusion
     of the conferees'  comments  or questions,  I may ask a
     question or two.   This  procedure  has in the past proven
     effective  in reaching equitable solutions.
                    At the end of all  the statements, we will
     have a discussion among the conferees and try to arrive
     at a basis of agreement on  the  facts of the situation.
     Then we will attempt to summarize the conference
lo   orally, giving the conferees, of  course,  the right to
n   amend or modify the summary.
12                  Under the Federal  law,  the Secretary
13   is required at the conclusion of  the conference to send
14   a  summary  of it to all  the  conferees.   The summary,
15   according  to law,  must  cover the  following points:
16        1.  Occurrence of  pollution  of interstate waters
17           subject  to abatement under the Federal Act;
18        2.  Adequacy of measures taken toward abatement
19           of pollution;  and
20        3.  Nature of delays,  if any,  being encountered
21           in abating the pollution.
22                  The Secretary is also required to make
23   recommendations for remedial action if such recommendations
24   are indicated.
25                  Now,  a word  about  the procedure

-------
    governing the  record  of the  conference.   A verbatim



    transcript of  the  conference is  being made for the



    purposes  of aiding us in preparing a  summary and  of



    providing a complete  record  of what is said and done



    here.



                    We  will make  copies of the summary and



    transcript available  to the  official  water pollution



 8  control agencies of Indiana  and  Illinois.



 9                  We  have found that, generally,  it  is



10  best that people should request  transcripts through



    their  State agency, rather than  come  directly to  the



12  Federal Government.   The reason  for this  is that  we would



13  prefer the people  who are interested  in the problem to



14  follow their normal relations in dealing  with State



15  agencie rather than the Federal  Government on these



16  matters when the conference  has  been  concluded.



17                  We  will be most happy  to make this



18  material  available to the States for  distribution.



19                  I would suggest that all speakers  and



20  participants other than the  conferees making statements



21  come to the lectern and identify themselves for purposes



22  of the record.



23                  At  this point, we are  indeed privileged



24  to be  able to  present Mayor  Richard Daley of the  City



25  of Chicago.

-------
                                                      10
                    Mayor Daley.

 2                                  (Applause.)

 3       MAYOR DALEY:  Thank you very  much,  Chairman Murray

    Stein.

                    Mr. Poole, Frank Chesrow,  Clarence

    Klassen, ladies and gentlemen,  as  Mayor  of  Chicago,  I

    wish to welcome all of the people  who are participating

    here today.

 9                  The problem of water pollution is of the

10  deepest concern to all of our citizens,  regardless  of

    wherever they may live, regardless of their economic

12  status.

13                  This meeting in  which we  are all  parti-

14  cipating can be a tremendous first step  in  initiating a

15  program that will do much to abate the pollution of our

15  most precious resource.

17                  I wish to express my appreciation to the

19  United States Department of Health, Education,  and

19  Welfare, Public Health Service,  for this  opportunity to

20  testify on this critical issue  of  water  pollution control

21  and abatement.

22                  Present here today  are public officials

23  and engineers from the city who will testify and will

24  be happy to answer any questions.

25                  In September of  1963, we  testified before

-------
 9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
                                                  11
the House Subcommittee on Natural Resources and Power on
the identical subject matter we are addressing ourselves
to here today.
               I  stated then it was our general philo-
sophy to try to solve our local problems of lake pollution
originating from  our own and neighboring communities and
industries by active and friendly cooperative efforts
with them as well as with the state health agencies in
Illinois and Indiana.
               I  still believe that we should explore
every avenue of cooperation, but the publication since
then of the report by the Division of Water Supply and
Pollution Control has made it apparent that cooperation
alone is not sufficient to meet the critical threat to
Lake Michigan and other bodies of water supply and
recreation.
               I will leave it to the engineers and
technicians to discuss the scientific results of the
survey, but the conclusion of this report is
inescapable.
               That conclusion is that at present
there exists a greater amount of pollution than should
be permitted — that the pollution is on the increase ~
and is showing definite signs of causing degradation of
the lake.

-------
                                                       12
 i                  The problem of water pollution has always
 2   been with us.  Its emergence as a definite threat to the
 3   health and welfare of our people has risen from the
 4   urbanization of our area — the increase of population —
 5   the expansion of industry — and the development of new
 6   products which may bring new and unknown pollutants.
 7                  History will show that Chicago has been
 8   in the forefront in recognizing that bold and drastic
 9   measures are often necessary to solve pollution
10   problems.
n                  Hundreds of millions of dollars have been
12   spent by the citizens of the Chicago area in reversing
13   the flow of the river and establishing a sewage disposal
14   system that is recognized as one of the engineering
15   wonders of the world.
16                  But we have not rested on these accomplish-
17   ments.
18                  In order to maintain the quality of our
19   water in the last 12 years  alone,  we have spent
20   $250,000,000 for capital improvements to insure the
21   purity of our water and the adequacy of its use for
22   fire protection for our citizens and industries in 63
23   suburbs in the metropolitan area.
24                  We appreciate that there have been voluntary
25   efforts made and substantial sums of money spent

-------
                                                         13
 i   to meet  the  threat of water pollution,  but  the  people
 2   of this  area are  now demanding that  bold  and  drastic
 3   measures be  taken to solve  our pollution  problems.
 4                   Our 1965-1969 five-year  water  works
 5   capital  improvement program calls for an  additional
 6   expenditure  of  approximately $69,000,000.
 7                   I  also take  pride in  the fact  that
 8   in 1961  a survey  to determine the adequacy  for  fire
 9   fighting of  the Chicago Water System, made  by the
10   National Board  of Fire Underwriters, resulted in the
n   water system being graded class one.
12                   Chicago is the only city with  a
13   population of over one million to receive this  dis-
14   tinction.
is                   The standard of our drinking water has
16   always been  considered among the highest  in the Nation.
17                   The absolute necessity for maintaining
18   the purity of our water resources is obvious, but is
19   worth repetition.
20                   Of the highest priority, of  course, is that
21   the health of our people depends on  the purity  of our
22   water.
23                   There can be no excuse.  We  cannot
24   tolerate even a remote possibility that the waters of
25   Lake Michigan shall become  defiled and  that the life of

-------
 !   this living lake be imperiled.
 2                  Lake Michigan has not only provided
 3   the residents of the metropolitan area with unparalleled
 4   recreational facilities, but also to millions of people
 5   throughout the Nation and the world.
 6                  With the growth of our population and the
 7   utilization of land for residential and industrial pur-
 8   poses the recreational facilities we do have must be
 9   highly treasured.
10                  We cannot permit any spoliation of
11   this great resource.
12                  Another highly important factor is the
13   aesthetic contribution.
14                  The shore line of Lake Michigan is our
15   front yard and it is considered one of the most fabulous
16   and beautiful front yards in the world.
17                  Unlike any other of our Great Lake
is   cities, you cannot only go swimming in Lake Michigan, but
19   you can breathe air unspoiled by foul odors.
20                  The Federal pollution report has spelled
21   out the pollution problems facing us now and the dangers
22   that are ahead unless prompt control measures are
23   Initiated.
24                  I am confident that all of the parties
25   involved ~ the states, the counties, local governments,

-------
                                                     15
     and private industries—will cooperate fully with the
     Federal Government in meeting the serious challenge
     that faces all of us.
                    I pledge the full support and cooperation
     of the City of Chicago.
 6                  In the words of President Johnson:
 7                  "It is true that we have often been
 8        careless with our natural bounty.  At times we have
 g        paid a heavy price for this neglect.  But once
10        our people were aroused to the danger, we have
11        acted to preserve our resources for the enrichment
12        of our country and the enjoyment of future
13        generations."
14                  With this,  Mr. Chairman and gentlemen
is   of the panel, I thank you  again for this opportunity.
16                  As the Chairman had said in his
17   opening remarks,  our governments,  our states must
18   cooperate because this is  a very important problem and
19   it challenges all of us, and with the resources of the
20   Federal Government,  the states, the local governments,
21   the health agencies,  the lawyers and private industry,
22   we can and we must and we  will preserve this great lake
23   for future posterity.
24                                     (Applause.)
25        CHAIRMAN STEIN:   Thank you, Mayor Daley, for a

-------
  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
                                                    16
comprehensive statement.

               I think we  can all  see why  Chicago  has

preserved its natural resources as much as it has  with

the tremendous problems that you have in Chicago.   And

as you well know, this is a jewel of a resource on your

lake.

               I remember the last time I  was at a

meeting with the Mayor.  It was in Honolulu at the

Mayor's Conference — one at which President Kennedy

spoke.  Even in Honolulu and in Hawaii we  found

pollution.  I think you should be proud of the City

that you have here, with the beaches open  and the

preservation of the water resources.  Because I am not sure

that the Hawaiian Islands, with all their  publicity and

the beautiful pictures, can match your record, especially

if given a similar population growth.  You have done

a magnificent job.

                                     (Applause.)

               We would like next to call  on Mr.

Kyran McGrath who has a statement for Senator Paul

Douglas.

               Mr. McGrath.

     MR. MC GRATH:  Thank you,  Mr. Stein, members  of

the conference, the statement of Senator Paul Douglas
                                                                           f

-------
     is as follows:
                    Mr. Chairman, I shall waste no words
     in describing the crucial necessity of our having pure
     water in lower Lake Michigan for household and individual
     use,  and for all forms of recreation and industry.
                    But it should be mentioned perhaps
     that  thus far Chicago has provided the purest and
     cheapest drinking water in the country,  and that by
 9   reversing the flow of the Chicago Hive?,  we saved Lake
10   Michigan from being polluted by our wastes.
11                  Through the activated sludge process
12   we have  developed the most efficient method of treating
13   household sewage which leaves but a ten percent
14   residual of  solid matter.   But even this  is a high
is   total  amount.
16                  In the country, over the years, hard work,
17   imaginative  efforts and large sums of money have been
18   expended in  the fight against pollution.
19                  The effort here is superb, but it is
20   not enough.
21                  The rate of pollution is aggravated
22   here,  as in  any metropolitan complex,  by  population
23   growth,  industrial growth,  and new technology.
24                  The problem is complicated by the fact
25   that pollution does not recognize political boundaries,

-------
                                                      18
 1   and that pollution originating in Indiana can and does
 2   do injury in Illinois, and to a much lesser degree,
 3   vice versa.
 4                  Illinois shares with Indiana this
 5   southern tip of Lake Michigan, a vast body of fresh
 6   water which is the only one of the Great Lakes  lying
 7   altogether within the United States.
 8                  Our two states also share the Calumet
 9   River System.
10                  If the people of Chicago and the
n   Calumet area are to enjoy the fullest benefits  of these
12   waters in the years to come, Illinois and Indiana must
13   work together to reduce existing pollution, to  Improve
u   the quality of the degraded waters, and to keep clean
is   waters clean.
16                  The two states must establish and
17   enforce realistic and effective minimum pollution
18   tolerances.
19                  The conference convened today in Chicago
20   in the matter of the interstate pollution of the waters
21   of the Grand Calumet, the Little Calumet, the Calumet,
22   Lake Michigan,, Wolf Lake, and their tributaries brings
23   together representatives of the State of Illinois, the
24   State of Indiana, the City of Chicago, and the
25   Government of the United States to review the state

-------
                                                       19
 j   of pollution and the progress made toward its control,

 2   to lay a basis for future action by all of those

 3   concerned,  and to afford the two States and the

 4   localities  an opportunity to take any remedial action

 ,   under Federal, State and local laws.
 O
 6                  Possibly, we may need new laws.

                    The Secretary of Health, Education, and

 g   Welfare has called this conference under the enforcement

 g   authority of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.

10                  As the activities authorized by that

n   Act are already to our benefit through the Great

12   Lakes-Illinois River Basin comprehensive study under-

13   taken several years ago, I hope that this conference

14   will result in a new resolve and a realistic program

15   for the cleanup of the southern tip of Lake Michigan

16   and the Calumet River System.

17                  The effects of pollution are manifest.

18                  Disagreeable tastes and odors in

19   drinking water, and the need for more expensive and

20   difficult treatment of municipal water supplies in both

21    states are  only part of the price of pollution.

22                  The water here is still safe to drink,

23   but further impairment of domestic water supplies

24   cannot be tolerated.

2S                  Pollution also greatly reduces the

-------
                                                         20
 i   recreational opportunities in our heavily populated
 2   area.
 3                  Many waters near  Chicago  are  now unsafe
 4   for swimming and other water sports.
 5                  The Grand Calumet and  the Indiana
 6   Harbor Canal are unfit for any recreational  use.
 7                  Lake Michigan and Wolf Lake must be
 8   preserved for this purpose.
 9                  Our people should not  have to drive for
10   miles on a weekend to avoid dirty beaches or beaches
11   too crowded for enjoyment because not  enough of them
12   are safe from pollution.
13                  To many a city dweller, who cannot  get
14   away, a posted beach means no swimming at all for  his
is   family for the entire summer.
16                  Pollution likewise spoils opportunities
17   for boating, water skiing and fishing.
18                  In some waters there are  no fish, in
19   others only rough varieties.
20                  Property values suffer near polluted
21   water.
22                  Not the fflnallast loss,  is  the  loss of
23   beauty.
24                  If you befoul it, you  take something
25   away from the people that cannot be put  down in terms  of

-------
                                                         21
  i I dollars and cents.
                    But the fact that this cannot be
     measured should not cause it to be ignored.
                    Illinois and Indiana municipalities
     and  industry share the responsibility for the degrada-
     tion of these waters.
                    Combined sewer overflows,  dredging,
     storage tank and barge spills,  lake vessel,  barge tow,
     and  pleasure craft wastes inflict local or temporary
 10
 11
 12
 13
 14
 15
 16
 17
 18
 19
20
21
22
23
24
25
damages.
               Gary, East Chicago, and Hammond in
Indiana, and Greater Chicago and Bloom Township in
Illinois, are the principal sources of municipal wastes.
               The genral absence of disinfection,
the many small treatment plants discharging into ditches
and small streams with little dilution water, and
combined sewer overflow are described as the major
municipal deficiencies in waste disposal.
               The volume of industrial wastes is
much heavier.
               Steel plants and, to a lesser extent,
oil refineries and chemical plants are major sources of
waste.  The Grand Calumet River and Indiana Harbor Canal
are heavily polluted, with the visual effects of the
Harbor's discoloration reaching  into Lake Michigan.

-------
                                                        22
 I   The Canal and its banks are covered with oil.  During
 2   rainstorms the overflow from combined storm and sani-
 3   tary sewers is discharged directly to the streams,
 4   contributing raw sewage, bacterial pollution and
 5   suspended solids, as well as pollution from any
 6   industrial wastes present in the city sewer sytem,
 7   to the total pollution load carried by the waterways.
 9                  A detailed discussion of pollution
 9   sources and effects is the province of the experts.  They
10   are described in the recent report by the Department
11   of Health, Education, and Welfare and they are
12   startling and frightening.  It is my purpose in
13   highlighting some of them to only underscore the
14   seriousness of the pollution which is the business of
is   this conference and the sense of urgency with which
ie   it must be attacked.
17                  Mr. Chairman, I look to your success in
18   this conference.
19                  The Federal Water Pollution Control Act,
20   the law under which you are holding this conference,
21   has been a strong force for the prevention, control and
22   abatement of water pollution in the United States
23   since its enactment in 1956.  To make it a more
24   effective instrument, the Senate has passed, and the
25   House of Representatives is expected to consider

-------
                                                       23
    shortly,  a bill to create the Federal Water Pollution
    Control  Administration,  to give the Secretary of Health,
    Education,  and Welfare permissive authority to set
    water  quality standards  for interstate waters, to
    increase  the dollar limitations on grants for construction
    of municipal waste treatment works, to give a "bonus"
    in the amount of a grant for projects In conformity
    with metropolitan area plans,  to authorize a four-
    year program for the development of new and improved
10   methods of coping with the problem of overflow from
11   combined  sewers,  and to  give statutory expression
12   to a positive national clean water policy.  It was
13   my privilege to join Senator Edmund S. Muskie of
14   Maine, and  thirty other  Senators,  in sponsoring the
is   legislation.  That Bill, S.4,  known as the Water Quality
16   Act of 1965, passed the  Senate by a roll call vote
                                      •
17   of 68  to  8  on January 28.
18                   When it becomes a law, the new Federal
19   Water  Pollution Control  Administration will provide an
20   administrative tool which will help us deal better
21   with the  National water  pollution control program for
22   the American people.   I  have a high regard for the
23   dedicated men and women  of the Public Health Service
24   who fight a good fight against disease.   But I do
25   not believe that a medically-oriented agency is the

-------
                                                       24
     appropriate organization for  the  conduct of an aggressive,
     sometimes  controversial  program such as  the control  of
     water pollution.   Water  pollution control is part and
     parcel of  water resources management.  That broad
     concept is not given needed emphasis by  the Public
     Health Service.  Nor is  the program given the
     identity and the status  which it  warrants as one  of
     several divisions  in one of several bureaus in the
     Public Health Service.   I foresee a more dynamic
10    National program with the creation of  the Federal Water
11    Pollution  Control  Administration  in the  Department of
12    Health,  Education, and Welfare, a program devoted to
13    curbing water pollution, and  I  hope that no bureaucratic
14    struggle for power will  delay this overdue adminlstra-
15    tive  reform.
16                  Another section  of the  Water Quality
17    Act to which I want to call attention  is that which
is    establishes  a research and development program relating
19    to combined  sewers.  Chicago  has  exciting plans for
20    the exploration of new and Improved  methods for con-
21    trolling the  discharges  from  combined  sewers,  and I
22    believe  the  Metropolitan Sanitary District is in  a
23    strong position to qualify for a  demonstration grant
24    under this new authority.  The Increase  in the dollar
25    limitations on waste treatment works construction

-------
 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
grants  will  give more  nearly equitable  treatment  to the



cities  of  the middle  size  which  have  been  receiving



far  less than the thirty percent of project  cost   which



the  law otherwise allows.    But  both  the total  appro-



priations  authorization  for  these grants,  $100  million



a  year  for the entire  Nation,  and the dollar ceilings



of $600,000  (30^ minimum)  for a  city, or $2.4 million



for  one project involving  a  number of cities permit



far  less assistance in the cities of  the country  than



the  huge size of the problem requires.   Certainly



the  great  metropolitan areas of  the country,  such as



New  York,  with its 15  million  people  and that of  Chicago



which now  includes approximately 7 million,  and will



shortly include at least 10  million,  should  not be



shackled by  the ceiling  of $2.4  million in the  present
bill.
                 Our problems here  cover  a multitude  of
localities  and  two proud  and  independent  states.



But they  are  also interdependent  and  each needs the  coop-



eration of  the  other.     We also  need the cooperation



of the great  industries of the  area.   They  are now  able



to throw  off  a  major portion  of the social costs of



their industrial wastes upon the general  public.    I



appeal to them  to hasten the treatment of their wastes



so that they will no longer endanger the public.

-------
                                                        26
                    Mr.  Chairman,  one  more  point.   While
     interstate  compacts have been useful in  the past,  I
     think we need a more effective weapon  against  bi-
     state pollution in  the future. The Federal, state and
     local governments should not  be regarded as mutual
     enemies.  Each  has a part to  play and  I  hope we  can
     agree on a  program  whereby we can raise  the standards
     of performance  instead of adjusting downwards  to the
 9    level of the lowest.  The states  and municipalities
10    should adopt safe and realistic minimum  standards  of
u    pollution,  and  then see to It that the individuals,
12    industries, cities, and states adhere  to these
13    standards.
14                   As man's genius has taken the bountiful
15    water resources which are the legacy of  the people of
16    our area and made them do his will, so man's pro-
17    fligacy has squandered a goodly part of  that legacy
18    through gross pollution.  Lake Michigan  is a
19    magnificent heritage and is vital to both Illinois
20    and Indiana.  I hope that 1965 will be the year  when
21    the still unspoiled strip of  the  Indiana Dunes will
22    be set aside for the perpetual education, inspirational
23    and invaluable  recreational use of the people.   I  hope
24    that it will also be the year when the people  of
25    Illinois and the people of Indiana Join  hands  to

-------
                                                        27
     restore the degraded waters of the lake and the Calumet
     River System for the everlasting benefit of the people.
 3        CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Thank you, Mr. McGrath.
 4                  Do you have Congressman Rostenkowski's
     statement,  too?
 6        MR. MC GRATH:  Yes, I do.
 7                  Congressman Rostenkowski was unable to
     be  here today due to pressing legislative matters of the U. S.
     House of Representatives.
10                  He asked me if I would present his statement
     for him.
12                  It goes, briefly:
13                  The protection of the valuable water
14   resources of the Chicago area is a matter of Immediate concern
15   I believe this timely conference on the interstate waters of
16   the Calumet River system, Wolf Lake and the southern end of
17   Lake Michigan will be of great help to the City of Chicago in
18   its program to keep the areas1 waters clean.
19                  Chicagoans are indeed fortunate to
20   have an abundance of fresh water nearby.  The clear,
21   cool waters of Lake Michigan are a constant source
22   of  pleasure.  Swimmers, water skiers,  boaters and
23   fishermen are on the lake in ever-increasing numbers
24   on  every sunny summer weekend.  Nor can we overlook
25   the sheer beauty of Lake Michigan.  Its value to the

-------
                                                       28
     residents  of  this  area  is  inestimable.
                    The recreational uses of Lake Michigan
     are only a part of its  great  importance and  value.   We
     depend on  the  clean waters of the  lake  for the water
     we drink and  use in our homes.   The  lake supplies the
     water for  all  domestic  uses for millions of  people in
     the Chicago area.
                    Preservation of Chicago's water
     resources  is  not a luxury,  but  a necessity.   The  uses
10   of many streams in this area  already have been limited
11   by the effects of  pollution.   This pollution can  be,
12   and must be abated.  Further,  it is  vitally  important
13   that we take  firm  measures to insure that the clean
14   waters of  this area remain clean.
15                  It  is my belief that  the cities and in-
16   dustrles of this area,  the state agencies and the
17   Department of  Health, Education, and Welfare hold
is   clean water as a universal goal, and will be able to
19   work together  to preserve  and protect our precious
20   water resources.
21                  Mr. Chairman,  thank you.
22       CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Thank you, Mr. McGrath,  for that
23   statement.
24                  We  also  have a statement from Mr.  Chesrow
25   now, another  former Congressman.   You know,  you have so

-------
                                                        29
 j   many Congressmen from the  Chicago area and Illinois who
 .   are interested  in the problem,  that we who work in
 A
 3   water pollution control  and  natural resources have a
 4   lot of favorites here, and all  of these are really
 5   among the most  effective Congressmen,  and the next one
 6   is, too.
 7                   Colonel Chesrow.
 8        MR. CHESROW:  I have  a  telegram here from Sidney
 -   Yates, a member of Congress.
10                   "Regret cannot be  with you at this
n        conference tomorrow because  of important leglsla-
12        tion pending in Washington.
13                   "Am very  much interested in the results
         of the  conference.  Please keep me advised.
.,                   "Kindest  regards,  Sidney R. Yates,
lo
,c        Member  of  Congress."
lo
17        CHAIRMAN STEIN:   Thank you,  Colonel.
18                   Neat,  we  have a  letter from Congressman
19   Robert McClory,  Just  to  show this is on a bipartisan
20   basis and that  letter is addressed to Mr. Poston.
21                   I will call on Mr. Poston now for Mr.
22   McClory*s remarks.   Mr.  Poston.
23        MR. POSTON:  Thank  you, Mr.  Stein.
24                   This letter is addressed to me and
25   received yesterday and it  reads:

-------
                                                        30
     "Dear Mr. Poston:
                   It is with regret  that  I find
     it impossible to attend the conference  which has
     been scheduled in Chicago, commencing on March  2,  1965.
     Accordingly, I would be grateful  if you would present
     this letter to the conference.
                   "As you know from  our previous relation-
     ships, I have had a special Interest in the subject of
     water pollution and various legislative and administrative
10    control measures involving this subject.   Indeed,  I
11    regret that my Congressional duties are such that
12    my presence will be required in Washington, rendering
13    it Impossible for me to attend, in person, the
     interesting and important conference about to get
is    under way.
16                  "I, of course, had occasion to study
17    in detail the report submitted by your  Division of
     Water Supply and Pollution Control to the Subcommittee
19    on Natural Resources and Power (the Jones Committee)
20    at the hearings conducted in Chicago in August, 1963.
21    In. addition, I have noted your more recent report,  of
22    February 1965, which provides a basis of information
23    for the conference, itself.  Many other sources of
24    information have come to my attention establishing
25    that many conditions of pollution and threats of
     pollution exist in the areas in which the conference

-------
                                                       31
     is primarily concerned.
                    "The problems confronting the conferees
     are complicated by the multiple uses to which the
     waters of Lake Michigan (primarily)must be put.  It
     would seem important to recognize that these various
     domestic, recreational, industrial and other appro-
     priate uses of this great body of water are legitimate
     and necessary.  I would hope,  however, that at no time
     will it be necessary for Lake  Michigan to receive the
10    treated effluent of the Metropolitan Sanitary District.
11                   "I am confident that the purpose of the
12 •   conference procedures will be  fulfilled if the
13    conferees (l)  identify the principal sources and
14    trends of pollution in the area and (2) develop
is    practical and  positive schedules for reduction of
16    pollution in these vital waters of Lake Michigan and
17    the related rivers and streams.
18                   "The existing Federal legislation and
19    its administration by the Public Health Service,
20    coupled with the substantial provisions of the
21    Illinois Statutes (with which  I am familiar), and the
22    Indiana Statutes (with which I must confess an
23    unfamiliarity),  as well as the great financial capacity
24    of the states, communities and industries involved,
25    should be adequate for correcting conditions which will be

-------
                                                        32
     found to exist.   There Is  certainly,  within this
     great and wealthy metropolitan area,  adequate state,
     local and private resources  to provide the necessary
     treatment and  disposal of  the  various municipal arid
     industrial wastes to  the end that  a high quality of
     water in Lake  Michigan may be  preserved and that
     the  quality of the various other waters may be
     enhanced.
                    "In connection  with arriving at satis-
10   factory  solutions,  it  would  seem extremely worthwhile
n   to explore fully  the  desirability  of  an adequate
12   interstate compact in which  the States of Illinois,
13   Indiana,  Michigan and  Wisconsin might all be Joined.
u   This suggestion is in line with the Congressional
is   admonition contained  in the  1961 Federal Water
16   Pollution Control Act.
17                  "I am  hoping  that the  conference will
18   also give adequate  attention to pollution and threats
19   of pollution from septic systems,  including their
20   effects  upon both surface  and  underground water sources.
21                  "The substantial progress which has been
22   made in  recent years in reducing pollution in this
23   area,  resulting particularly from  the development of
24   municipal and  industrial waste  treatment facilities,
25   should not deter  the  conferees  from recommending

-------
                                                        33
     accelerated programs having in mind existing practical
     and  financial considerations.
                    "In conclusion, may I reemphasize the
     importance of coordinated action in which local,
     state  and Federal agencies join in an overall spirit
     of cooperation and respect to  the end that all of
     these  interests,  as well as the broader public interest,
     may  be well served.
 9                  "Sincerely yours, Robert Me Glory,
10   Member of Congress."
H       CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Thank you, Mr. Boston.
12                  The Governor of Indiana, Mr. Roger
13   Brannigan, regrets he cannot be here because of the
14   press  of  legislative duties at home, and we have the
15   same sincere regrets from Otto Kerner of Illinois.
     However,  in Governor Kerner*s  place, we will now hear
17   from Dr.  Franklin Yoder, the Health Officer of the
18   State  of  Illinois.    Dr. Yoder.
19       DR.  YODER:  Mr. Stein, fellow conferees,
20   distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen.  I also
21   understand that we have  a very fine representation  here
22   from various citizen groups.
23                  I heard somebody mention the League  of
24   Women  Voters are  here.  I think this is excellent.
25                  In view of Mayor Daley»s forthright

-------
     statement,  I will abridge my remarks  to a certain extent
     because I do not want to duplicate anyone's
     comments.
                    I would like, however,  to say that in
     the beginning I am going to quote from Justice  Oliver
     Wendell Holmes when he said, "A river" — and I insert
     "or a fresh water lake" — is more than an amenity.
     It is a treasure.  It offers the necessity of life that
     must be rationed wisely among those who have power
10   over it."
11                 This was in a 1931 decision involving
12   the Delaware River.  They may be even  more meaningful
13   and appropriate to us today as we convene for this
14   Important conference.
is                 Unlike the pioneering days, this portion
is   of Lake Michigan with its surrounding  streams and
17   rivers must now serve many complex purposes  essential
18   to living.  All too often, we lose sight  of  these
19   essential multipurpose uses of water which include:
20   sources of vital domestic water supply,  an abundant
21   source of protein food, a vehicle for  commercial trans-
22   portatlon, an expanding recreational facility,  necessary
23   irrigation for crops and drink for livestock, power  for
24   the wheels of Industry, as well as the necessary
25   raw material for industrial use.

-------
                                                      35
 i                   In fact, the very existence, to say
 2   nothing of the expansion,  of our Industrial economy
 3   depends upon this raw material.   For in a modern community,
 4   we  rely on water to absorb and transport waste products
 5   from our very municipal and industrial doorsteps.
 g                   Despite the man-made municipal and state
 7   boundaries,  this area has  been pre-eminently constituted
 8   by  nature into a community.  Whether our allegiance is
 g   to  Indiana,  Illinois, Chicago or East Chicago, we,
10   nevertheless, live in this community where both the human
u   and industrial health and  progress is mutually affected
12   by  the  degree of the purity of the water.
13                   From a geological point of view, the
14   Great Lakes  area is relatively young, but we are old
15   beyond  our years in regard to the use of the Lake
16   Michigan water resources.   Obviously, there is general
17   agreement and acceptance of the  premise that we can no
18   longer  afford to continue  to waste this resource, but
19   concerning the methods of  its conservation and its
20   priority of use, there is  a wide disagreement and
21   divergence of opinion.  While many of these problems are
22   relatively old politically, technically, and legally,
23   the awareness of the public to them is new.
24                   The current water resources problem in
2s   this area is that of maintaining the quality of our new

-------
                                                       36
 i   and used water, suitable for reuse.  We  cannot afford
 2   to restrict the municipal and industrial growth of
 3   this area with the concept that we are running out
 4   of suitable water.  We cannot afford to  use water  once
 5   and then discard it unless it is discharged suitable for
 6   use again for the many purposes it is now intended.  A
 7   supply of water adequate in quantity and satisfactory in
 s   quality for all future domestic and industrial uses for
 9   this area might be considered a health officer's dream.
10   I am advised that this is something which can be accom-
n   plished through engineering technology.  However,  it may
12   not become a reality for reasons which have little
13   relation to technology or public health.  It may be a
14   question of money.  A clash of local interest may  be
is   an obstacle.
15                  The necessary water development may
17   remain in the "dream stage" because of legal considerations
19   and political differences.  Technical considerations
19   are based upon real, ascertainable factors.  Political,
20   legal and governmental considerations may involve  incon-
21   sistent and uncertain factors.  Public opinion often
22   becuase of the lack of knowledge and appreciation  of the
23   value and use of water may assume unpredictable propor-
24   tions.  These uncertainties may through knowledge, under-
25   standing, and appreciation, change from the politically

-------
                                                       37
    impossible  or the economically unfeasible to the
    possible.   Often the  urgent  need for coordinated public
    action  becomes apparent  when the seriousness of the
    problem and feasible  solutions are explained and con-
    sidered.  It Is my hope  that this conference will
    stimulate such understanding and promote  such appre-
    ciation of  water use.
                    In closing then, it is recognized that
    water occupies an unparalleled place In the personal and
10   economic life of this area.   As a resource,  water is a
11   requirement so basic  to  our  very existence that all
12   other resources are either dependent upon a plentiful
13   supply  of clean water, or, in its absence,  other
14   resources are valueless  for  use and development.  While
is   many of our national  resources vanish with use, the
16   use of  water merely produces changes in its position,
17   quality and quantity.  Viewing the area involved in this
18   conference  as a community, one with mutual health and
19   economic interests, I can best conclude by paraphrasing
20   the words of an industrialist when he recently said,
21   "Cooperation is not a mere sentiment,  but in this area,
22   a public health and economic necessity."   With the
23   population  and industrial growth predicted for this area,
24   all of  us should help translate this cooperation into
25   action  — for "in today  walks tomorrow."   Thank you.

-------
                                                        33
 l         CHAIRMAN STEIN:   Thank you,  Dr.  Yoder.
 2                   Now,  we will turn to Mr. Poston for the
    formal presentation.    Mr.  Poston.
 4         MR.  POSTON:   Thank you,  Mr.  Stein.
 5                   Mr. Chairman,  conferees, ladies and
    gentlemen, my name is  H.  W.  Poston, and I am the
    Federal Conferee  for purposes of  this conference.
                    Normally,  I  direct the Water Supply &
    Pollution Control activities  of the  Public Health Service
10   in the States of  Illinois,  Indiana,  Ohio,  Michigan and
11   Wisconsin.
12                   Today,  water pollution control is one
13   of our most pressing social ard economic problems.   It
14   involves  the  public health, water management,  conservation
15   and  just  plain aesthetics.
16                   Water pollution has  been with us a long
17   time and  will be  a lot longer unless  we take a more
18   concerted action.
19                   President  Johnson has  shown continued
20   interest  and  concern for  pollution of our Nation's waters.
21   In his message on natural beauty, he  asked for stepped
22   up enforcement authority.  He said that the  Federal
23   Government must be able to  prevent pollution before it
24   happens and be able to prevent this pollution at the
25   very source rather than waiting until the pollution is in

-------
                                                       39
 1   the  streams.
 2                   He called every major river basin in
 3   America polluted and he stressed industrial pollution.
 4   He called  for stepped up enforcement or stepped-up
 5   effort  to  abate pollution from Federal installations.
 6                   This is three per cent of our National
 7   pollution  load.
 8                   The need for Increased research on
 g   pesticides was emphasized.  All in all, the message
10   calls for  a bigger and a better and a more aggressive
11   Federal water pollution control program.
12                   It specifically instructs the Secretary
13   of the  Department of Health,  Education, and Welfare to
H   undertake  an  intensive program to clean up the Nation's
is   most polluted streams.
16                   Congress has recognized the water
17   pollution  control problem.
18                   In September of 1963, a hearing was held
19   in Chicago by a House Subcommittee on Government
20   Operations.  A report on these hearings entitled "Water
21   Pollution  Control and Abatement in the Chicago Area,
22   Lower Lake Michigan," has just been released,  and it is
23   available  in  the rear of the  room.  This is a  copy of it.
24                   This report gives the views of many
25   interests  in  the area and it  is most complete.

-------
                    We from the Department of Health,
     Education,  and Welfare are here because of our enforcement
     responsibilities  under the Federal Water Pollution Control
     Act;  but in addition to the specific responsibilities in
     connection  with enforcement,  this Act provides many tools
     for a mutually broad attack on the water pollution control
     problem to  supplement the very significant efforts that
     have  been put forth by the states.
 9                  For example, this law authorizes
10   development of comprehensive  plans for utilizing the
     water resources of our river  basins.
12                  It authorizes funds for research to
13   develop new and better methods for waste treatment.
14                  It authorizes  financial assistance to
15   state water pollution control agencies and municipalities
16   to  strengthen their water pollution control programs.
17                  The Public Health Service has long been
18   interested  in the Chicago area.   It was in the summer of
19   1924  that the Trustees of the Sanitary District of
20   Chicago,  the Commissioner of  Health of the City of
21   Chicago and the Director of the  Health Department of
22   the State of Illinois and the Commissioner of Health
23   of  the State of Indiana Jointly  requested the Surgeon
24   General of  the Public Health  Service to cooperate with
25   them  in a study of the sewage pollution of Lake Michigan

-------
                                                      41
 i   In that area adjacent to the so-called Calumet District
 2   lying partly in  Illinois and partly in Indiana.
 3                  This  study was  reported on in 1927 after
 4   two years of field investigations.
 s                  In I960, the Public Health Service started
 6   a comprehensive  study of the Great Lakes-Illinois River
 7   Basin.  This is  the biggest and the most  thorough.
 8   investigation ever undertaken  on water quality in the country,
 9                  The greatest part of the activities of
10   the Great Lakes-Illinois River Basin project  to this date
n   have been on the Illinois River Basin in  Lake Michigan.
12                  The purposes of the study,  extensive
13   laboratory facilities have been developed  to  carry out
14   the extensive analytical procedure.
15                  Technical personnel have been put  to
16   work looking into all facets of water quality in  this
17   area.
18                  Automatic monitoring equipment has been
19   used for continuous surveillance of streams and lake
20   conditions.
21                  Meters have been developed for determining
22   the direction and velocity of  currents in the lake.
23   Special studies  have been made in an attempt  to find the
24   cause for the death of loons and gulls in Lake Michigan.
25                  A special technical committee, representative

-------
                                                        42
     of wide variety  of water  uses  was  formed to advise with
     the project on matters of long range program development.
                   Our report today  is a result of many
     studies and from Information and the work of many  people;
     Federal, state and local  agencies.
                   I think for this  presentation of this
     report, it is especially  appropriate to  have Mr. Maurice
     Le Bosquet, one  of our senior  engineers  make the present-
     ation.  It is appropriate because  he is  a native
10    Chicagoan.  He went to Parker  High School and  graduated
     from the University of Illinois and he worked  with the
12    Illinois Health  Department making  surveys of industrial
13    wastes in the Calumet area.
14                  He also worked  with Greeley  and Hansen,
15    consulting engineers here in Chicago.
ig                  In addition to  his  deep seated  interest
17    in Chicago and the broad  experience with the Public
18    Health Service,  he is an  engineer  of international
19    authority, having been advisor to  the Governments  of the
20   Belgium Congo and India.
21                  At mid-month, he will go  to  Peru for
22    the World Bank as a consultant on  health and sanitation
23   matters.
24                  Mr. Le Bosquet  has  also been an advisor
2s    to our Great Lakes project.  I'd like to present Mr.

-------
 i    Le Bosquet.

 2         MR. LE BOSQUET:  Thank you, Mr. Poston.

 3                   Mr. Chairman, conferees, ladies and gentlemen,

     on the basis of reports, surveys or studies, in accordance

     with Section 8 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act,

     Secretary Anthony J. Celebrezze, of the Department of Health,

     Education, and Welfare, on December 15, 1965, called a con-

 8    ference in the matter of pollution of the interstate waters

 9    of the Grand Calumet River, Little Calumet River, Calumet

10    River, Lake Michigan, Wolf Lake and their tributaries.

11                   This presentation is a summary of the technical

12    report on interstate pollution problems in the Calumet area

13    of Indiana and Illinois.

14                   I would ask at this time that the complete

15    report be placed in the record and I will summarize.

16         CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Without objection, that will be done.

17                         REPORT ON
           POLLUTION OF THE WATERS OF THE GRAND
18        CALUMET RIVER, LITTLE CALUMET RIVER, CALUMET
              RIVER, LAKE MICHIGAN, WOLF LAKE AND
19                     THEIR TRIBUTARIES

20                    ILLINOIS - INDIANA

2i      U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
                     Public Health Service
22          Division of Water Supply and Pollution Control
                             Region V
23                        Chicago, Illinois

24                         February, 1965

25

-------
                                                       44

 1                 I  -  SUMMARY  AND  CONCLUSIONS

 2                   On the basis of reports, surveys,  or studies,

 3   in accordance with section 8  of the Federal Water Pollution

 4   Control Act  (33 U.S.C. 466 et seq.) Secretary Anthony  J.

 5   Celebrezze of the Department  of Health, Education,  and Wel-

 6   fare, on December 15, 1964, called a conference in the matter

 7   of pollution of the interstate waters of the Grand Calumet

 8   River, Little Calumet River,  Calumet River, Lake  Michigan,

 9   Wolf Lake and their tributaries (Indiana-Illinois).

10                   The Calumet Area at the south end  of Lake

11   Michigan in Illinois and  Indiana includes the Calumet  River

12   system and the  affected waters of Lake Michigan.   Although

13   poorly drained, it lies astride a continental divide,  with

14   about 40 percent of the area  draining to the Illinois  River

is   thence to the Mississippi River, and about 60 percent  of the

16   area draining to Lake Michigan and the St. Lawrence  River.

17   Most of the streams and ditches are sluggish or stagnant, and

18   some of the streams, particularly the Calumet River  in Chlcago;

19   experience alternating directions of flow.

20                   The western parts of the Little Calumet and
         Calumet
21   Grand^Rivers flow from Indiana into Illinois.  Wolf  Lake is an

22   interstate lake lying on  the  Illinois-Indiana state  line.  The

23   state line extends northward  from the shoreline into Lake

24   Michigan, passing within  one-third mile of the mouth of the

25   Calumet River in Chicago, and turns east at a point  about li

-------
                                                      45
     miles north of the Calumet Harbor breakwater.

                    The currents in Lake Michigan are also sub-

     ject to reversal of flow.   Under most conditions the direction

     of flow is from Indiana waters to Illinois waters,  but flow

     from Illinois to Indiana waters is also common.

                    The area is highly Industrialized, and the

     industries are expanding production rapidly.  There are

     ten major steel mills,  five petroleum refineries, and several

     chemical, paper, and food  processing industries in the area.

                    Lake Michigan is used as a source of municipal

u    water supply.  The City of Chicago pumps about 1040 million

12    gallons daily (mgd) and serves a population of about 4,400,000

13    The cities of Gary, Hammond, East Chicago, and Whiting in

14    Indiana pump about 62 mgd  and serve a population of about

15    375*000.  Lake Michigan is also used as the major source
16    of industrial process and  cooling water in the area, and as a

17    source of condenser water  for power plants.  Lake Michigan and

18    its harbors in the area handle about 60 million tons of cargo

19    annually, of which three-fourths is iron ore and related

20    materials for the steel industry.
21                   Lake Michigan and Wolf Lake are heavily used

22    for recreational activities such as swimming, boating, water

23    skiing, and fishing. They also receive direct discharges of

24    industrial wastes.
25                   The Grand Calumet River is used to a minor

-------
                                                       46
 i    extent as an  Industrial water  source.   Its main use  is as  a
 2    receiver of municipal and Industrial wastes.  The  Indiana
 3    Harbor Canal  is used extensively for navigation and  as a
 4    receiver of industrial wastes.  The waters of the  Grand
 5    Calumet River and the Indiana  Harbor Canal are  unfit for
 e    any recreational activity.
 7                  The Calumet River and the navigable portion
 8    of the Little Calumet River are used for navigation,
 9    industrial water supplies, receipt of municipal and  industrial
10    wastes, and recreational boating.  A large number  of parks,
n    golf courses, and forestpreserves are located along  the
12    banks of the  Little Calumet River.  The Cook County  Forest
13    Preserve District has not developed picnic areas along the
14    Little Calumet River because of its polluted condition.
15                  Municipal sewage and industrial  wastes,
16    treated to varying degrees, are the principal pollutions!
17    materials discharged continuously into the waters  of the
18    Calumet Area.  Other wastes discharged intermittently may
19    have serious  local effects or may cause temporary  excessive
20    pollution.  Among these wastes are accidental spills from
21    storage tanks and barges, combined sewer overflows,  wastes
22    from lake vessels, barge tows, and pleasure craft, and
23    materials from dredging operations.
24                  The total oxygen demend of municipal  and
25    industrial waste as discharged in the Calumet Area is

-------
 i   about  1,150,000 population equivalent (PE)  of which 80



 2   percent  Is  discharged  In the  Lake  Michigan  Basin and 20



 3   percent  is  discharged  in the  Illinois River Basin.   Seventy



 4   percent  of  the  waste discharged  in the Illinois  River is



 5   from municipal  sources and 30 percent is  from industrial



 6   sources.  In  contrast,  only 5 percent of  the waste  discharged



 7   in the Lake Michigan Basin is from municipal sources,  and



 8   95 percent  is from industrial sources.



 9                   The principal  deficiencies in municipal waste



10   disposal  in the Calumet Area  are the  general lack of



11   effluent  disinfection,  the prevalence of  combined sewer



12   systems  that  cause the discharge of untreated sewage during



13   and  after heavy rains,  and the proliferation of  small  sewage



14   treatment plants throughout the basin that  discharge to



15   ditches and small streams.  These  plants  are so  numerous,



16   and  the amount  of dilution water so small,  that  nearly all



17   streams are to  some extent polluted.



18                   Three steel plants  that  discharge wastes to



19   the  Grand Calumet River and the Indiana Harbor Canal are the



20   most significant sources of wastes in the Lake Michigan



21   Basin.  Oil refineries  and chemical plants  are lesser,



22   but  still major,  sources of wastes.   The  steel plants  dis-



23   charge coking wastes,  blast furnace wastes,  and  rolling



24   mill wastes.  The chief identifiable  constituents in these



25   discharges  are  oxygen-demanding wastes, oily wastes,

-------
 i   waste pickle liquor, phenolic materials, ammonia,
 2   cyanide, and suspended solids.  The refineries discharge
 3   oxygen-demanding wastes, oily wastes, phenolic materials,
 4   and ammonia.
 5                  The steel plants in the Illinois River
 6   Basin have their coking wastes sewered and treated at the
 7   Calumet Plant of the Metropolitan Sanitary District of
 8   Greater Chicago.  The principal wastes discharged to the
 9   rivers from these plants are oily wastes, waste pickle
10   liquor, and suspended solids.  One steel plant discharges
n   untreated sewage to the Little Calumet River in Illinois.
12                  Biological studies (1961-63) indicate that
13   all of the streams in the Calumet Area are polluted,
u   differing only in degree and by nature of the pollutant.
15   The Grand Calumet River is the worst of all as evidenced by
16   the near-absence of bottom organisms.  The Little Calumet
17   River is and Calumet Rivers and the Indiana Harbor Canal
is   are also severely degraded.
19                  Streams in the Calumet Area are generally
20   characterized by unsightly appearance, in the form of float-
21   ing debris, oil, discoloration, and turbidity.  Channel
22   banks, structures, and boats acquire a black coating from
23   oil or tarry substances.  Malodorous conditions are pre-
24   valent and frequent.  Along the shores of Lake Michigan,
25   in Indiana and the southern shore in Illinois, the Lake

-------
    waters are discolored by suspended and dissolved waste
    materials, in sharp contrast to the pleasing appearance
    of the rest of Lake Michigan.
                    The streams of the Calumet Area are
    grossly polluted by fecal contamination.   Average colifonn
    densities on the Grand Calumet and Little Calumet Rivers
    where  they cross the State line were in the order of 1
    million per 100 ml, and average fecal streptococcus densities
    were 70,000 to 80,000 per 100 ml.   Burns  Ditch showed
10  120,000 coliform per 100 ml near Lake Michigan, and 1.7
11  million four miles Inland.  In the Indiana Harbor Canal
12  coliform counts averaged 380,000 per 100  ml,  and individual
13  tests  ranged up to 2.5 million.  The Calumet River exhibited
14  average coliform densities of 2,900 per 100 ml about three
is  miles, farther inland.  Periodic reversals of flow in the
is  Calumet River can contribute bacterial pollution in Lake
17  Michigan.  Bacterial pollution of the magnitudes Indicated
18  in Calumet Area Streams constitutes a threat  to public
19  health.
20                  Critically-low dissolved oxygen concentra-
21  tions  exist generally throughout the streams  of the Calumet
22  Area.   Nearly every sampling station showed zero dissolved
23  oxygen at some time during field investigations.
24                  The bottom of Lake Michigan in the Calumet
25  and Chicago areas exhibits biological degradation

-------
 9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
                                                  50
 caused by organic  enrichment.   Whereas in the clean bottom
 areas of Lake Michigan there are many kinds of organisms,
 with none predominating,  this  area exhibits only a few
 kinds.  Sludge-worms and  aquatic scuds are the most
 numerous, but bloodworms  and fingernail clams are some-
 times abundant.  Of these,  only the scud is sensitive
 to pollution. The number of pollution-tolerant organisms
 average 250  to 400 per square  foot in the Calumet Area,
 and increase to  1000 per  square foot off Chicago.  The
 lesser numbers in  the Calumet  Area reflect inhibition
 by heavy settleable solids  and toxic materials, whereas the
 less dense organic materials are carried by lake currents
 northward to the waters off Chicago.  The kinds of organisms
 found in this area of Lake  Michigan limit the species of
 desirable fish such as whitefish,  lake trout, and yellow
 perch, and favor trash fish such as carp, buffalo,  and
 suckers.
               The deep waters of Lake Michigan generally
contain less  than one coliform  organism per 100 ml.   In
 contrast, the inshore waters of Lake Michigan in the
 Calumet Area often contain  several thousand coliform
 organisms per 100  ml, indicating fecal contamination  from
 the tributary area.  Bathing beaches at Whiting, Hammond,
 and Chicago's Calumet Park,  which lie between Indiana
 Harbor and the Calumet River,  nearly always exhibit coliform

-------
                                                      51
     densities greater than 1000 per 100 ml.  Collform
     densities greater than 10,000 are common at these beaches,
     and  densities greater than 100,000 occur often at the
     Whiting and Hammond beaches.
                    Taste and odor producing materials,  such
     as phenolic materials, are discharged to Lake Michigan from
     industries in Indiana, and Interfere with municipal water
     supplies in Indiana and Illinois.  It has been demonstrated
     that severe taste and odor problems at Indiana water treat-
10   ment plants in January and March 1963* followed a few
     days later by similar problems at Chicago, were associated
12   with lake currents moving northwestward from the Indiana
13   Harbor area toward Chicago.  Likewise, large amounts of
u   ammonia discharged to Lake Michigan in Indiana increase
15   the  cost and difficulty of municipal water treatment in
ie   Indiana and Illinois.  In addition, this ammonia contri-
17   butes to fertilization of Lake Michigan, which can cause
ie   prolific growths of algae and aquatic weeds that pile
19   up onto beaches, clog water intakes, and interferes with
20   filter plant operations,  and cause taste and odor problems
21   in munlpal water supplies.
22                  Section DC of this report discusses corrective
23   measures needed in the Calumet Area.
24                  Although one company discharges industrial
25   wastes into Wolf Lake in Indiana, resulting in pollution of

-------
                                                       52



 i   a portion of the lake and causing fish kills, investl-



 2   gation by the Public Health Service has not disclosed



 3   significant Interstate pollution of Wolf Lake.



 4                  There is no evidence of interstate



 5   pollution from the  discharge of wastes to Lake Michigan



 6   via Burns Ditch. Burns Ditch has some effect on the



 7   contribution of nutrients in the south end of Lake Michigan,



 8   and contributes local bacterial pollution.  The effects of



 9   increased development in this area bear careful watching.



10                  Sewage and industrial wastes discharged



n    to the Little Calumet River and Grand Calumet River in



12   Indiana cause pollution of these waters in Illinois.



13   Sewage and industrial wastes discharged to the Calumet



14    River  System and Lake Michigan in Indiana cause pollution  .



15    of the waters of Lake Michigan in Illinois,  and sewage



16    and discharged Industrial wastes to the Calumet River



17    System and Lake Michigan in Illinois cause pollution of



18    Lake Michigan in Indiana.   This pollution endangers the



19    health or welfare of persons in a state other than that



20    in which the discharges originate,  and therefore is subject



21    to abatement under  the provisions of the Federal Water



22    Pollution Control Act.



23                       II - FORWARD



24                   This is a technical report on interstate



25    pollution problems  in the  Calumet Area,  Indiana and Illinois,

-------
                                                        53
 l   The  waters under consideration are the Grand Calumet River,
 2   Little  Calumet River,  Calumet River, Lake Michigan, Wolf
 3   Lake and their tributaries.   Findings are based on data
 4   obtained from State,  local,  and sanitary district records,
 5   industries,  and sampling by  the Public Health Service.
 6                   The cooperation provided by the Indiana
 7   Stream  Pollution Control Board,  the Illinois Sanitary
 8   Water Board,  the Metropolitan Sanitary District of
 9   Greater Chicago, and  others  in supplying valuable infor-
10   mation  is gratefully  acknowledged.
11                   The report considers the quality character-
12   istics  of the waters as  they exist today,  evaluates the
13   effects of waste discharges  on the water quality and
14   water uses,  and summarizes the principal problems and
15   needed  corrections.
16                       III - BACKGROUND
17                   The quality of the waters of Lake Michigan
IB   has  long been a matter of concern,  and there have been
19   diverse opinions on how  and  to what extent the lake should
20   be protected.  In the  19th century the growing city of
21   Chicago experienced increasingly severe outbreaks of cholera
22   and  typhoid  fever.  In 1856  Chicago started construction
23   of the  first integrated  sewer system in the United States
24   and  only the second one  in the modern world - Hamburg,
25   Germany having built  one before.  However, these sewers

-------
 i   drained to the rivers and hence to Lake Michigan,  and



 2   epidemics continued.



 3                  The Metropolitan Sanitary District  of



 4   Greater Chicago  (then the Sanitary District of Chicago) was



 5   organized in 1890, and its first responsibility was  to



 6   protect Chicago's water supply from pollution.  It con-



 7   structed the Sanitary and Ship Canal and reversed  the



 8   flow of the Chicago River in 1900.



 9                  The flow of the Calumet River was reversed



10   in 1922, and thus Chicago's sewage was substantially ex-



11   eluded from Lake Michigan and diverted to the Mississippi



12   River drainage basin.



13                  In 1922 a number of Great Lakes States



14   joined to bring suit in the United States Supreme  Court



is   to end the existing diversion at Chicago.  In 1930 the



16   Court issued a decree directing the Sanitary District



17   to reduce its diversion to 1500 cubic feet per second



18   (cfs), plus domestic pumpage (which now averages 1700-1800



19   cfs) by the end of 1938.  To meet the terms of the decree,



20   the District engaged in a massive construction program



21   designed to provide secondary treatment for its wastes.



22   The building program was substantially completed in  19^9.



23   Litigation was resumed in 1959, when the Supreme Court



24   directed the reopening of its 1930 decree.  The present



25   party litigants consist of the States of New York, Ohio,

-------
                                                        55
     Minnesota,  Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin as

     plaintiffs,  the State of Illinois as defendant, and the

     United States of America as an intervening party litigant.

                    The State of Illinois, the City of Chicago,

     and  the Sanitary District of Chicago filed suit in the

     United States Supreme Court in 1944 against the State

     of Indiana,  the Cities of Hammond, Gary, East Chicago,

     and  Whiting,  and 16 industries in Indiana, alleging pollution

     of the south end of Lake Michigan and the impairment of

10   Chicago's water supplies.  The case was heard before a

n   Master in Chancery in St. Louis,  Missouri, and a con-

12   sent decree  was entered in 1945*  whereby certain corrective

13   measures were to be taken.  In 1948 the consent decree was

14   deemed to have been complied with.

15                          IV - THE AREA

16                  The area included in this report is the

17   Calumet River System in Indiana and Illinois upstream of

18   the  navigation locks at Blue Island, Illinois, the contiguous

19   and  directly affected areas of Lake Michigan, north to the

20   Cook-Lake County, Illinois line,  and Wolf Lake,  Figure

21   IV-1 (P.154)  shows the relationship of the Calumet Area to the

22   larger Chicago area drainage pattern, while Figure IV-2

23   (P.155) shows the relevant Calumet Area in more detail.

24                  The Calumet Area,  as defined in this report

25   and  shown in Figure IV-»2 (P.155), includes roughly ?42 square

-------
                                                       56



 i   miles, of which 320 square miles are normally  tributary



 2   to the Illinois River and Mississippi River, and  422 square



 3   miles are normally tributary to Lake Michigan  and the St.



 4   Lawrence River.



 5   Cities and Industries



 6                  Some of the major cities  in  the area  are



 7   Gary, East Chicago, Whiting, and Hammond, in Indiana;  and



 8   Calumet City, Chicago Heights, and a part of the  south side



 g   of Chicago in Illinois.  The area is heavily industralized,



10   with five petroleum refineries and ten major steel mills.



n   Some of the major industries in Indiana are the United



12   States Steel Corporation, Gary Works and Gary  Sheet  and



13   Tin Mill; Youngstown Sheet and Tube Company; Inland  Steel



u   Company; Cities Service Petroleum Company; Sinclair  Re-



15   fining Company; Mobil Oil Company; and American Oil



is   Company.  Some of the major industries in Illinois are the



17   United States Steel Corporation, South Works,  Wisconsin



18   Steel Works, Interlace Iron Corporation, Republic Steel



19   Corporation and Acme Steel Company.  As an indication of



20   the magnitude of industrial activity in the area,  the



21   value added in manufacture in the Calumet area in the



22   year 1958 was estimated at 2 billion dollars.  Industry



23   is growing in this area and present day activity  is



24   undoubtedly higher.



25   Stream System

-------
                                                      57
 i                   The Calumet Area is a flat plain with
 2   much of the land only slightly above Lake Michigan
 3   water levels.   In what might be considered their
 4   natural state,  the Little Calumet and Grand Calumet
 5   Rivers originated in Indiana and flowed westward into
 6   Illinois where  they Joined and became simply the Calumet
 7   River, which discharged into Lake Michigan.  However,
 3   the  development of the area by man has changed this flow
 9   pattern.
10                   In 1922, the Calumet Sag Channel was
n   completed between the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal
12   and  the Little  Calumet River at Blue Island,  Illinois.
13   This construction caused the Calumet River, and that
14   portion of the  Little Calumet River from Blue Island
15   to the Calumet  River, to be reversed and thus flow
16   away from Lake  Michigan.  However,  this is an unstable
17   situation;  depending on storm runoff and fluctuating
18   Lake levels, the stream frequently flows toward
19   Lake Michigan.
20                   Burns Ditch was completed in 1923 to
2\   connect the eastern part of the Little Calumet River
22   in Indiana to Lake Michigan near Ogden Dunes, Indiana.
23   This construction caused an indefinite division of the
24   flow in the Vicinity of Highland,  Indiana,  reversing
25   the  flow of the Little Calumet River from this point
    east to Ogden Dunes.  All portions of the Little Calu-

-------
                                                       58
 i   met River east of the new divide then became  tributary
 2   to Lake Michigan via Burns Ditch.
 3                  The  Indiana Harbor  Canal  was  completed
 4   in East Chicago, Indiana, in 1903.  Construction  of
 5   this canal connected the Grand Calumet River  east of
 6   this point, now normally tributary to Lake Michigan.
 7   The Grand Calumet River from this point  west  to the
 g   area near the East  Chicago - Hammond,  Indiana city  limit
 9   has been reversed and now flows to the Lake Michigan via
10   the Indiana Harbor  Canal.  The point where the division
11   of flow occurs is rather Indefinite, and depending
12   upon the local level of Lake Michigan, dredging operations,
13   and rainfall intensity, the actual divide can vary over
14   a distance of several miles.  Under normal dry-weather
15   conditions the East Chicago sewage treatment  plant
16   effluent flows eastward to the Indiana Harbor Canal  and
17   Lake Michigan, while a variable part of  the Hammond
18   sewage treatment plant effluent flows westward to the
19   Calumet River.
20                  A temporary dam on  the Grand Calumet
21   River at Columbia Avenue in Hammond, Indiana  has
22   recently been proposed by the U. S. Corps of  Engineers.
23   The purpose of the dam would be to prevent water
24   reaching the Illinois River system from  the Grand
25   Calumet River east of that point, when the locks  at

-------
                                                        59
    Blue Island,  Illinois, have been removed.  The exact
    location of the new dam is still subject to study.  The
    Corps of Engineers has proposed two alternate sites for
    the dam.  Site A is just west of the outfall sewer from
    the Hammond sewage treatment plant and would direct all
    treated and by-passed sewage from Hammond and East
    Chicago toward Lake Michigan.  Site B is just east of the
    Hammond outfall sewer and would direct sewage from
    Hammond to the Calumet River, while sewage from East
10   Chicago would flow to Lake Michigan.  The Public Health
n   Service has proposed that the dam be so located that
12   the treated sewage from Hammond and East Chicago, Indiana,
13   will not be directed toward Lake Michigan.
14                   Wolf Lake is located astride the Illinois-
15   Indiana State Line in Chicago and Hammond.  The original
16   connecting channel from Wolf Lake to Lake Michigan has
17   been blocked, and a connection to the Calumet River in
18   Chicago has been constructed.  The City of Hammond has a
19   much-used park on the east shore of Wolf Lake which
20   occupies most of the Indiana shoreline.  The Illinois
21   portion is a part of Wolf Lake Conservation Area.
22   Flow Reversal nin .Calumet R_iygr
23                   The direction of flow in the Calumet
24   River under normal conditions is from Lake Michigan
25   toward the Calumet-Sag Canal.  This flow is induced

-------
                                                         60
 1   by the hydraulic  control of the Sanitary and  Ship Canal
 2   system maintained by the Metropolitan  Sanitary District
 3   in connection with the diversion of water  from Lake
 4   Michigan for dilution purposes.  The Blue  Island  Con-
 5   trolling Works, owned and operated by  the  Sanitary
 6   District, is one of the points of diversion from  Lake
 7   Michigan.
 8                  The record low stages of Lake  Michigan
 9   during the past year have contributed  to reversals
10   of flow in the Calumet River under two different  sets
11   of conditions as explained below.
12                  1.  With the present low lake  stages
13   and the requirement to maintain a 9-foot navigation
14   depth in the Calumet Sag Channel, the  hydraulic head
is   at the Blue Island Controlling Works is minimal,  vary-
16   ing from zero to a few tenths of a foot most  of the
17   time.
IB                  Local variations in the level  of Lake
19   Michigan of 0.5 to 1.0 foot due to wind and/or
20   barometric pressure effects are common.  These changes
21   occur in a few hours time, and the effect may persist
                                    •
22   for one or more days.
23                  When the lake drops 0.5 foot or more
24   at Calumet Harbor, this can produce a  hydraulic
25   gradient which causes the Calumet River to flow toward

-------
                                                       61
 !   the  lake  for periods  ranging  from a few hours  to more
 2   than one  day.  This may occur even though the  lock
 3   gates at  the Blue Island Controlling Works are fully
 4   opened  in an effort to  induce flow to the Calumet-Sag
 5   Channel.
 6                   The Metropolitan Sanitary District
 7   operates  recording water level gages located on the
 8   Little  Calumet  River  at the Acme Steel Plant,  and
 9   on the  Calumet  River  near its mouth.  The recorder
10   charts  for the  period January through March 1964,  were
n   examined  for periods  of flow  reversal.   On the basis
12   of 12-hour average gage heights obtained by inspection,
13   eight periods of  flow reversal were found.  The duration
14   of reversal varied from 12 to 36 hours.   A detailed
15   examination of  these  gage records would  permit cal-
16   culation  of the percent of time during which flow is
17   towards the lake.  Flow reversals could  also be correlated
18   with rainfall to  determine which reversals were caused
19   by storm  runoff.
20                   2. Major storms which produce  excessive
21   runoff  in the Little  Calumet  River basin in the past have
22   resulted  in occasional  flow reversals in the Calumet
23   River.  These have been due to the Inability of the
24   Calumet-Sag Channel to  carry  the flood flows away from
25   the  area  fast enough, or to operation of the Blue Island

-------
                                                        62

     Controlling Works for prevention of flood damage In the



     area west of the Controlling works.  The duration of
 A


     these flow reversals varies greatly, depending on
 3


     the storm rainfall distribution.  It was estimated that
 4


     the Calumet River flowed into Lake Michigan for about
 5


     72 hours during and after the storm of October 9-11,
 6


     1951*.  During the storm of July 12-13* 1957, when



     flooding became critical in the Calumet-Sag Channel,
 8


     the lock gates at Blue Island Controlling Works were
 9


     opened to permit flow out of the canal toward Lake



     Michigan.  The entire Calumet-Little Calumet system



     flowed into Lake Michigan for several hours.



                    In September  1961, heavy rains on
13


     the 13th and 14th resulted in general flooding which
14


     caused the Calumet River to flow into the Lake for
15


     several hours.
16


                    Flow reversals caused by runoff have
17


     recently become more frequent, due in part to the
18


     hydraulic conditions produced by the extremely low
iy


     lake stages.  The laofc of head at the Blue Island



     Controlling Works restricts the flow that can be
£i


     discharged out of the Calumet-Little Calumet system
22


     to the Calumet-Sag Channel.  Therefore, runoff may more
23


     easily produce a gradient causing flow toward
24


     Lake Michigan.
25

-------
                                                        63
                    When reversals of flow in the Calumet
    River occur,  both municipal and  industrial  wastes
    enter Indiana waters of Lake  Michigan which lie  about
    1/3 mile off  shore.   Corps of Engineers  studies  of
    currents in Calumet  Harbor show  that  strong northerly
    winds produce a strong  southeast current through the
    harbor.  This current would carry pollution along the
    Indiana shoreline.
 9                  The Thomas J.  O'Brien  lock and dam
10  will provide  a positive barrier  between  Lake Michigan
    and all of the municipal treatment plants and some of
12  the Industrial waste sources  on  the Calumet-Little
13  Calumet system.   When the 0»Brlen lock is put into
14  operation, these wastes will  be  excluded from the lake,
15  except during infrequent periods of major flooding
16  when the control gates might  be  opened to alleviate
i?  flood damage.
18                       V - WATER USES
19  Municipal Water Supply
20                  There are six  major municipal water
21  systems in Chicago and the adjacent Calumet  Area  in
22  Indiana which use Lake Michigan  as a  source  of water
23  supply.  The  largest is the recently  constructed  Central
24  District Filtration  Plant near the center of Chicago.
25  This plant serves a  population of about  2,800,000 and

-------
                                                    64
 !   pumps an average of about 660 mgd (million gallons daily)
 2   The second largest is Chicago's South District Pil-
 3   tration Plant located Just north of Calumet Harbor.
 4   This plant serves a population of about 1,600,000 and
 5   pumps an average of about 380 mgd.  The other users
 6   are Gary, serving 200,000 people and using 24 mgd;
 7   Hammond, serving 112,000 people and using 23 mgd;
 8   East Chicago, serving 56,000 people and using 14
 9   mgd; and Whiting, serving 8,000 persons and using 1.5
10   mgd.  The Gary-Hobart Water Company is constructing
H   a new municipal water plant at Ogden Dunes, Indiana,
12   about one mile west of Burns Ditch.   This plant will
13   have an initial rated capacity of 16 mgd.
14                  The location of these municipal water
15   supplies is shown in Figure IV-1 (P.154).
16   Industrial Water Supplies
17                  Nearly all of the independent water
18   supplies in the Calumet Area are surface supplies.
19   The total pumpage (excluding cooling water used by
20   public utilities) is about 2,760 mgd, of which about
21   2,480 mgd is pumped in the Lake Michigan Basin and
22   about 280 mgd in the Illinois River drainage basin.
23   Table V-l shows a breakdown of water use by industrial
24   group.
25                  The steel industry used about 2,400

-------
                                                       65
 i   mgd,  8? percent of the total.   The petroleum refining
 2   industry uses 250 mgd, 9 percent of the total.   The
 3   remaining 4 percent is used by the paper,  food,  and
 4   chemical industries.  Ninety percent of the industrial
 5   water pumpage is taken directly from Lake  Michigan.
 6   The Calumet and Little Calumet Rivers supply the
 7   remainder,  except for a small  amount taken from  the
 8   Grand Calumet River and the Indiana Harbor Canal.
 9   Waterborne  Commerce
10                   The several ports in the Calumet  Area
11   are Involved in international,  interstate,  and
12   interport activities and form  a large part of Lake
13   Michigan commerce.   The Corps  of Engineers,  U. S.
14   Army,  reported that in 1963* over 52 million tons of cargo
15   moved through Gary Harbor,  Buffington Harbor, Indiana
is   Harbor,  Lake Calumet,  Calumet  Harbor,  and  the Calumet
17   River.   This accounted for almost one-half of the
18   total Lake  Michigan commerce.   Three major types of
is   cargo made  up 90 percent of the tonnage handled  through
20   the Calumet Area ports.   Iron  ore and related
21   materials for the steel industry accounted for 74
22   percent  of  the total.   Petroleum products  amounted  to
23   10 percent  and grain shipments  were 6 percent of the
24   total
25                   In general,  the harbors listed above

-------
                                                        66
     have sufficient  depth to accommodate lake vessels and
     some, but not all, of the ocean-going vessels  which
     enter the Great  Lakes via the  St.  Lawrence Seaway.
     In addition, a 9-foot depth navigation channel connects
     the  Calumet River with the Illinois  Waterway-Mississippi
     River System, providing water  transportation to St.
     Louis, Minneapolis,  Pittsburgh and New Orleans.
     Recreation
                   Recreational activities such as swimming,
10   boating, water skiing and fishing  are engaged  in by a
11   large segment of the population of the Calumet Area.
12   During the summer, millions of people visit the beaches
13   in Chicago, Gary and Indiana Dunes State  Park.
14   Hundreds of pleasure boats can be  observed on  Lake
is   Michigan and Wolf Lake,  and at times  there is  a
16   virtual parade of boats  to and from  the marinas and
i?   mooring facilities.   As  the population grows,  the need
18   for  recreational facilities will expand.   The  locations
19   of marinas, launching ramps, beaches,  and water-oriented
20   parks are shown  in Figure V-l  (P.  156).
21                 Lake  Michigan and Wolf Lake provide  the
22   only swimming waters.   The streams are not safe for
23   swimming because of  the bacterial  pollution.   The
24   Lake Michigan beaches at Chicago,  Gary, and whiting are
25   packed on summer weekends, but there  is an increasing

-------
                                                     67




 i   tendency  for people living in the Calumet area



 2   to drive  to the  Indiana Dunes State Park or the



 3   Michigan  beaches where the water is clearer and



 4   the sand  is cleaner.  The Hammond-owned beach on Wolf



 5   Lake is used by  thousands of swimmers and sun bathers.



 6   The Lake  Michigan beach at Hammond has been closed



 7   for several years because of high coliform bacteria



 8   counts.



 9 •                   The popularity  of water skiing has



10   paralleled the growth in pleasure boating.  Occasionally



11   water  skiers are observed on the Calumet River but the



12   poor quality of  the water and heavy boat traffic make



13   it undesirable.  The Indiana Harbor Canal and Grand



14   Calumet River are unfit for any recreational activity.



is   None of the other streams of the area is deep enough



16   for motor boating and skiing.   Water skiing is a
                                   L


17   popular sport on both Lake Michigan and Wolf Lake.



18                    In recent years the growth of interest  in



19   pleasure  boating has increased  at a phenomenal rate.



20   Marinas,  mooring facilities, and launching ramps



21   are not able to  handle peak traffic.  There are now



22   24 such boating  facilities in the areas.  This number



23   would  undoubtedly increase markedly if the sheltered



24   waters of the area were not polluted.  The boat



25   registration records of Indiana and Illinois show how

-------
                                                       68
     popular pleasure  boating has  become.   In the three
     Indiana counties  bordering  on Lake Michigan there
     are  11,000  boats, and  in Lake and  Cook Counties in
     Illinois there are  43*000 registered  boats.  Many of
     the  boaters of the  area moor  their boats in cleaner
     waters  as far away  as  Saugatuck and Holland in Michigan.
     The  waters  of the Calumet River stain boat  hulls with
     a  tar-like  substance that is  unsightly and  difficult
     to remove.
 10                 Most public  parks are  located near some
     feature of  nature that has  strong  appeal.   Many times
 12   the  appeal  is a lake or a stream.   In the Calumet area
 13   there are several such parks  that  provide recreational
 14   opportunities for thousands of people.   Marquette Park
 15   at Gary and Wolf Lake  in Hammond are  two of the larger
 15   parks of the area.  Both are  located  on relatively
 17   clean waters.  Calumet Park beach  in  Chicago is also
 18   heavily used, but the  bacteria content  of its waters is
 19   higher  than desirable, and  accumulations of popcorn
20   slag on the beach from steel  mills make the beach
21   unattractive to bathers because of its  gritty texture.
22   There are a number  of  other parks  and golf  courses along
23   the  Little  Calumet  and Grand  Calumet  Rivers that are
24   less attractive because of  unsightly  streams.   The Cook
25   County  Forest Preserve reports they have now adopted a

-------
                                                       69
     a  policy of building lakes and ponds in the interior of
     the preserves,  away from the polluted streams.
                    Except for Wolf Lake and Burns Ditch,
     the streams of  the Calumet area are not fished because
     of the severely polluted conditions and consequent
     absence of fish.  Waterfowl avoid the polluted streams,
     but hundreds of waterfowl can be observed at V/olf Lake
     during the spring and fall migrations.  They also frequent
     the offshore Lake Michigan.
10    Esthetics
                    A body of water that is dirty-looking
12    or foul-smelling is anything but pleasant.  It can be
13    particularly repugnant if it meanders through an area
14    where  large populations live and work.  The Calumet Rivers
15    are like this.   Although there are not very many homes
16    on the banks of the streams, they are in view of thousands
17    of people motoring or walking in the area.  The Indiana
IB    Toll Road parallels seven miles of the Grand Calumet
     River,  and the  Chicago Skyway crosses the Calumet River.
20    There  are 16 beaches and parks that provide public
21    access  to the streams and lakes.  The polluted waters
22    at roost of these parks detract from the beauty and limit
23    esthetic enjoyment.   The value of property adjacent
24    to clean water  is significantly higher than similar
25    property having no adjacent water or situated next

-------
                                                     70
 i   to polluted water.  If the degraded and unsightly
 2   waters of the Calumet area were clean, the value
 3   of the adjacent properties would rise sub-
 4   stantially.
 5   Waste Disposal and Assimilation
 5                  Nearly every stream in the Calumet  area,
 7   and indirectly Lake Michigan, receives municipal waste.
 8   Nearly all municipal waste receives secondary treatment.
 9   Most of the waste receiving less than secondary treat-
10   ment is in the process of correction.  Most of the
n   treated domestic waste is not disinfected.
12                  Some portions of the Calumet Area receive
13   relatively little industrial waste.  The area tributary
14   to Burns Ditch receives industrial wastes near its
15   mouth, and municipal wastes in tributary areas.  The
16   non-navigable portion of the Little Calumet River  which
17   flows to the Illinois River receives municipal wastes
is   and a relatively small amount of industrial waste.  The
19   large amounts of industrial waste are discharged to the
20   Calumet and Grand Calumet Rivers, the navigable portion
21   of the Little Calumet River, Wolf Lake, the Indiana
22   Harbor Canal and Lake Michigan.
23                        VI - SOURCES OP WASTES
24                  Municipal sewage and industrial wastes
25   are the principal pollutional materials discharged

-------
                                                       71
     continuously into the waters of the Calumet Area.
     Other wastes, discharged intermittently or regularly,  may
     have serious local effects or may cause temporary excessive
     pollution.   Among these wastes are accidental spills
     from storage tanks,  barges,  etc.; combined sewer
     overflows;  wastes from lake  vessels,  barge tows, and
     pleasure craft;  and materials from dredging operations.
                    The total oxygen demand of municipal  and
     the  industrial waste in the  Calumet Area is about 1,150,000
10    population  equivalent (PE) of which 80 percent is
     discharged  in the Lake Michigan Basin and 20 percent
12    is discharged in the Illinois River Basin.  Seventy
13    percent  of  the wastes discharged in the Illinois River
14    Basin is from municipal sources and 30 percent is from
15    industrial  sources.   In contrast, only 5 percent of
16    the  waste discharged in the  Lake Michigan Basin is from
17    municipal sources and 95 percent is from industrial
18    sources.
19                   Three industrial plants discharge one-
20    half of  the population equivalent in the entire Calumet
21    Area and two thirds  of the population equivalent in  the
22    Lake Michigan portion of the area.   These plants are
23    the  United  States Steel Corporation in Gary,  Indiana,
24    and  the  Inland Steel Company and the Youngstown Sheet
25    and  Tube Company in  East Chicago, Indiana.

-------
                                                        72
     Municipal  Wastes
                    Sources of municipal wastes in the
     Lake  Michigan portion of  the  Calumet Area are listed
     in Table VI-I,  and  sources in the  Illinois River portion
     are listed in Table VI-2.
                    All  but two of the  municipal waste sources
     draining to Lake  Michigan are tributary to Burns Ditch.
 8   Each  of these 19  sources  is relatively  small,  but
 g   they  total 43 percent of  the  municipal  wastes to Lake
10   Michigan.   At present,  many of these sources discharge
n   inadequately  treated  sewage.   Some are  in the process of
12   being corrected.  For instance, the Merrillville Con-
13   servancy District has been organized to serve the
14   Black Oak-Ross  area south of  Gary,   Indiana.
15                  The  largest sources of municipal  wastes
16   discharged to the Lake  Michigan Basin are the sewage
17   treatment  plants  at Gary  and  East  Chicago,  Indiana.
18   These discharge via the Grand Calumet River and  the
19   Indiana Harbor  Canal.   Neither plant accepts  significant
20   industrial wastes.  Both  provide secondary treatment.
21   At  the present  time Gary has  under construction  sewers
22   and sewage treatment  plant  expansions.   This  construction
23   includes chlorlnatlon facilities and is  nearing  com-
24   pletion.   It  is understood  that the East Chicago plant
25   has chlorination  facilities but they are not  regularly

-------
                                                        73
 i    operated.
 2                   The largest sources of municipal
 3    wastes  discharged to the Illinois River Basin from
 4    the  Calumet Area are the Calumet Plant of the Metro-
 5    politan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago, the
 6    Sanitary District of Bloom Township,  Illinois and the
 7    Hammond Sanitary District,  Indiana.   All of these
 8    plants  provide  secondary treatment and accept industrial
 9    waste.   Depending upon runoff conditions and the level  of
10    Lake Michigan,  a variable portion of the treated waste
11    from Hammond drains  to Lake Michigan.
12                   The Hammond Sanitary  District has a
13    major sewer and sewage treatment plant expansion project
14    now  under  construction which is  nearing completion.   All
is    of the  waste from Griffith,  Indiana  has been connected;
is    part of Munster is connected,  and works are under con-
17    struction  to connect all of it.   About half of High-
18    land Is connected, with the remainder scheduled to be.
19    These connections should eliminate pollution of the  Little
20    Calumet River from these sources,  except for storm
21    water overflows,  and will result in  an Increased discharge
22    of treated sewage to the Grand Calumet River.  The State
23    of Indiana has  recommended that  the  Hammond Sanitary
24    District include chlorinatlon facilities as part of  the
25    present construction project.

-------
                                                       74
                    The Sanitary District of Bloom Township,
     Illinois serves Park Forest,  Chicago Heights,  and South
     Chicago Heights,  and a large  industrial district in
     Chicago Heights.   The Sanitary District has engaged two
     firms  of consulting engineers to study its problems.
     Both reports  have been received, and actions to implement
     the  recommendations have  been taken.
                    The Calumet Plant of the Metropolitan
 9   Sanitary District of Greater  Chicago (MSD) is  by far
10   the  largest sewage treatment  plant  in the Calumet Area.
11   It discharges 50  percent  of the municipal waste in the
12   Illinois River  portion, and 40 percent of the  municipal
13   waste  in the  entire Calumet Area.   Effluent disinfection
14   is not practiced,  and no  plans for  disinfection have
15   been announced.   The Calumet  Plant  serves the  southeast
16   part of Chicago and many  suburbs such as Blue  Island,
17   Calumet City, Riverdale,  and  Dolton.  It receives and
is   treats domestic and Industrial wastes.  Of particular
19   significance, it  treats coking wastes from the steel
20   plants located  along the  Calumet River in Chicago so
21   that phenolic and other constituents of these  wastes
22   receive secondary treatment.
23                  The MSD operates two small sewage treat-
24   ment plants in  the Calumet Area,  each achieving 85
25   percent or higher biochemical oxygen demand (BOD)

-------
                                                       75
     removal efficiency.   These plants are at East Chicago
     Heights and Hazel Crest,  Illinois.  In addition,  the
     MSD supervises through analytical control 19
     additional small operations.   These small operations
     show between 80 and  90 percent BOD removal efficiency.
     Three of these latter small plants will be eliminated
     within six months and become  part of the Intercepter
     system,  In accordance with the overall policy of
     the Sanitary District pertaining to such Installations.
10   Chlorlnatlon Is carried out at all small Metropolitan
11   Sanitary District treatment plants,  and a number  of
12   the small private plants  in the District have.begun
13   chlorination.
u                  Except as  hereafter noted, all domestic
15  wastes  from industries In the Calumet Area either
16  are connected  to municipal systems or receive secondary
17  treatment at the site.  All industrial sewage treatment
is  plants  in Indiana provide chlorination except the
19  Universal Atlas Cement Company,  a part of the U.  S.
20   Steel  Corporation.
21                  Although secondary treatment for organ-
22   ized  sewage systems  is the rule in the Calumet Area,
23   there  are a large number  of small sewage treatment
24  plants,  septic tanks systems,  and tile systems, 
-------
                                                          76
     and ditches.   These are so numerous, and the amount

     of dilution water available is so small, that

     nearly all streams and ditches are to some extent

     polluted.

                    Table IV-7 shows the status of

     Public Health Service  Grants for Construction of

     Municipal  WasteTreatment facilities.  Total grants

     of $1,900,210 in Indiana have supported $7,039,000

     in eligible construction,  while grants of $237,710

10   in Illinois have supported $795,600 in eligible

     construction.   The Metropolitan Sanitary District of

12   Greater Chicago has not  been certified for a con-

13   struction  grant to da% by the Illinois Sanitary

14   Water  Board.

15   Combined Sewer Overflows

16                  Most of the older communities in the

17   Calumet Area  have  combined sewer systems,  which con-

18   vey the dry weather flow to treatment plants,  and spill

19   combined flows to  the  streams or to Lake Michigan during

20   storm  periods,  either  by gravity or by pumping.  The over-

21   flow of raw sanitary sewage and Industrial wastes

22   mixed  with storm runoff  constitutes a source of

23   pollution  of  the waterways and of Lake Michigan in

24   the Calumet Area.   Although the overflows  are  intermittent,

25   depending  on  rainfall, the resultant pollution seriously

-------
 9
 10
 11
 12


 13
17


18


19


20


21


22
                                                       77
     affects the quality of the receiving waters.

                    Combined sanitary sewage overflows

     contribute gross bacterial pollution, high suspended

     solids concentrations, and a heavy BOD load.  Any

     industrial wastes present In the municipal sewer

     system add further to the pollution problem.

                    Several Indiana communities are served

     by combined sewers with reported overflows to tributaries

     of the Calumet River and flow westward into Illinois.

     Pollution resulting from overflows in these towns has

     Interstate implications:
                    MUNSTER           HAMMOND

                    GRIFFITH          SCHERERVILLE

14  I!                     HIGHLAND

is                   A number of Illinois communities having

16    combined  sewers which overflow to the Calumet
    River  system are listed below.   Overflows from

    these  towns  can go  to Lake Michigan during periods

    of  flow  reversal in the Calumet River:

                    CALUMET CITY      LANSING

                    BURNHAM           RIVERDALE

                    SOUTH HOLLAND     DOLTON
23                   PHOENIX           POSEN

24 I                 CHICAGO(MSD Calumet Treatment Plant)


25

-------
                                                      78

                    Several Indiana communities having com-


 2   bined  sewers  which overflow to the Indiana Harbor Canal-


 3   Grand  Calumet River system are listed below.  Overflows


 4   from these  towns  go to Lake Michigan via the Indiana


 5   Harbor Canal:


 6                  GARY              HAMMOND
                    EAST CHICAGO      WHITING

 7
                    A  number of other Indiana towns served

 8
     by  combined sewers which overflow to the Little Calumet

 9
     Burns  Ditch system are listed  below.  These overflows

10
     reach  Lake  Michigan via Burns  Ditch:


                    CHESTERTON        EAST GARY


                    PORTER            HOBART


                    VALPARAISO        GRIFFITH

14
                    In addition,  at least one city, whiting,

15
     Indiana, has  a  combined sewer  overflow which discharges

16
     directly to Lake  Michigan.

17
     Industrial  Wastes
18
                    Industrial  waste  information in this

19
    report was obtained from records  of  the  Indiana Stream

20
    Pollution Control Board, the  Illinois  State Sanitary

21
    Water Board, the Metropolitan Sanitary District of

22
    Greater Chicago, from a number of the  industries,  and

23
    from studies by the Public Health Service.   In part-

24
    icular, the Public Health  Service conducted a sampling

25

-------
                                                       79
     survey of industrial wastes in the Calumet Area in the

     latter half of 1963.

                    The principal sources of industrial

     waste in the Calumet Area are located in Figure VI-1

 5.   (P. 157).  The industries are listed in Tables VI-3

     and 4 which show the principal municipal and industrial

     sources of oxygen-demanding waste, ammonia nitrogen,

     phenolics, cyanide and oil.

 9                  The Grand Calumet River and Indiana

10   Harbor Canal are grossly polluted.  There is no

11   dissolved oxygen in the Indiana Harbor Canal, and

12   Its waters and banks are covered with oil.  The lake-

13   ward reaches of Indiana Harbor are rust-colored from

14   waste pickle liquor.  The effects of this pollution

15   extend into Lake Michigan.  The largest sources of

16   waste on the Grand Calumet River and Indiana Harbor

17   Canal are the United States Steel Corporation, Gary,

18   Indiana; the Youngstown Sheet and Tube Company, East

19   Chicago, Indiana; and Inland Steel Company, East Chicago,
           •
20   Indiana.  Three petroleum refineries are lesser, but

21    still major sources of waste.  They are Cities Service

22   Petroleum Company, Sinclair Refining Company, and Mobil

23    Oil Company, and all in East Chicago, Indiana.  A

24    summary of waste loads from these six plants is as

25    follows:

-------
  1
  2
                                                          8o

                                              Pounds Per Day
                                   Ammonia
      COMPANY        MOD     K5     Nitrogen  Phenol   Cyanide   Oil
     U.S.  Steel,      330  266,000  13,750    1,500    1,700  54,000
        Gary,  Ind.
     Youngstown S&T   250  100,000   4,090      250      250  l8,QOO
        E.Chi.,' Ind.
     Inland Steel,    480  200,000  16,800      620      940  24,800
        E.Chi., Ind.
     Cities Service,  80   47,400   1,140      130     	   4,040
        E.Chi., Ind.
     Sinclair,         4    4,740     130      190     	     290
        E.Chi., Ind.
  8   Mobil Oil Co.,    4   12,400   1,130      780     	   	
        E.Chi., Ind.
  9

 10        All of these plants have invested in waste treatment

 11   facilities.   The United States Steel Corporation quenches

 12   coke  with ammonia still wastes and discharges waste pickle

 13   liquor to an absorption lagoon.   U. S. Steel discharges blast

 14   furnace flue dust to the Grand Calumet River and recovers it

 15   with  a dredge that is located in the river permanently.

 16   The Youngstown Sheet and Tube Company recovers phenol and

 17   most  of its  pickle liquor,  and recovers blast furnace flue

 18   dust  with thickeners.  Inland Steel Company recovers phenol

 19   and blast furnace flue dust, but discharges waste pickle

 20   iiquor to the Indiana Harbor Canal.  Analysis of the wastes

 21   from  these three steel plants indicates that large amounts

 22   of coking wastes are reaching the Grand Calumet River and

 23   Indiana Harbor Canal.

 24        Cities Service Petroleum Company provides oil separators

25   and sulfide  and ammonia strippers, and has installed a second

-------
                                                        81

     ary treatment pilot plant.  Sinclair Refining Company


     provides oil separators, an ammonia and sulfide stripper,


     a sulfide oxidation tower, and removes phenol by extraction


     with crude oil and oxidation in a cooling tower.  The total


     amount of waste is limited by a large amount of water reuse.


     Sinclair also skims oil from the Lake George Branch,


     Indiana Harbor Canal, to help decrease the oil nuisance.


     Mobil Oil Company provides oil separators, cooling towers,


 9   and straw filters.  A sulfide and ammonia stripper is


 10   under construction.  A sulfide oxidation tower is being


 n   installed.  Mobil Oil Company uses the Indiana Harbor
                    i

 12   Canal as a water supply.


 13        E. I. DuPont de Nemours &  Company, East Chicago,


 14   Indiana, produces hydrochloric acid as a by-product of


 15   one of its manufacturing operations.  It is reported


 16   that the Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board has


 17   approved discharge to the Grand Calumet River through an


 18   underwater waste diffusion system of a maximum of 90,000


 19   pounds per day of chloride, and at normal river flows, a


20   maximum of 125*000 pounds per day of unneutralized hydro-


21   chloric acid that would use up to 25 mg/L of natural


22   alkalinity in the river.  The approval was granted with


23   the understanding that the Company would make every effort to


24   sell the acid rather than discharge it to the Grand Calumet


25   River.  The Company has advised that all hydrochloric acid

-------
                                                         82
     is now being sold,  and that no chlorides or acid from this
     operation are being discharged to the river.
          The Midwest Steel Division,  National Steel Corporation,
     provides a high degree of treatment for its sheet and tin
     mill  wastes.  There is no significant pollution to Burns
     Ditch from this source,  and this  plant Illustrates the
     degree of waste control that can  be achieved in a steel
     rolling mill.  The  Bethlehem Steel Company is installing
 9    similar waste treatment facilities for its Burns Harbor

10    sheet and tin mill, now under construction.  When the
     proposed Burns Harbor  deep water  port is constructed,
12    these two companies plan to install basic steel and coking
13    facilities.   Their  plans to control waste from these future
14    facilities have not been reported.  The State of Indiana has
1S    notified the companies that adequate waste treatment must be
16    provided and plans  must be approved before basic steel
17    mills are constructed.
18         The principal  sources of wastes that discharge directly
19    to Lake Michigan are Union Carbide Chemicals Company, Whiting,
20    Indiana; American Oil  Company,  whiting, Indiana; American
21    Maize-Products Company,  Hammond,  Indiana; and United States
22    Steel Corporation,  Chicago,  Illinois.  Wastes from the
23    first three are summarized as follows:

24
25

-------
 2

                                                    POUNDS PER DAY
 3
 4
     Union Carbide, Whiting,     43  99,000   	      13
                      Ind.
 6
     American Oil Co., Whiting,  97  57,000  3,800   1,100   3,950
                         Ind.

     American Maize-Products Co.  9  44,000   	    	    	
          Hammond, Ind.
 9
 10

 11

 12

 13

 14

 IS

 16

 17

 18

 19

20

21

22

23

24

25
                                        AMMONIA
COMPANY                      MOD PE     NITROGEN PHENOL  OIL
               Union Carbide Chemicals  Company has  a

quench water recirculation system.  Other wastes are mostly

soluble In water, and.no treatment Is provided.  Recently

large amounts of pellets of material similar to polyethylene

have been found washed ashore on the beaches in Chicago.

It is believe that Union Carbide is possible source of
this material.
               American Oil Company provides oil  separators
on both process wastes and cooling water return flow, and
                      •

secondary treatment on process wastes.  American Maize -

Products Company discharges some wastes to the Hammond

Sanitary District.  Other wastes are treated in an

anaerobic - aerobic lagoon and chlorinated before dis-

charge.  A decrease of 80-90 percent in BOD in the Lagoon

system is reported.

               The United States Steel Corporation,

-------
                                                       84
     South Works, Chicago, Illinois has no coke plant.  Its
     principal wastes are blast furnace flue dust, oil, and
     hydraulically quenched blast furnace slag (popcorn slag).
     The amount of flue dust that overflows the thickeners
     is not known, but discoloration of Calumet Harbor and
     Lake Michigan is evident from the air.  The company
     provides oil separators, but their effectiveness is
     not known.  Popcorn slag at times is discharged and
     washes ashore at such places as Calumet Park Beach in
 10   Chicago where it becomes a nuisance to bathers.  No
 n   significant amount of pickle liquor is discharged.
 12   Blast furnace flue dust and oily wastes have been ob-
 13   served to flow into Indiana waters of Lake Michigan,
 14   which lie about 1/3 mile off shore.
 is                  Wisconsin Steel Works, Interlake Iron
 16   Corporation,  and Republic Steel Corporation, all in
 17   Chicago,  have their coke plant wastes sewered to the
 18   Calumet Sewage Treatment Plant.  The data in Table VI-6,
 19   however,  indicate that some coke wastes are probably
20   discharged to the Calumet River by Interlake Iron
21   Corporation.   Only Republic Steel Corporation discharges
22   a  significant amount of pickle liquor.  It has not been
23   reported whether this pickle liquor is neutralized before
24   discharge.   All three plants provide thickeners for
25   recovery of blast furnace flue dust.  Some popcorn slag

-------
                                                       65
     has been traced to the Wisconsin Steel Works.
                    Cargill, Inc., Chicago, Illinois, provides
     septic tanks for domestic wastes.  Wastes from refining
     soybean oil contribute 8,700 PE to the Calumet River.
     An industrial waste treatment plant providing neutraliza-
     tion and anaerobic-aerobic treatment has been constructed,
     but has not been reported to be in operation.
                    Lever Brothers Company, Hammond, Indiana
     discharges about 18,000 PE to the extreme northern end
10   of Wolf Lake.  Several acres of the lake have been
11   polluted and fish kills have been reported.  Studies
12   of Wolf Lake by the Public Health Service have not
13   disclosed evidence of significant interstate pollution.
                    Acme Steel Company, Riverdale, Illinois,
     discharges raw sewage from approximately 2,900 of its
16   employees.  It also discharges a substantial amount of
17   unneutralized pickle liquor.  The Company provides
18   scale pits, oil separators and a thickener.  Acme Steel
19   Company is drawing plans to separate the domestic waste
20   from the combined system so that the domestic waste may
21   be discharged to the existing sewerage system.  Further,
22   plans are being made for revision of production operations
23   needed for the Installation of a pickle liquor waste
24   disposal system.
25                  Victor Chemical Company in Chicago Heights,

-------
                                                         86
     Illinois discharges an estimated 3,300 pounds per day
     of phosphate via the State Street Ditch and the Sanitary
     District of Bloom Township.  This phosphate can
     potentially produce algae nuisances downstream In the
     Illinois River.
     Federal Installations
                    There are presently twenty-five Federally
     owned or leased installations in the conference area.
     Of these twenty-five installations, seventeen are
 10   housing units which have been leased for army personnel
 11   when off-base housing was needed.  The number of these
 12   housing units and their location varies as the needs for
 13   housing occur.  In the leasing agreements, the responsi-
 14   bility for providing sewage disposal lies with the
 is   various building owners.
 16                  The other Federal installations in the
 17   area Include four Nike missile sites, one Corps of
 is   Engineers lock and dam, one Naval reserve training
 19   center, one Defense material supply depot, one Coast
20   Guard light station.  Waste treatment facilities appear
21   to be adequate for all of these installations except
22   the light station located at the mouth of Indiana Harbor.
23   This installation, known as the Indiana Harbor Light,
24   has a personnel complement of 3-^ persons and their
2s   domestic sewage is discharged untreated directly to Lake

-------
                                                         87
     Michigan.
                    A waste disposal problem  could possibly
     occur at the Defense material supply depot located on
     Wolf Lake, Hammond, Indiana.  This installation is built
     on a land fill area and the soil is not  ideal for the
     septic tanks and tile drain fields which are currently
     being used.  The depot is now manned by  a staff of only
     15-20 persons.  In the event that activity at this
     installation is increased or changed, the waste disposal
 10   system should be reviewed, and the possibility of
 11   connecting to the Hammond Sanitary District sewers
 12   should be investigated.
 13   Bulk Storape Areas and Barges
 14                  Open air storage of iron  ore, coal, and
 is   limestone at unloading sites adjacent to waterways is a
 is   potential source of pollution.  If the stockpiles are
 17   not properly drained,  dust and granular material may be
 18   washed into the streams by rainfall.  These materials
 19   may be carried to the  lake in suspension if the stream
20   velocity is adequate,  or they may settle in the dock area.
21                  Bulk storage areas for petroleum products,
22   commonly called tank farms, are also potential sources
23   of pollution.  Although tanks may be adequately diked,
24   accidental spills can  occur in connection with the trans-
25   fer of liquid between  tanks, or in the operation of

-------
                                                        88
     loading or unloading a vessel or barge.  These may be
     due to human error or mechanical failure.
                    An accident spill occurred in December
     1963 at the American Oil Company dock in the Lake
     George Branch of the Indiana Harbor Canal.  A barge
     containing about 10,000 barrels of highly toxic toluene
     was being unloaded,  when suddenly  the bow of the barge
     sank with three valves open.  An unknown amount of
 9   toluene escaped to the canal approximately 14 hours
 10   before the leak was  controlled.  As far as is known,
 11   no serious damage resulted from the spill.  This
 12   was partly due to the high volatility of the toluene,
 13   which evaporated rapidly.
 14   Vessel Pollution
 15                  Cargo vessels accounted for about 11,000
 16   trips through Calumet Area deep water ports in 1963.  In
 17   addition,  several thousand pleasure craft operate out of
 18   marinas in the area.  Wastes discharged by these vessels
 19   seldom undergo any treatment, although some boats have
20   facilities for treating or holding sanitary wastes.  The
21    principal vessel wastes are sanitary, garbage, refuse
22    and drainage,  ballast and  bilge water, dredged materials,
23    compartment washings, and  cargo losses.  Uncontrolled
24    discharge of these wastes  can result in serious pollution
25    problems to beaches, shore property, recreational waters,

-------
                                                        89
     and municipal and industrial water supplies.
 2                  The Chicago Water Department has had a
 3   problem during the recreational boating season with
 4   plastic "Marine sanitary Bags" getting onto screens,
 s   settling basins and filter beds.  Apparently, pleasure
 6   boat operators use the bags for sanitary wastes and then
 7   throw the sealed bags overboard into Lake Michigan.
 a                  In general, existing Federal, State, and
 9   local regulations restricting the discharge of vessel
10   wastes are primarily aimed at protecting municipal
11   water supplies and preserving navigation channels.
12   Enforcement of these regulations is difficult at best.
13   Posting of regulations and surveillance efforts by the
     Public Health Service, the Coast Guard, and the Corps
is   of Engineers constitute the control measures.

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

-------
                                                        90
 1                      VII - LAKE CURRENTS
 2                  Intensive studies of currents and
     temperature  changes were made by the Public Health
     Service in the  Illinols-Indiana-Michigan boundary waters
     from November 1962 through July 1964.  The study used
     automatic  recording current meters and free floating cur-
     rent measuring  devices.   Additional current meter
     studies were conducted  In the Calumet Harbor area during
     the  summer and  fall of  1963 by the U. S.  Lake Survey.  The
10   studies indicate a prevailing flow from south to north
11   along the  southern and  the adjacent southwestern portion
12   of Lake Michigan.
13                  Only three pertinent studies of currents
14   have been  made  in  Lake  Michigan prior to  the present
15   study.   Prom 1892  through 1894,  Mark Harrington of the
16   U.S.  Weather Bureau released  a series of  drift bottles
17   over a  three year  period.   In 1954-55*  James Johnson of
is   the  U.S. Bureau of Fisheries  made an Intensive study
19   of surface currents using drift bottles and drift cards.
20   Also, in 1955,  Dr. John  Ayres and others  of the
21    University of Michigan used drift bottles and temperature
22   studies to show currents  in the lake.
23                  These studies  were confined to the
24   summer  period and  are based on a very limited period of
25    study.   The  information was too narrow in scope to be

-------
                                                             91
 i   usable for background information.
 2   General Considerations
 3                  Both wind and the shore are the primary
     factors which influence the flow of water in the southern
     part of the lake.  Wind is the energy source for putting
     the water in motion, and the shoreline is responsible for
     the general direction of flow in this area.  Water move-
     ments, in general, tend to parallel the shore as the
     water gets shallower.  Water tending to move parallel to
10   the shoreline is illustrated by the patterns of flow
11   found in the Calumet Area.
12                  Density plays a role in the movement of
13   materials put into the lake.  A pollutant discharged
14   into the lake will rise, sink or come to rest within
is   the water mass depending ^on its initial density.
16                  Existing currents or absence of currents
17   also affect the discharge of a pollutant.  If a pollu-
     tant is discharged into the lake during near calm
19   periods it will build up into a stationary mass.  If
20   the pollutants are discharged into an existing current
21    It  will be diluted by the moving water.  The initial
22   dilution depends on the rate of discharge of the
23   pollutant and the speed of the current.
24                  The most important types of motion are
25    mixing and transport.   Mixing refers to the rate of

-------
                                                          92
     dilution of a pollutant.  Transport Is the net movement of
     a water mass from one area to another.
     Relationship to Municipal Water Supplies
                    Water transport can be divided into two
     broad types, short and long term.  Short term means  up
     to a few days in length and long term would include  months
     of travel.  Data shown in Figures VII-1, 2, 3, and 4
     (PP. 163, 164, 165, 166), refer to over 20,000 continuous
 9   current meter observations from various stations in  southern
 10   Lake Michigan near or adjacent to the Calumet Area.  The
     data from the current meter stations describe the flow
                           o
 12   in the area shown.
 13                  Two specific periods, January 21 to
 14   24,  1963 and March 14 to 16,  1963* shown in Figure VII-1
 15   (P.  163) and VII-2 (P. 164),  show the pattern of flow  from
 **
 16   current meter records.  During both periods the City of
 17   Chicago Water Department experienced severe taste and  odor
 18   problems from water taken at  the cribs.  On January  20, 1963*
 19   the  odor threshold level at Whiting and Hammond were
20   recorded at a value of 8 at both intakes.  These values
21   Jumped 4 to 5 times by the following day and nearly
22   15 to 20 times by January 22.  The flow of water past  the
23   intakes was toward the northwest as shown in Figure VII-1
24   (P.  163).  On January 24, Just two days later, the Chicago
25   South District Filtration Plant recorded its first

-------
                                                       93
     taste and odor problems In 1963.  Taste and odor
     problems were not experienced farther to the north at
     this time, indicated that the pollution occurred to
     the south as shown by the water movements.
                    Figure VII-2 (P. 164), shows the conditions
     during the second occurrence in 1963 when severe taste and
     odor problems occurred at Chicago.  Water flow during the
     March 14 to 16, 1963 period was again from the south to
     the north.
10                  Mixing rates can vary widely depending
11   on the weather conditions.  During the times of taste
12   and odor difficulties experienced by Chicago both in
13   January and in March 1963, chemical analyses showed
14   that the water mass was diluted about four times while
15   in transit from the Whiting-Hammond areas to the
16   Chicago intake.
17                  Studies made during April 1963 near
19   Chicago indicate that the dilution ratio following near
19   calm conditions is less than five for currents up to
20   one foot per second and five miles of travel.
21                  Figure VII-3 (P. 165), shows typical annual
22   water movements in the Illinois-Indiana region.  Regardless
23   of the season of the year, the prevailing flow is from
24   the south, although flows from the north also  occur, as
25   shown.  From December through March strong northeast

-------
     storms,  as  well  as  prolonged  west  and  west-southwest



     winds, account for  the  relatively  greater percentage of



     time when flow is from  the  north.   From April through



     July the total percentage of  flow  from the south is less



     than 50  percent, but  is still the  dominant sector.   From



     August through November, currents  show a very dominant



     flow from the south.  The winds over the lake during



     the summer  are primarily from the  south and southeast



     and in the  winter are from  the northwest,  both of which



10   maintain the northward  flow of water.



n                 Figure VII-4 (P. 166),  illustrates the in-



12   dependent results of  continuous summer and fall studies made



13   by the U.S. Lake Survey in  and adjacent to Calumet  Harbor.



14   The Lake Survey  concluded that the northwestward flow



is   past the harbor was a typical summer condition.   This



16   flow was reversed only  by strong northerly winds.



17                 Current  speeds along the shore and in the



18   upper layers move between 2 and 5  miles per day for 60



19   percent  of  the time.  Movement from the Indiana area



20   to the Chicago vicinity will  normally  take from three to



21   four days for average conditions.   Under storm conditions



22   or periods  of high winds, it  could travel  the distance in



23   less than one day.



24   Summary



25                 The general  pattern of  flow during the

-------
                                                        95
     year in the southwest corner of Lake Michigan is from
     south to north.  Northwest and southerly winds maintain
     this flow.  Reversals to this pattern occur only after
     prolonged wind shifts of more than eighteen hours in
     length when the wind is from the northeast and southwest.
                    Specific occurrences of taste and odor
     problems experienced at the South District Filtration
     Plant were shown to originate in the Indiana portion of
     Lake Michigan.
10
11    VIII - EFFECTS OF WASTES ON WATER QUALITY AND WATER USES
12   Water Quality Criteria
13                  The quality of water as it affects the
14   health or welfare of people in the environment is adjudged
15   by many criteria.  These criteria range from character-
is   istlcs readily discernible to the senses of sight and
17   smell,  to tests requiring highly sensitive laboratory
18   equipment and  sophisticated techniques.  The following
19   paragraphs discuss the more important tests and their
20   significance,  preliminary to a description of quality
21   conditions and effects in specific parts of the stream
22   and lake system.
23                      Dissolved Oxygen (DO)
24                  The small quantity of oxygen dissolved
25   in water is perhaps the  most important single Ingredient

-------
                                                       96
     necessary for a healthy, balanced, aquatic environment.
     Dissolved oxygen Is consumed by living organisms through
     respiration and is replenished, if a well-balanced
     environment exists, by absorption from the atmosphere
     and through the life processes of aquatic plants.  When
     organic pollution enters this environment, the balance
     is altered.  The bacteria, present in the water or
 8   introduced with pollution, utilize the organic matter
 9   as food and multiply rapidly.  The resulting oxygen
 10   deficiency may be great enough to inhibit or destroy the
 n   fish and other desirable organisms and to convert the
 12 II  stream or lake into an odoriferous nuisance.  Solubility
 13   of oxygen in water is quite low, saturation values ranging
 14   from 8 to 13 milligams per liter (mg/l) depending on
 15   water temperature and, in lesser degree, on atmospheric
 16   pressure.  Commonly accepted minimum concentrations that
 17   should be maintained at all times to prevent nuisance
 18   and promote desirable aquatic life, range from a minimum
 19   of 3 mg/l, which will support minimal aquatic life and
20    rough fish, to 6 or more mg/l for certain types of game
21    fish.  It is considered that a reasonable goal for
22    dissolved oxygen in Calumet Area streams is an absolute
23    minimum of 3 mg/l and preferably not less than 4.  For
24    Lake Michigan itself, it is both reasonable and highly
25    desirable that dissolved oxygen concentration be maintained

-------
                                                       97
 i   at or near saturation levels.
 2                  Biochemical Oxygen Demand  (BOD)
 3                  The biochemical oxygen demand of muni-
     cipal and Industrial waste waters is exerted by three
     classes of materials:  1) carbonaceous organic materials,
     2) oxldizable nitrogen compounds, and 3) certain chemical
     reducing compounds which will react readily with
     dissolved oxygen.  In general, high BOD values can be
     expected to result in lower dissolved oxygen levels
10   in the receiving waters, greater need for chlorine and
11    chemicals for water treatment and may cause tastes
12   and odor in treated water.
13                  Bacterial Pollution Indicators
14                  Two indicators of the degree of bacterial
is    pollution are used in this report:  the traditional coliform
16    bacteria test, and the more recently developed test
17    for fecal streptococci.  Since the origin of most of
18    the coliform group of organisms is the intestinal tract
19    of warm-blooded animals, Including man, the presence of
20   these organisms in a body of water is strongly indicative
21    of contamination of the water by fecal matter.  Waters
22    so contaminated must be presumed to contain also
23    pathogenic bacteria and viruses, some identifiable and
24    some quite difficult to Isolate.  The fecal streptococci
25    (fecal strep), which are also enteric organisms abounding

-------
                                                          98
     In the intestinal tracts of warm-blooded animals and
     man,  likewise indicate the presence of fecal matter in
     water.  Moreover, the fecal strep test is a more positive
     indicator,  because some of the coliform group may be
     found in nature,  in soil,  etc.,  and may multiply in
     water — whereas  the fecal strep generally do not
     multiply outside  their natural intestinal habitat.
                    Coliform and fecal strep concentrations,
     expressed herein  as the number of organisms per 100
10   milliliters (ml)  of water sample, are therefore indica-
11   tors  of the degree of hazard from waterborne disease.
12   While any degree  of hazard to health is undesirable,
13   the complete elimination of hazard is impossible, and
u   many  states and other organizations have established or
15   proposed limiting values on the  indicators.  For assess-
16   ment  of the degree of bacterial  pollution in waters of
17   the Calumet Area, the following  guidelines are proposed:
18              A)  For recreational  use involving intimate con-
19                  tact such as swimming, water skiing, and skin
20                  diving, coliform concentration should not
21                  exceed 1,000 MPN per 100 ml and fecal strep
22                  count should not  exceed 20 MPN per 100 ml;
23              B)  For uses involving limited body contact, such
24                  as commercial shipping (barge traffic), and
25                  boating, coliform and fecal strep counts

-------
                                                          99
                     should be, respectively,  not more  than  5,000

  2                   to 100 per 100 ml;

  3              C)   For municipal source water, at  the intake,

  4                   average  coliform  concentration  should not

  5                   exceed 5,000 per  100 ml in any  one month, and

  6                   not more than 20  percent  of individual  samples

  7                   in any one month  should exceed  that amount.

  8                   It is imperative  here to  note that the

  9 I  foregoing suggested guidelines for bacterial pollution

 10   are to be regarded as restrictive, not permissive.  That

     is to say, as subsequently recommended,  pathogens and

 12   associated organisms originating in human wastes  should

 13   be destroyed by disinfection, to the greatest degree

 14   feasible, at waste treatment plants prior to discharge.

 15   Referring particularly to Lake Michigan, the natural

 16   bacterial quality of its water is excellent, and  every

 17   reasonable effort should be made to keep it that  way.

 18                           Phenols

 19                   Phenolic material, which  includes

20   phenols, cresols and xylenols,  when found in water is

21   usually the result of pollution by industrial wastes.

22   Very low concentrations of phenols can impart a disagree-

23   able taste to water when chlorinated.   Thresholds of

24   taste and odor for chlorophenols range from 1 to  20

25   mlcrograms per liter (ug/1).  (Practically speaking, one

-------
                                                       100

     microgram per liter Is equal to one part per billion by

     weight.)  The drinking water standards of the U.S. Public

     Health Service recommend that phenols not be present

     in a water supply in excess of one microgram per  liter

     where other more suitable supplies are or can be  made

     available.

  7                     Biological Indicators
                                                              «-
                    The kinds and numbers of aquatic plants

     and animals Inhabiting a particular body of water, and

 10   the stream or lake bottom beneath it, reflect the

 11   quality of water that has generally prevailed in  the

 12   area for an extended period of time.  Some plants and

 13   animals are capable, by virtue of physiological features

 14   or living habits, of withstanding polluted conditions

 is   and multiply rapidly when competition with less tolerant

 16   forms is eliminted.  Examples of pollution-tolerant

 17   animals are the sludgeworms, bloodworms, leeches, and

 18   pulmonate snails, that exist in the decaying organic

 19   sediment which builds up from the settleable organic

 20   solids present in most waste discharges.  A benthic

 21   (bottom-dwelling) population consisting of many kinds

 22   of organisms with low numbers of each species is  typical

23   of unpolluted waters.

24

25

-------
                                                       101
 1   Calumet Area Streams
 2                  Except as otherwise noted, the statements
 3   on water quality conditions in this and subsequent sections
 4   are based on field surveys and investigations conducted
 5   during 1961-64 by the Great Lakes-Illinois River Basins
 6   Project.
 7                    Biological Conditions
 8                  Summary results of biological studies for
 9   the Little Calumet River and the Calumet River are shown
10   in Figure VIII-1 (P. 167).  These studies confirmed that all
li   of the streams in the Calumet area are polluted, differing
12   only in degree and by nature of the pollutant.  The
13   Grand Calumet River is the worst of all as evidenced by
14   a near-absence of bottom organisms.  The Little Calumet
15   and Calumet Rivers and the Indiana Harbor Canal were
16   also found severely degraded.  None of the streams
17   exhibited a balanced bottom-dwelling community.
18                  The Calumet River from its confluence with
19   the Grand Calumet River to its mouth in Calumet Harbor is
20    severely degraded.  The stream was highly turbid.  Oil
21    slicks and floating sewage solids were observed.  At
22    stations at the mouth, and five miles upstream from the
23    mouth, the bottom was composed mainly of organic ooze
24    that had a sewage and petroleum odor.  Near the mouth of
25    the Grand Calumet River the bottom deposits of the

-------
                                                        102
     Calumet  River were  composed  of Inert or inorganic
     materials.
                    Only very pollution-tolerant sludge-
     worms  (Oligochaeta) existed  in the  reach from Lake
     Calumet  downstream  (away from Lake  Michigan).  From Lake
     Calumet  upstream to the  harbor mouth (Lake Michigan
     inlet),  sludgeworms predominated, but the presence of
     fingernail  clams (Spaeriidae) indicated a slight improve-
 9   ment in  water quality and bottom conditions.   Sludgeworms
10   averaged more than  3,000 per square foot in this stream
11   reach.
12                  Attached  filamentous algae, routinely
13   scraped  from  substrata in this river,  were very pollutlon-
14   tolerant blue-green forms.   No pollution-sensitive
is   filamentous forms were found.
16                  The  bottom sediments of the Little
17   Calumet  River were  composed  of ooze and organic debris
18   along with  some gravel and rubble.   The dredgings had
19   a sewage odor.   The water was highly turbid and had a
20   strong sewage odor  at the station upstream ten miles
21   from Thorn  Creek.  Slime was evident for about three
22   miles downstream in the  barge canal from the  confluence
23   with the Grand Calumet River.
24                  The  organic bottom deposits of the
25   Little Calumet River supported large numbers  of pollution-

-------
                                                        103
     tolerant sludgeworms, with population densities as high
     as 11,000 per square foot.  There were no pollution-in-
     tolerant organisms.  Pollution-tolerant blue-green algae
     were the only aquatic plants living in this river.
                    The Grand Calumet River was practically
     barren biologically.  Although there were thick deposits
     that usually provide a suitable habitat for sludge-
     worms, extended septic periods and toxic pollutants
 9   prevented their establishment.
10                  Only the very pollution-tolerant
11   filamentous blue-green algae occurred.  The bottom was
12   composed of minute iron particles at the farthest
13   station upstream near the headwaters in Gary, Indiana.
14   Westward from that point to the Indiana Harbor Canal,
is   the bottom consisted of rubble, petroleum wastes, and
is   a heavy black oily organic ooze that had a highly
i?   objectionable sewage and petroleum odor.  The stream
18   surface was covered with oil.
19                  Nutrients in treated sewage from towns
20   in the drainage basin tributary to Burns Ditch,  and the
21   sluggishness of the stream,  combine to effect a most
22   favorable condition for planktonic algal growth.  The
23   subsequent die-off of the algae forms a bottom sediment
24   favorable for populations of pollution-tolerant sludge-
25   worms and bloodworms.  The stream is biologically

-------
                                                        104
    degraded but not as severely as other area  streams.
                    Industrial pollutants inhibited  the
    establishments  of large numbers of bottom animals  in
    the Indiana Harbor Canal.  The highest number of
    sludgeworms, only 44 per square foot, were  found near
    the southern end of the canal.  The stations near  the
    mouth at Indiana Harbor had only from two to ten sludge-
 8  jj worms per square foot.  Oil slicks were observed at
 9  | all stations and the water was very turbid.
10
11
12
                          Bacterial Pollution
                   The bacterial findings for  Calumet  Area
     streams reported herein derive from an intensive 24-
 13 1  day sampling survey conducted between August 20 and Sep-
 14   tember 12, 1963.  Samples were collected once a day at
 15   each sampling station on some 20 days of the period.
 16   Coliform and fecal streptococcus densities were deter-
 17 I  mined for each sample, by the membrane filter technique.
 18   Representative average and maximum results are shown
 19   graphically on  Figures VIII-2 (P. 168) and VIII-3 (P. 169).
 20 I  Gross fecal pollution is generally evidenced.  It is also
 21   evident on the two Figures that the interstate flow from
 22   Indiana to Illinois through both Grand and Little
23   Calumet Rivers is grossly polluted bacterially; this
24 I  contributes materially to the health hazard to down-
25 jj  stream users,  including workers on commercial barge lines

-------
                                                         105
  i It and re creationists using the boating areas and boat
  2
  3
  9
 11
 12
 13
launching ramps  in the near vicinity.

               Fecal  streptococcus densities  add
      further confirmation to the coliform indications of

  5 I]  pollution.  Sampling stations located near the State line

  6 ||  on either side, in both the Grand and Little Calumet

      Rivers, had average fecal strep concentrations in the

  8 ||  order of 70,000 to 80,000 per 1OO ml.
               Burns Ditch showed an average  coliform
 10  I  density of 120,000 per 100 ml near its point of dis-
charge to Lake Michigan, and 1.7 million per 100 ml

about 4 miles inland.  Fecal strep at the latter point

averaged 83,000 ml.
 14 I                 In the Indiana Harbor Canal coliform

 is    counts averaged 380,000 per 100 ml, and individual tests

 16 I  ranged up to 2.5 million.  Associated fecal strep values

 17    ranged as high as 40,000 per 100 ml.

 18                   In Wolf Lake, coliform densities as high

 19    as 19,000 per 100 ml were found in the Indiana portion,

 20    and values ranged downward to 250 per 100 ml at the

 21    lake's outlet connection to the Calumet River.  It is

 22    believed that abnormally high coliform counts are con-

 23    fined to local areas of Wolf Lake, and there is no

 24    evidence of significant interstate bacterial pollution

25    through this lake.

-------
                                                           106
                    The Calumet River exhibited average
     coliform densities of 2,900 per 100 ml near its Junction
     with Lake Michigan,  increasing to 25*000 per ml about 3
     miles farther inland.  As  described in earlier sections
     of this report,  the  Calumet River generally serves as one
     of the diversion channels  carrying water away from Lake
     Michigan into the Illinois River system.  Frequent
     reversals of flow occur, however — occasioned by Inver-
     sion of the  flat water surface gradient due to storm
 10   runoff or local  short-term lowering of Lake Michigan
 11   surface level due to surges (seiches)  in the lake.
 12   Prolonged southwesterly winds  could produce both such a
 13   lowering of  Lake Michigan  and  a current movement within
 14   the lake that is from Illinois into Indiana waters.  Thus,
 15   at times water from  the Calumet River, polluted bacter-
 16   ially and otherwise,  can cross from Illinois to Indiana.
 17   Whether such movement constitutes a hazard or detriment
 18   to water uses in Indiana would depend  upon the effect-
 19   iveness of dllutional mixing,  the proximity of beaches
20   or water intakes,  and other factors — but the possibi-
21   lity exists.   Unquestionably the flow  reversals are
22   detrimental  to beaches and other water uses in Illinois,
23   along the shoreline  immediately adjacent to the junction.
24                  In summary, widespread  and gross bac-
25   terial pollution prevailing throughout the waters of the

-------
                                                      107
     Calumet Area stream system constitutes a threat to
     public health.  Any human contact with these waters
     entails an exposure risk of Infectious disease.  In
     addition, such waters comprise a habitat for insects
     (such as roaches) and animals ( such as rats and birds)
     which can act as mobile disseminators of infection.
 7         Biochemical Oxygen Demand and Dissolved Oxygen
 8                  Figure VIII-4 (P. 170) shows average BOD
     concentrations, at sampling stations on the Little Calumet
10   River, for August-September 1963 survey period pre-
n   viously described.  Noteworthy is the concentration of
12   20.3 milligrams per liter (mg/l) at mile point 333.1,
13   just east of the Illinois-Indiana State line; combining
14   with average stream flows for the period,  that figure
15   converts to a pollutional load of about 1,500 pounds
16   per day of 5-day BOD crossing the line from Indiana into
17   Illinois.
18                  Figure VIII-5 (P. 171) shows BOD con-
19   centratlons for the corresponding period in the western
20   part of the Grand Calumet River.  It will  be noted that
21   BOD concentration near the State line, at  mile point 328.7,
22   is 15.7 mg/l; combining this concentration with average
23   stream flow indicates that about 3,200 pounds per day  of
24   5-day BOD entered Illinois from Indiana through the
25   Grand Calumet River.

-------
                                                        108
                    For comparison with the foregoing, the
     Calumet Treatment Plant of MSD-Chicago discharges about
     10,000 pounds per day of 5-day BOD into the reach of
     navigation channel between Lake Michigan and Blue
     Island Lock.   Thus,  the organic waste loads of an
     interstate nature, some 3,200 and 1,500 pounds per day
     of BOD respectively from Grand and Little Calumet
     Rivers, comprise a significant part of the total input
     to the reversible-flow portion to the navigation
 10   channel,  and  westward in the  Calumet-Sag Channel.  In
 11   the larger picture of the Illinois River channel system,
 12   downstream from the  western end of the Cal-Sag Channel,
 13   such waste loads are dwarfed  by the much larger inputs
 14   from MSD-Chicage's main plant at Stickney.
 15                  Average dissolved oxygen conditions in
 16   the Grand and Little Calumet  Rivers corresponding in
 17   location  and  time to the BOD  conditions just discussed,
 is   are shown in  Figures VIII-6 (P. 172) and VIII-7 (P.  173).
 19   Not only  did  critically low average DO conditions prevail
 20   generally throughout the area,  but some individual samples
 21   showed zero DO at every station.  The anomalous value of 4.9
 22   mg/l average  DO at mile point 337.2 in Indiana, near the
23   point where the Little Calumet  River divides to flow
24   east and  west,  is worth special comment.   Here the
25   individual samples showed extreme variability in DO,

-------
                                                         109
 i    ranging from zero to 25.6 mg/1.  The latter represents
 2    a  high degree of supersaturation and a very unstable
 3    transient  condition.   This anomaly is attributed to
 4    intense algal activity and a lagoon effect in the
 5    shallow, sluggish,  nutrient-rich water.
 Q    Lake Michigan
 7                   The following discusses the effects of
 8    wastes entering Lake  Michigan in the Calumet Area on the
 9    quality of the lake and the uses made of it.  Wastes
10    entering Lake Michigan come from the Indiana Harbor
11    Canal,  industries discharging along the  shoreline in
12    Indiana and Illinois,  reversal of flow of the Calumet
13    River  in Chicago,  to  a lesser extent the discharge from
14    Burns  Ditch in Indiana,  and at least one storm water
is    overflow in Whiting,  Indiana.
16                            Biology
17                   Between 1961 and 1963 more than 450 bottom
18    dredgings  were made in the lake area from Willamette,
19    Illinois to Indiana Dunes  State Park and lakeward about
20    30 miles.   The lake was divided into sectors bounded by
21    15 minute  lines of latitude and longitude,  and the numbers
22    of organisms per square foot and the kinds  of organisms
23    comprising the bottom animal communities were determined
24    for each sector.   Summary  results of those  data are
25    shown  in Figure VIII-8 (P.174)  and illustrate the effects

-------
                                                        110
     on Lake  Michigan of the  sources  of pollution in the
     Calumet  Area.
                    The bottom animal communities of this
     area  of  Lake Michigan were composed of  only a few
     different kinds of organisms.  Sludgeworms  (Oligochaeta)
     and aquatic scuds (Amphlpoda) were more numerous, but
     bloodworms  (Tendpiedldae)  and fingernail clams (Sphaerldae)
     were  sometimes  abundant.   Of these four different kinds
 9   of animals only one, the  scud, is  sensitive to pollution,
10   preferring a clean sand or gravel  bottom and relatively
n   clear water.  Where the lake bottom is  subjected to
12   deposits of organic materials the  conditions are more
13   favorable for sludgeworms,  bloodworms and fingernail
14   clams.
15                  Figure VIII-8 (P.  17*0 shows the population
16   differences in  bottom organisms  from one sector to the
17   other.   In Sector 3, offshore from the  Calumet Area
18   streams, pollution-tolerant organisms averaged 400 per
19   square foot, and  there were only a few  clean water
20   associated organisms.  In  Sector 2,  also Calumet Area
21   shoreline waters,  pollution-tolerant organisms averaged
22   about 250 per square foot, and again there  were only  a
23   few pollution intolerant organisms.  In Sector 6,  which
24   is  north of Sectors  2 and  3, and along  the  Chicago
25   shoreline, pollution tolerant organisms averaged about

-------
                                                        Ill
    1,000 per  square  foot of  lake bottom and  pollution
    intolerant forms  averaged about 50 per  square  foot.  This
    more than  two-fold increase in pollution  tolerant
    organisms  is attributed to an organic sediment that  is
    a more suitable habitat for organisms such as  sludge-
    worms and  less favorable for clean water  associated
    organisms.  The reason sludgeworms were less numerous
    in Sectors 2 and  3 is that the heavier suspended particles
    contained  in wastes from the steel industries  settle out
10   before they are carried northward to the  Chicago water-
n   front.  Some of the lighter organic particles  from sewage
12   and other organic waste sources also settle out near the
13   Calumet Area, but some are carried northward by lake
14   currents, and deposited along the Chicago shoreline.
15   In addition, toxic and inhibitory materials in some of
16   the industrial pollutants are more highly concentrated
17   in the Calumet Area of the lake than off  the Chicago
18   shoreline.  The lower concentration of toxic substances
19   in the Chicago Area would permit larger populations of
20   organisms to develop.
21                  Further evidence that wastes from the
22   Calumet Area are deposited in the Lake near Chicago is
23   in odors of the dredgings from this area  of Lake
24   Michigan.  Some of the dredgings from the sectors along
25   the shore  contained organic sediments described as ooze.

-------
 3
 8

 9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
                                                     112
 Sewage odors were detected In some of the dredgings
 in Sectors 1, 2, 3 and 6j  and petroleum odors were de-
 tected in bottom "muds from Sectors 1 and 2.
                The organic materials discharged in the
 Calumet Area, and carried  by the streams into Lake
 Michigan,  have created a condition deleterious to
 aquatic life.  This is indicated by the predominance
 of sludgeworms over kinds  of organisms beneficial to
 fish.   The aquatic scud is one of the principal food
 organisms  for desirable species of Lake Michigan fish,
 particularly the whitefish,  lake trout, and yellow perch.
 In this area where scuds are scarce there is inade-
 quate  food for large populations of desirable fish.
 Trash  fish like carp,  buffalo and suckers usually pre-
 dominate in a lake area where the bottom sediment is
 organic.
                Pollution of this large area of Lake
 Michigan is especially serious because it is practically
 irreversible.  That is, the  conditions that now exist
 will not necessarily improve with the cessation of
 present waste discharges.   In a stream where there is a
 current moving in one  direction there is a tendency for
 the bottom deposits to be  scoured away.  However,  lake
currents are weak and shifting, and bottom deposits
 might  move only slightly over a long period of time.

-------
                                                        113



 i                   In addition to the study of the bottom



 2    organisms,  samples of water were collected for planktonlc



 3    (free floating) algae evaluations.   The information ob-



 4    tained about the abundance and kinds of algae presents



 5    further understanding of the effects of pollutants.  If



 6    growth factors  such as water movement,  temperature  and



 7    light are favorable,  the planktonic  algae  populations



 8    increase with an increase in growth  nutrients.   There



 9    are a wide  number of algal growth nutrients but,  Just



10    as agricultural crops such as corn and  soybeans require



11    measureable amounts of phosphorus and nitrogen, so  do



12    the planktonic  algae.  Inorganic nitrogen  and total



13    phosphate concentrations of 0.3 milligrams per  liter



14    and 0.03 milligrams per liter,  respectively,  at the



is    start of the algae growing season are considered  suffi-



16    cient to cause  nuisance algal conditions.   Concentrations of



17    inorganic nitrogen were higher than  0.3 mg/1  in the Lake



18    Michigan area adjacent to the Calumet area.   However,



19    total phosphate values were near, but rarely  ever



20    more  than 0.03  mg/l«   Secchi disc readings in this



21    area  were generally about three feet.  Dense



22    populations of  planktonic algae did  not occur,  probably



23    because  of  a shortage of phosphorus,  and because



24    suspended matter restricted light penetration.   If  the



25    discharge of phosphorus and other nutrients  continues,

-------
     the concentration of phosphates can be expected to

  2   surpass the critical level of 0.03 mg/1 and algal

  3   nuisance conditions will occur.

  4                         Bacteriology

  5                  The waters off the Calumet area and

  6   the Chicago area were studied during 1962 and 1963 in a

  7   series of sampling cruises.  Coliform and fecal

  8   streptococcus determinations were made.  Virtually none

  9   of these organisms were found in the deep water of the

 10   main body of Lake Michigan.  Highest coliform concen-

 u   trations occurred in the waters extending from the mouth

 12   of the Calumet River to the Indiana Harbor and out to

 13   a distance of approximately two miles offshore.  Coli-

 14   form densities as high as 7,000 per 100 ml were observed

 15   in this area.   In the zone extending on eastward to

 ie   Burns Bitch all determinations were in the range of 1 to

 17   1,000 per 100 ml at a distance up to two miles offshore.

 18   Coliform densities in the range of 100 to 1,000 were

 19   observed extending outward from the Calumet Harbor-

 2o   Indiana Harbor area for a distance of five to seven miles.

 21   Such densities were detected at the Indiana-Illinois

 22   boundary line  running east and west in Lake Michigan,

23   due north of Whiting.  The waters of the south end of

24   Lake Michigan are thus shown to be receiving large loads
  ||
25 1  of fecal pollution originating in the Calumet Area and

-------
                                                        115
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
in
moving out into Lake Michigan.
Data from records of the Chicago Park
District on the occurrence of coliform bacteria on
beaches in the Calumet Area and northward along the
Lake shore in Chicago are shown below. Each beach was
sampled on 20 to 30 different days during the bathing
season each year, and the table shows the number of
days sampled on which the coliform count exceeded the
values shown.
Beaches No. of sampling days when coliform were
11

12
13
Indiana
14 Whiting
15
16

17
18
19
Hammond

Illinois
Calumet
Rainbow

67th St.
20
Jackson Pk.
21
57th St.
22
49th St.
23
*240,000
24
110,
000
or
greater
greater
196!


2
2


1
1

0

0

0

0



62


5
12


1
0

0

0

0

0



63


7
9


1
0

0

0

0

0



64


0
1*


0
0

0

0

0

0



than greater
10,000
61


8
6


4
2

0

2

0

0



62 63


12 14
13 14


3 12
0 1

1 2

2 2

0 1

0 1



64


1
5


3
0

2

1

1

0



1,
61


19
19


22
10

9

12

12

5



000
62 63


20 23
20 23


19 25
10 9

9 7

11 12

5 11

3 5



than

64


16
18


18
8

10

11

6

4



25

-------
                                                           116
   i                  It is evident that Whiting Beach and
  2
 17
 18
      Hammond Beach In Indiana and Calumet Park Beach In
      Chicago are the most heavily polluted.   These beaches

      lie within the artificial bay created by the Calumet

      Harbor breakwater and Indiana Harbor, and are directly

      subject to pollution by wastes discharged to Lake

      Michigan in the Calumet Area.  Coliform densities usually

  8 I!  exceed 1,000 per 100 ml,  and are often  100 times higher.

  9   The beach at Hammond is closed to swimming by orders

 10   of the Hammond Health Department due  to high coliform

 11   concentrations.  The beach is posted  for no swimming.

 12                  The effects of bacterial pollution from

 13   the Calumet Area are extended to beaches farther north

 14   along  the shoreline,  although to a diminishing extent.

 15   These  relationships are shown in Figure  VIII-9 (P.  175).

 16 1  The locations of the beaches are shown  in Figure V-l (P. 156)
               The water intakes of Chicago's Dunne

Crib and South District Filtration Plant are often
 19   affected by those polluted waters moving northward from

 20   Indiana and the mouth of  the  Calumet River.   Rainbow

 21   Beach and  the filtration  plant are  immediately adjacent,

 22 I  and Dunne  Crib is two miles offshore.   The bacterial

 23   records of water from both the plant and crib intakes

 24   substantiate the presence of  waters carrying fecal

25   pollution.  At times the  quality of the water abruptly

-------
                                                       117
    worsens and  coliform densities  increase  sharply.
    During the last  part of  November  1963, for example,
    coliform densities as high as 5,800 were recorded  through
    an eight-day period.  Higher coliform densities have
    been recorded in other seasons  and years since 1950.
 B          Phenolic Materials and  Taste  and Odor
 7                 In 1962 Lake Michigan  studies by the
    Public Health Service, phenol samples were  collected  at
 9  three Indiana Harbor  stations.  Results  at  these stations
10  and at one nearby lake station  were slightly higher than
11  values found  in  other Inshore sampling.   The most
12  notable result was a  phenol value of  6.8 mg/1 (micro-
13  grams per liter).
14                 In the first half  of 1963,  stations were
is  located within the inner harbor area, and at these
16  stations the  analytical results showed definite
17  degradation of water  quality.   Phenols were as high as
is  52.4 mg/L.  At the stations adjacent  to  the harbor, the
19  phenols were  present  in concentrations ranging from 0.4
20  to 10.0 mg/1.  The May, 1963 studies  showed that
21  phenol values at  nearly all of  sixty-four lake stations
22  in the Indiana Harbor, Calumet  Harbor, and adjacent
23  lake stations exceeded 1 mg/L.
24                 A special study  in the Calumet and
25  Indiana Harbor area was made for phenols during the

-------
                                                         118
  !   period of October 20 through December 9,  1963.   Figure

  2   VIII-10 (P. 176> illustrates a typical set of results obtained

  3   during this study.  One day's sampling was selected for

  4   this figure (October 22, 1963) to show a  typical flow

  c   pattern because averages on individual lake stations
  O
  6   have proved to be misleading.  Changes in wind  direction

  7   from day to day cause the pollution plume to alter its

  8   course.  The direction and severity of such pollution

  9   plumes are best represented by a separate examination

 10   of each individual day's sampling.   Averages are useful

 n   in showing larger range effects on the general  water

 12   quality of sizable areas in the lake,  but averages of

 13   all results at individual stations  do not successfully

 14   produce either of the desired patterns.

 ..                  The phenol values shown in Figure

 16   VIII-10 (P. 177)  were 127 mg/1 in Indiana Harbor,  56 mg/1 at

 17   the harbor mouth, and 72 mg/L a half mile out in the

 18   lake.   At points  two miles and four and one-half miles

 lg   in a northwesterly direction, results were 6 mg/1.

 20   They decreased to 5 mg/1 in another mile  and to 3 mg/L

 21   as the State line was crossed.  Higher results  (4 to

 22   12 mg/1) were observed near the shoreline between

23   Indiana Harbor and Calumet Harbor and in  Calumet Harbor.

24   These  phenol results were associated with a phenol value

25   of 254 mg/1 in the Indiana Harbor Canal on the  same day.

-------
                                                        119
                     To illustrate  both the average results

     and the maximum results  in both the  Indiana  and  Calumet

     Harbor area and the  Chicago water intake  areas,  Figure

     VIII-11  (P. 177)  show the average of all  samples collected

  5  I in these areas  in 1962 and 1963.

                     The average of 518 samples in the Calumet

     Harbor-Indiana  Harbor area was 16 mg/1.   In  the  sector

  a  I! west across the State line, the average of 105 samples

  9   was 1.8 mg/1 and  in  the  sector to the north,  where the

 10   Chicago water intakes are located, the average phenol

 11   value of 21 samples  was  1.6 mg/l.  It should  be  pointed

 12   out that the maximum values obtained in these three areas

 13   were respectively 354 mg/1, 32 mg/1,  and  3.2  mg/1, all

 14   substantially higher than the typical day previously

 is   referred to in  Figure VIII-10  (P.  176).

 16                   Phenols are decomposed by  bacterial

 i?   action in the presence of dissolved  oxygen and their  persis-

 18   tence from point-to-point is relatively short-lived,  except

 19   during low temperature periods.   The  levels observed  in

 20   the October study could be expected  to be  exceeded in

 21   colder weather, especially at the  stations farthest

 22   removed from Indiana Harbor, near  the water intakes.

23                   The shore intake of the Chicago South

24   District Filtration  Plant is less  than a mile from the

25   Indiana State line.  The Dunne Crib  Intake is about two

-------
 8

 9

10

11

12

13

14

IS

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
                                                      120
   miles  offshore  and  less  than three miles  from the

2  State  line.   The  locations  of these intakes  are such that

   the problems  which  occur at this  plant  and the results

4  of analyses obtained here are a direct  reflection of

5  interstate pollution.

                   Records of phenol  determinations by the

   City of  Chicago were obtained during 10 months of record

   in 1962  and the first three months of 1963.   The 1962

   phenol results  ranged from  0 to 6 mg/1  with  an average

   of 2 mg/1.  The phenol results from the first three

   months of 1963  averaged  1 mg/1.

                   The  Filtration Plant reported that one

   of its most serious taste and  odor problems  occurred

   between  January 24, 1963 and February 7,  1963»  lasting

   15 days.  During this period threshold  odor  numbers

   increased from  the  usual level of 4 to  a  maximum value

   of 50 at Dunne  Crib and  15  at  the shore intake.   Odors

   during this period were  characterized as  "hydrocarbon."

   This description is usually associated  with  industrial

   wastes.  These  high odor numbers  are  reflected  in the

   heavy use of  carbon in an effort  to remove the  odor.

   Associated with these objectionable odors were  high

   ammonia nitrogen results which will be  discussed in more

   detail later.

                   Other periods referred to  by  the Chicago

-------
                                                          121
     South District Filtration Plant as causing similar
     problems are shown in Table VIII-1 (P. 152).  These periods
     were March 3 and 4,  1963*  when threshold odor values of 8
     (Hydrocarbon) at the shore and 12 (hydrocarbon) at
     Dunne Crib were reported.   On April 2 to 7,  1963,
 6   threshold odor numbers up  to 10 at the shore and 14 at
 7   the  Crib were reported. Again these odors were reported
 8   as  "hydrocarbon."  Another critical period recently
 9   reported was a 20-day period from December 11 to
 10   December 31, 1964.   During this period an excessive
 11   threshold odor of 90 (hydrocarbon) was obtained at
 12   Dunne Crib and 16 was obtained at the shore.
 13                  As was discussed in Section VII, the
 14   high threshold odor  number in January and March 1963,
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
were associated with movements of water from  Indiana
towards Chicago intakes.
               Four Indiana water plants also take
their water from Lake Michigan in the Calumet Area.  The
Gary-Hobart Water Plant reports that when high carbon
dosages are required, hydrocarbon odors are always
responsible.  Acute problems were experienced in this
plant in January, February, and March 1963, and less
severe problems were experienced in January,  February,
March and December  1964.  Threshold odors and phenol
analyses were not reported.

-------
                                                          122
                    The East Chicago Water Treatment Plant
 .2   reports that beginning December 15, 1964, a strong
     phenol odor was detected.   Threshold odor numbers for
     the next eight days ranged from 8 to 35, maintaining
     35 for three consecutive days.   Normal or average
     carbon dosages are 24 to 27 pounds per million gallons.
     During these eight days dosages were between 63 and 163
 8   Ibs/foG.
 9                  The Hammond Water Plant reports that
10   when winds  are from the southeast or northeast, inten-
11   sive pollution due to phenols is experienced.  In the
12   past,  phenols were experienced  only during winter
13   months but  they are now expected at any time.  Threshold
14   odor numbers of 2,500 or higher have been recorded.  On
15   March 24 and 25 and April  2,  1964, a severe  taste  was
16   experienced characterized  as  a  "gasoline or paint" type.
17   This continued with less severity for two weeks.  An
18   insecticide spill was identified on July 10 and 11,
19   1964,  which took one week  to  eliminate from the system.
20   During December 1 to 26, 1964,  threshold odors from
21   30 to  79 were experienced  for 77 percent of the time.
22                  Whiting, Indiana, is located with
23   industrial  plants in close proximity on both sides.
24   Industrial  pollution never ceases to be a problem.
25   Threshold odors are usually high, running 15 to 25 when

-------
 10

 11

 12

 13
16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
                                                   123
severe problems are absent.  During 1963 and 1964 much

higher than average chemical dosages were required.

Only one period of phenol results was available.  Re-

sults from January 16 to February 6, 1963, ranged from

1 to 26 mg/1 with an average value of 8 mg/1.  Threshold

odors during this period averaged 18 with a maximum

of 100.  In contrast during the week of December 24,

1964, threshold odors ranged from 300 to 2,000.  Phenol

analyses were not obtained during this period.

               Because of the taste and odor problems

reported in the first part of 1963, the Public Health

Service began monitoring water intakes in Chicago and

vicinity for organic contaminants.  This program was
 14   continued until June 1964.  The stations selected were

 is   Whiting, Chicago's South District Filtration Plant,
Chicago Avenue, Evanston, and Waukegan.  The carbon

absorption method was used for this study and the average

results are shown in Table VIII-2 (P. 153).

               The Whiting, Indiana, plant showed

significantly greater amounts of carbon chloroform

extract than the other intakes.  This is an indication

of industrial pollution.  An average value of 242 micro-

grams per liter found at this station can be considered

a serious pollution load.  Threshold odor numbers up to

3,000 have been reported at Whiting.  The "Public Health

-------
                                                       121



     Service Drinking Water Standard - 1962" (PHS Publication



     No.  956) recommends  a threshold odor number limit of 3.



     A study by Rosen and Rubin showed that 70 percent of



     the  organic carbon in the carbon-chloroform extract



     from samples of intake water at Whiting,  Indiana was



     fossil  carbon,  originating from petroleum and coal, and



     indicated industrial sources.  The other  30 percent was



     contemporary carbon, indicating sewage origin.



                    The carbon filter extracts from the other



10   water plants indicate they are  receiving  organic



11   pollutants in their  raw water of the same magnitude as



12   obtained in the South District  Filtration Plant.  Un-



13   fortunately,  carbon  filter studies were not being made



14   at the  times of the  most  severe taste and odor  problems



15   reported by these plants,  in January,  March,  and April



16   1963, and December 1964.



17           Nitrogen:  Ammonia,  Organic,  and  Nitrate-Nitrite



18                  Nitrogen is necessary to the normal



19   life  cycle of aquatic life.   If it is present with



20   phosphate in moderate concentrations,  accelerated



21   growths  of algae  and plankton can result.   Ammonia in



22   high  concentrations,  above 2 to 2.5 mg/1  and  under



23   alkaline pH conditions  (pH8-8.5)  is a substance toxic



24   to many  forms of  aquatic  life.   At alllevels  it is an



25   increased burden  to  municipal water treatment,  because

-------
                                                         125



 1   of  its high chlorine  demand.



 2                   A study of Indiana Harbor was conducted



 3   from May  8  to  May 23,  1963, covering  five stations  in-



 4   side the  breakwater and 27 stations adjacent to  the



 s   harbor.   At the  same  time, a  survey was  also made covering



 6   32  stations at Calumet Harbor.  Pour  of  these stations



 7   were located inside the breakwater, and  the  others  were



 8   located outside  the breakwater.   The  concentrations of



 9   ammonia nitrogen and  organic  nitrogen were found to be



10   higher at the  stations near the harbors  than they were



11   farther out in the lake and were  much higher than



12   concentrations found  in the mid-lake  waters.



13                  Figure  VIII-12 (P.  178) illustrates  typical



14   ammonia nitrogen results as found  on  November 24, 1963.



15   The highest  result was 2.4 mg/1 in the Indiana Harbor



16   Canal, followed  by 1.5 mg/1 in the inner harbor, 1.6



17   at the harbor  mouth, and 1.1 mg/1 at  the point one-half



18   miles from  shore.  Close by was another result of 0.5



19   mg/1.  Four  miles northwest of the harbor, the level



20   was 0.45, and  at  five miles northwest of the  State



21   line, the result was 0.75 mg/1.



22                  Figure  VIII-13  (P.179) shows  the average



23   results of all samples collected  in the Calumet Area studies,



24   The data were  analyzed in quadrangles of 15 minutes



25   latitude and 15 minutes longitude.  The average of 538

-------
                                                      126
     results in the Calumet Harbor-Indiana Harbor area was

     0.35 rog/1.  Across the State line to the west, the aver-
     age result of 108 samples was 0.19 mg/1.  To the north,

     in the area of the Chicago water intakes, the average

     value of 58 samples was 0.12 mg/1.  While the averages

     are not significant from a health standpoint, they

     represent a nutrient load to the lake, and the maximum

     values between 2 and 4.5 mg/1 in the Indiana Harbor-

     Calumet Harbor area could be toxic to many forms of

10   aquatic life.  In addition,  the values up to 0.37 in

n   the area of the water intakes contribute to the cost of

12   water treatment.  The levels also demonstrate the

13   movement of pollution from the Indiana Harbor area

14   northwestward toward the Chicago water intakes and

15   shore area.  Similar patterns were also observed for

16   organic nitrogen and for nitrate-nitrite nitrogen

17   results.  The distribution of the total nitrogen results

18   in the area emphasizes the nutrient load placed in the

is   lake by the addition of nitrogen in the Calumet area.

20                  Excessive amounts of ammonia discharged

21   to interstate waters of Lake Michigan contribute to

22   overfertilization of the lake,  with consequent eutrophi-

23   cation or aging.  Over-enrichment of the lake can cause

24   prolific growths of algae and aquatic weeds that pile

25   up onto beaches, clog water  intakes, interfere with filter

-------
                                                        127
     plant operations, and cause taste and odor problems in

     municipal water supplies.

                    An even better indication of the fre-

     quency and degree of this pollution can be found in the
  5 I records of the Chicago South District Filtration Plant.

  6 || The two analyses which were made daily on the raw water

     of this plant which was closely allied are ammonia
8
15

16

17

18

19

20

21
     nitrogen and threshold odor.  Threshold odor has been
 9   discussed previously, but it bears some repetition on

 10   its relation to ammonia values.  The shore Intake of
 11   this plant is approximately eight miles from the

 12   Indiana Harbor and three-quarters of a mile from the

 13 I  Indiana-IIlinois State line.

 14                  The effect of the ammonia in Lake
   Michigan water has been felt repeatedly  by  the  Chicago

   South District Filtration  Plant.  This plant  takes  from

   20 to 60 percent of  its water from  its short  intake de-

   pending on the total demand on the  plant, and the

   remainder of the water comes from the Dunne Crib, two
   miles off shore.  Reports  from this plant indicated that

   a critical water quality problem existed from January 24,
22    1963 to February 7, 1963.
23                   During this period when the severe

24 I  "hydrocarbon" threshold odor problem reached a maximum

25    odor number of 50 at the Dunne Crib and 15 at the shore,

-------
                                                      128
     high ammonia  results  were  also obtained.   The filtration
     plant reported  that the  normal ammonia value of raw lake
     water should  be 0.004 mg/1 and treatment  problems occur
     with a rapid  increase in chlorine  demand  when the
     ammonia nitrogen level exceeds 0.02 mg/1.   During this
     period,  the average ammonia values at  the Dunne Crib
     were over 0.02  mg/1 on twelve  out  of the  fifteen days
     with maximum  values over 0.10  mg/1 on  nine days and over
     0.20 mg/1 on  four of  the days.  The average value at the
10    short intake  exceeded 0.04 mg/1 every  day,  with maximum
11    values more than 0.10 mg/1 on  nine days.
12                   Other  periods referred  to  by the Chicago
13    South District  Filtration  Plant as causing similar
14    problems were March 3 and  4, 1963, April  2 to 7,  1963,
is    and  December  11  to 31, 1964.   On March 3  and  4,  1963,
16    a threshold odor value of  12 was obtained  at  the  Dunne
17    Crib and 8 was  obtained  at the  shore,  again with the
18    characteristic hydrocarbon odor.   Ammonia  values  of
19    0.052 mg/1 at the Crib and 0.10 mg/1 at the shore were
20    also obtained on this date.  On April  2 to 7,  1963,
21    threshold odors  of 14 at the Crib  and  10  at the  shore
22    were again associated with ammonia values  as  high as
23    0.14 mg/1 at  the  Crib and  up to 0.098  mg/1  at the shore.
24                   During the  last reported problem
25    period, December  11 to 31, 1964, a maximum threshold

-------
                                                         129
 i   odor of 90 (hydrocarbon) and an ammonia value of 0.164

 2   mg/1 were obtained at Dunne Crib.

 3                  Although the highest ammonia values

 4   were obtained during the same periods as the highest

 5   threshold odors,  the relationship does not always hold.

 e   High ammonia concentrations were also observed and

 7   problems occurred from them at a number of other times

 8   with no attendant increase in threshold odor numbers.

 9   Such conditions existed on numerous occasions, the

10   most notable being from April 15 to May 20, 1963, when

11    ammonia levels were over 0.05 mg/1 for 20 days with

12   three days over 0.11 mg/1 and from November 18 to

13   December 3* 1963* when ammonia nitrogen levels again

14   ranged from 0.05  to 0.14 mg/1 for twelve days.

15                  During 1963 at the South District

16    Filtration Plant, ammonia nitrogen results exceeded 0.02

17    mg/1 on 187 days.  Shown below Is a breakdown of the

18    number of days this and higher values were exceeded at

19    the  Dunne Crib and at the shore:

20    Ammonia Nitrogen
     	Results                  Shore (1963)    Dunne Crib  (196;
21
     greater than 0.02 mg/1            182              187
22
     greater than 0.05 mg/1             72               77
23
     greater than 0.10 mg/1              6               15
24
     greater than 0.20 mg/1                               3
25

-------
                                                         130
                    Ammonia problems are also reported by the

     Gary-Hobart Water Company which draws its water from

     Lake Michigan at Gary.  Gary-Hobart reports odors

     suggesting gasoline,  and that high ammonia concentrations

     are common in the raw water,  the average magnitude

     being 0.10 mg/1.  Water company officials report that

     each pound of ammonia in the  raw water increases the

  8 I!  chlorine demand by about 10 pounds.  On seven days

  9   during January, 1963* ammonia concentrations ranged

 10   from 0.40 to 0.65 mg/1.  On three days in March, 1963,

 11   the ammonia values were between 0.30 and 0.40 mg/1.

 12   During 1964, ammonia  values of 0.15 to 0.4? mg/1 were
 13

 14

 15
18

19

20

21

22

23

24
reported on eight days in January, six days in February

and one day in March.

                   Additional Problems
 16 I                 The Gary-Hobart Water Company reports

 17 ||  that  high iron concentrations are common in the raw
water supply.  The average amount of the iron in the

raw water is reported to be 0.15 mg/1.  In January,

1963, iron results were 0.4 to 1.0 mg/1 for five days.

In March, 1963, iron ranged from 0.5 to 1.1 mg/1 for

four days.  In February and March, 1964, iron values

were between 0.3 and 0.5 mg/1 for eight days.  This

iron probably comes from waste pickle liquor discharged
25    to  Indiana Harbor.   The effect of this iron is to

-------
                                                         131
 i   Increase the  cost of water treatment.
 2                   An investigation was  conducted  in
 3   September 1963, to determine the source of popcorn slag
 4   which fouls the Calumet Park Beach on Lake Michigan  at
 5   95th Street in Chicago.  Popcorn slag is a very  light,
 6   porous solid which is formed by rapid cooling  of molten
 7   blast furnace slag by water jets.  Some escapes  the
 8   recovery facilities and is then discharged in  washing or
 9   cooling water to the adjacent watercourse.  The  slag
10   floats and is moved by winds and current.  Thus, it
11   frequently collects on bathing beaches, where  the
12   sulfide odor and gritty texture are both annoying and
13   uncomfortable to bathers.  This problem is a more or
H   less continuous nuisance throughout the summer.  Field
is   investigations have indicated that at least two  plants
16   discharge this waste.  The largest source of popcorn
17   slag is the U.S. Steel, South Works, in Chicago.  A  lesser
18   source is the Wisconsin Steel Works in Chicago,
19
20
21
22

23
24
25

-------
                                                        132
  1                      EC -  CORRECTIVE ACTION NEEDED

  2                  It  is  recommended that:

  3                  1.   Industrial plants in both Indiana

  4  and  Illinois take  immediate  steps to improve practices

  s  for exclusion or treatment  of wastes, especially the

  6  following  constituents:

  7                  Oil  and tarry  substances;

  8                  Phenolic  compounds or other persistent

  9                  organic chemicals that contribute to

 10                  taste  and odor problems;

 11                  Ammonia and  other nitrogenous material;

 12                  Phosphorous;

 13                  Suspended matter;  and

 14                  Highly acidic  or  alkaline  materials.

 is                  2.   Major Industrial  plants institute

 16  permanent programs  of  sampling their effluents to pro-

 17  vide more complete  information about waste outputs.

 18  Location and frequencey  of sample  collection should be

 19  sufficient to yield statistically  reliable values of

20  waste output and its variations.   Analyses should

21  include the following:   pH, oil, tarry residues, phenolics,

22  ammonia, organic nitrogen, total nitrogen,  cyanide,

23  toxic metals, phosphorus, suspended  solids,  and  bio-

24  chemical oxygen demand.  Wastewater  flows  should be

25  measured, and results  should be reported  in terms of

-------
                                                       133
 i    both concentrations and tonnage rates.   Monthly
 2    reports  of results  should be submitted  to the appro-
 3    prlate State water  pollution control agencies, where
 4    they will  be available in open files.  Unusual increases
 5    in waste output and accident spills should be reported
 6    immediately to the  State agency.
 7                   3.   Appropriate State or local agencies
 8    establish  system of water quality monitoring  stations
 9    at strategic points in the public waters of the area.
10    Analyses should include the indices recited above,  plus
11    dissolved  oxygen, coliform and fecal streptococcus
12    counts,  and stream  temperature.   At selected  locations
13    and  for  selected Indices,  continuously  recording
14    monitors should be  maintained  and data  transmitted  to
is    a central  receiving office.  Effective  alerting proce-
16    dures should be instituted by  State or  other  appropriate
17    agencies,  for quickly  informing interested parties  of
is    sudden changes or hazards  to water quality.
19                   4.   The Thomas  J.  C^Brien Lock be closed
20    and  placed  in conventional lockage operation  to provide
21    more positive control  of flows and reduce  the frequency
22    and  duration of backflows  to Lake Michigan.
23                   5.   A dam be built across the  Grand
24    Calumet  River to prevent uncontrolled flows from Lake
25    Michigan to the Illinois River through  that channel.

-------
 14

 15

 16

 17

 18

 19
                                                         134
     Preferred  location  of  the  dam is east of the outfall
     from the East  Chicago  Municipal  Waste Treatment Plant.
                    6.   All municipal wastes in the area
     receive secondary treatment.   The trend toward consoli-
     dation of  small  community  facilities  into integrated
     sewer systems  should be accelerated,  to achieve better
     operation  conditions and reduce  the proliferation of
     sewage treatment plants discharging into small tribu-
     taries and dry watercourses.
 10 I!                7.   Hammond and East Chicago investigate
 n   the  feasibility  of  constructing  lagoons for further
 12   treatment of waste  effluents.  Part of the existing
 13   poorly-drained floor plain of  the Grand Calumet River
might be utilized for this purpose, with levees around
the lagoons high enough to prevent flooding, and
improved bypass channels for storm drainage.
               8.  All sanitary wastes be disinfected
before discharge.  Disinfection should be practiced in
the manner prescribed by State water pollution control
20  I agencies and mutually agreed upon between  the  two  States,

21

22

23

24

25

-------
                                               135
        Table  VI-la

SOURCES OF MUNICIPAL WASTES
    LAKE MICHIGAN BASIN
Community,
Sanitary
District, or
Institution
Crown Point,
Ind.
St. John TWP,
Ind.
Lincoln Gardens,
Ind.
Ross TWP,
Ind.
Hobart TWP,
Ind.
Hobart, Ind.
Black Oak-Ross,
Ind. (d)
Gary, Ind.
Miller Plant
Chesterton,
Ind.
Porter, Ind. (e)
Valparaiso,
Ind.
Receiving
Stream
(Direct)
Deep River
Turkey Cr.
Turkey Cr.
Turkey Cr.
Deep River
Deep River
L. Cal. R.
Burns Ditch
L. Cal. R.
L. Cal. R.
Salt Creek
Eight Smaller
Sources, Ind.
BURNS DITCH SUBTOTAL
Gary, Ind . SD
Main Plant
G. Cal. R.
East Chicago,
Ind. G. Cal. R.
INDIANA HARBOR SUBTOTAL
LAKE MICHIGAN TOTAL
Treatment
Secondary
Minor
Secondary
Minor
Minor
Secondary
Minor
Secondary
Secondary
Minor
Secondary
Estimated Pop
Connected to
Sewer
8000
3300 (a)
1000
»,6» M
8920 (c)
18,680
6000
5000
^335
1200
15,000
7 Secondary
1 Minor 6350

Secondary
Secondary
92,640
174,500 (f)
57,660
232,100
Estimated- Sewered
. Population Equivalent^
Before
Treatment
8000
650
1000
3000
1800
15,000
6000
4990
uooo
1200
11,600
63,290
299,000
53,300
352, 300
Discharged
1200
650
150
3000
1800
2000
5280
1750
400
1200
500
1325
18,755
l8,HX>(g)
6500 (b)
^M^^^^^^BH
24,600
^3,355

-------
                                       Table Vl-lb

                               SOURCES OF MUNICIPAL WASTES
                                   LAKE MICHIGAN BASIN

(a)  1,000 in Illinois River basin.  Remainder are served by septic tank systems with some systems oper-

     ating improperly.

(b)  Gary SD sewers serve 1,^00.  Remainder are served by septic tank systems with subsurface discharge.

     An undetermined amount reaches Turkey Creek.

(c)  Gary SD sewers serve several hundred people.  The remainder are served by septic tank systems with

     subsurface discharge.  An undetermined amount reaches Deep River.

(d)  About 17,000 in Illinois River Basin; 6,000 in Lake Michigan Basin.  Due to local weather conditions

     and dredging operations, 0-90$ of this area may drain eastward into Lake Michigan.  Man:- ::-:;.'i.ic tank

     systems operating improperly or systems are inadequate.  Will be served by Merrillville Conservancy

     District.

(e)  Negotiating with Chesterton to accept and treat Porter's sewage.

(f)  Gary Main Plant serves all of Gary except the Miller Area.  Outside Gary, a large shopping center and

     nearby subdivisions are also served by the main plant sewers.  These include:   Meadowland Estates -

     TOO, Meadowdale - 700, and several snail subdivisions.  Altogether, about 1700 people outside Gary

     are served by the Gary SD Main Plant sewers.

(g)  Also - 3810 Ib/day ammonia nitrogen; 6lO Ib/day organic nitrogen; 30 Ib/day nitrate nitrogen.

(h)  Also - 61tO Ib/day ammonia nitrogen; 27^ Ib/day organic nitrogen; 377 Ib/day nitrate nitrogen.          ^

*Population Equivalent as Measured by 5-Day Biochemical Oxygen Demand

-------
                                                                        137
                             Table VI-2a

                     SOURCES OF MUNICIPAL WASTES
                        ILLINOIS RIVER BASIN
Community,
Sanitary
District, or
Institution
Hammond , Ind . ( a )
Black Oak-Ross,
Ind.
Schererville,
Ind.
Dyer, Ind.
Receiving
Stream
(Direct)
G. Cal. R.
L. Cal. R.
Hart Ditch
Hart Ditch
Treatment
Secondary
Minor
Minor (b)
Minor (b)
Estimated Pop.
Connected to
Sewer
lU7,000

1,250
3,600
Estimated
Population
Before
Treatment
281,000
17,000
1,250
3,600
Sewered
Equivalent*
Discharged
27,000(h)
15,000
1,000
3,000
 Highland,  Ind.
 (part)  (c)

 Three smaller
 sources,  Ind.

 Calumet Plant
 (MSD),  Ill.(d)

 Lansing,  111.

 Bloom Twp.  San.
 Dist.,  Ill.(e)

 Steger, Ill.(f)

 Crete,  111.

 East Chicago
 Heights,  111.

 Matteson, 111.
Flossmoore,  111.
Homewood, 111.
Washington Park
Race Track, 111.
L. Cal. R.
None          5,^30

2 Secondary
              1 Minor
              1,600
L. Cal. R.

L. Cal. R.


Thorn Creek

Third Creek

Deer Creek


Deer Creek

Butterfield
Creek

Butterfield
Creek

Butterfield
Creek

 Ditch to
 Thorn Cr.
Secondary   602,UOO

Secondary    18,000


Secondary    68,000

Secondary     6,UOO

Secondary     3,500


Secondary    10,000

Secondary     3,000


Secondary     U,600


Secondary    lU,000



 Secondary    20,000
  1,250
780
883,000    8o,ooo(i)

 18,000     3,600


 77,000    16,900(j)

  6, too     1,300

  3,500     1,000


 10,000     1,200

  3,000       200
              700


 15,000     i,uoo
   1,000
 100

-------
                                                         138
        Table VI-2b

SOURCES OF MUNICIPAL WASTES
    ILLINOS RIVER BASIN
Community,
Sanitary
District, or
Institution
Southdale
Subd., 111.
Thornton, 111.
Hazel Crest,
111.
Sundale Hills
Subd., 111.
Receiving
Stream
(Direct)
Lansing Dr.
Ditch
Thorn Creek
Cal. Union
Dr. Ditch
Midlothian
Creek
Est. 20 smaller
sources, 111.
ILLINOIS RIVER TOTAL
CALUMET AREA TOTAL
Treatment
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
All
Secondary
Estimated
Connected
Sewer
1,200
2,900
6,200
1,UOO
5,000
9^2,480
1,267,220
Estimated Sewered
Pop. Population Equivalent*
to Before
Treatment Discharged
800
2,900
6,200
1,900
5,000
1,3^7,830
1,763,^20
100
koo
600
200
500
159,860
203,215

-------
                                        Table VI-2c

                                SOURCES OF MUNICIPAL WASTES
                                     ILLINOIS RIVER BASIN


(a)  Includes contributions from Whiting, Monster, Griffith, and Highland (part).  Improvements completed
     to raise capacity to 36 MOD.

(b)  Sewage treatment plant under construction.

(c)  Part of wastes served to Hammond.  Interceptor to take 100$ of wastes to Hammond, SD is under
     construction.

(d)  Serves Alsip, Blue Crest, Blue Island, Burnham, Calumet City, Calumet Park, Canterbury Gardens, Chicago,
     Chicago Ridge, Dixmoor, Dolton, Evergreen Park, Garden Homes, Harvey, Hickory Hills, Markham, Meerion-
     ette Park, Midlothian, Oak Forest, Oak Lawn, Phoenix, Pcsen, Riverdale, Robbins, South Holland, Key-
     stone Additions, Manor Heights Subdivision, Martin Roberts Subdivision, (Oaklawn), and South Stickney.

(e)  Serves Park Forest, Chicago Heights, and South Chicago Heights.

(f)  The population of Steger is divided U,300 Hill County and 2,100 Cook County.

(g)  Now being sewered for a proposed treatment plant, now partly sewered, septic tanks, etc., with large
     percentage discharging to Midlothian Creek.

(h)  Also:  990 Ib/day ammonia nitrogen; 310 Ib/day organic nitrogen; 1,070 Ib/day nitrate nitrogen.

(i)  Also:  12,200 Ib/day ammonia nitrogen; 17,500 Ib/day total nitrogen; based on 1961-1962 data.

(j)  Also:  850 Ib/day ammonia nitrogen; 710 Ib/day organic nitrogen; 3^ Ib/day nitrate nitrogen.
                                                                                                                00
*Population Equivalent As Measured By 5-Day Biochemical Oxygen Demand                                           \Q

-------
                                                                                140
                              Table VI-3 a

            SOURCES OF INDUSTRIAL WASTES,  LAKE MICHIGAN BASIN
Industry and City
Receiving
Stream
Nature of
Waste
Treatment
Provided
N. Ind. Public Service Co.
Baileytown, Indiana

N. Ind. Public Service Co.
Gary, Indiana

Universal Atlas Cement Co.
Gary, Indiana

Union Carbide Chemicals Co.
Whiting, Indiana

American Oil Company
Whiting, Indiana

American Maize-Products Co.
Hammond, Indiana

Commonwealth Edison Co.
State Line Station
Hammond, Indiana

U.S. Steel Corp., So. Works
Chicago, Illinois

Bethlehem Steel Corporation
Chesterton, Indiana
Midwest Steel Division
National Steel Corporation
Portage, Indiana
                               LAKE MICHIGAN SHORELINE
L. Michigan   Ash
L. Michigan   Ash
L. Michigan   Domestic
                 Settling Ponds
                 Settling Ponds
                 Secondary
L. Michigan   Petrochemical    Some recirculation
              Petroleum
L. Michigan   refinery
L. Michigan   Corn starch
              Fly ash,
L. Michigan   slag
L. Michigan   Basic steel

              Rolling mill
L. Cal. R.    Domestic
              Rolling mill
Burns Ditch   Domestic
                 Oil separators
                 Secondary

                 Lagoon, inplant
                 control
                 Dewatering
                 bins

                 Flue dust
                 clairifier

                 Scale pits,
                 Flocculation-
                 Clairification

                 Scale pits,
                 Flocculation
                 Clairification,
                 Secondary
                 Chlorination

-------
                                                                      141
                             Table VI-3b

             SOURCES  OF  INDUSTRIAL WASTES, LAKE MICHIGAN BASIN
Industry and  City
Receiving
Stream
Nature
of Waste
Treatment
Provided
U.S.  Steel  Corporation*
Gary  Works
Gary, Indiana
U.S. Steel Corporation
Gary Sheet & Tin Mill
Gary, Indiana

Steiner Tissue Mill
Gary, Indiana

Berry Refining Co.
Gary, Indiana

Cities Service Petroleum Co.
East Chicago, Indiana
E. I. DuPont de Menours & Co.
East Chicago, Indiana
Blaw Know Company
East Chicago, Indiana

General American Trans-
portation Company
East Chicago,, Indiana
Linde Air Products Co.
East Chicago, Indiana

American Oil Company
Hammond, Indiana
                               GRAND CALUMET RIVER - INDIANA HARBOR CANAL
G. Cal. R.
Basic steel
Coke
G. Cal. R.
G. Cal. R.    Paper
No discharge

              Petroleum
G. Cal. R.    Refinery
              Inorganic
G. Cal. R.    Chemicals
Indiana
Harbor Canal
Indiana       Tank car
Harbor Canal  washing
Indiana       Cooling
Harbor Canal  water

              Petroleum
L. George Br. refinery
Phenol quenched
pickle liquor
absorption lagoon,
oil recovery pits
flue dust-partial
recovery
                Save-alls

                Oil separator &
                impounding basin

                Oil separators,
                sulfide &
                ammonia stripper,
                caustic neutra-
                lization

                Controlled dis-
                charge facilities,
                acid neutral-
                ization

                Settling tanks
                & filters
                Pond,  settling
                basin,  oil
                separator, pH
                control,  chemical
                treatment

-------
                                                                               142
                              Table VI-3c

            SOURCES OF INDUSTRIAL WASTES, LAKE MICHIGAN BASIN
Industry and City
Receiving
Stream
Nature
of Waste
Treatment
Provided
                               GRAND CALUMET RIVER - ITOIANA HARBOR CANAL
Calumet Nitrogen Products Co.
Hammond, Indiana

Union Tank Car Company
Hammond, Indiana

Sinclair Refining Company
East Chicago, Indiana
L. George Br.


L. George Br.


L. George Br.
Synthetic
ammonia

Tank car
washing

Petroleum
refinery
East Chicago Storm Sewer
East Chicago, Indiana

Mobil Oil Company
East Chicago, Indiana
L. George Br.


L. George Br.
Industrial

Petroleum
refinery
U.S. Gypsum Company
East Chicago, Indiana

Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co.
East Chicago, Indiana
Inland Steel Company
East Chicago, Indiana
Indiana
Harbor Canal

Indiana
Harbor Canal
Indiana
Harbor Canal
Gypsum &
Basic steel
Coke
Basic steel
Coke
Holding
pond

Chemical oil
separation basins

Oil separators,
cooling towers,
ammonia-sulf ide
stripper, sulfide
oxidation, caustic
treatment, phenolic
waters routed
through desalters
Oil separation,
cooling towers,
straw filters,
sulfide & ammonia
strippers under
construction.
Stripper waters
will be through
desalters for
phenol reduction
None

Phenol & pickle
liquor recovery,
thickeners, oily
waste treatment,
scale pits

Phenols & nap-
halene recovery,
coke plant
cooling waters,
recirculation,
scale pits

-------
                                 Table VI - 3d

              SOURCES OF INDUSTRIAL WASTES, LAKE MICHIGAN BASIN

                                 Receiving     Nature of        Treatment
Industry and City	Stream	Waste	Provided

                                 GRfiND CALUMET RIVER - INDIANA HARBOR CANAL

Adolph Plating, Inc.             G. Cal. R.    Plating
East Chicago, Indiana

U.S.S. Lead Refinery, Inc.       G. Cal. R.
East Chicago, Indiana

American Steel Foundries         Indiana
East Chicago, Indiana            Harbor Canal
* Also includes U.S. Steel Corporation National Tube Division and American
  Bridge Division, Gary, Indiana.

-------
                                                                           144
                              Table VI-W

            SOURCES OF INDUSTRIAL WASTES, ILLINOIS RIVER BASIN
Industry and City
Receiving
Stream
Nature
of Waste
Treatment
Provided
Commonwealth Edison Company
Calumet Station
Chicago, Illinois              Calumet R.

Wisconsin Steel Works
Chicago, Illinois              Calumet R.
Interlake Iron Corporation
Chicago, Illinois              Calumet R.
Republic Steel Corporation
Chicago, Illinois              Calumet R.

Lever Brothers Company
Hammond, Indiana               Wolf Lake

Allied Chemical Company
Chicago, Illinois              Calumet R.

Cargill, Inc.
Chicago, Illinois              Calumet R.
Ford Motor Company
Chicago, Illinois              Calumet R.
LaSalle Steel Company
Hammond, Indiana               G.  Cal.  R.

Swift & Company
Burnham, Illinois              G.  Cal.  R.

Catalin Corporation
Calumet City, Illinois         L.  Cal.  R.

Spencer Chemical Company
Calumet City, Illinois         L.  Cal.  R.

Acme Steel Corporation
Riverdale, Illinois            L.  Cal.. R.
                Flue dust,
                some neutra-
                lized pickle
                liquor, coke
                breeze

                Some coke
                wastes, flue
                dust

                Flue dust,
                pickle liquor

                Soap,
                fats

                Inorganic
                chemicals

                Soybean
                oil
                Paint, alkali,
                chromium
                Some pickle
                liquor
                Fertilizer
                Phenolics
               Thickener,
               neutrali zatibn
               Thickeners,
               closed coke
               quench

               Thickeners,
               scale pits

               Air flotation,
               chlorination
               Neutrali zation,
               treatment plant
               under construction

               Filtration,
               treatment plant
               under construction

               Acid neutralization
               None
                Raw sewage     Thickener,
                mill scale,    scale pits,
                pickle liquor  oil separation

-------
                                                                      145

                              Table VI-^b

           SOURCES OF INDUSTRIAL WASTES, ILLINOIS RIVER BASIN

                               Receiving     Nature           Treatment
Industry and City	Stream	of Waste	Provided	

State Street Ditch
Chicago Heights, 111.          Thorn Creek   Phosphate

Simmons Company
Monster, Indiana               L.  Cal. R.    Plating          Alkaline
                                                              chlorination of
                                                              cyanide, reduction
                                                              of chromate

-------
                                                 Table VI-5a

                               QUANTITIES OF INDUSTRIAL WASTE, LAKE MICHIGAN BASIN
Industry
and
City
              PE (5        	Pounds Per Day	
Discharge     Day BOD      Ammonia      Total
MOD	Basis)	Nitrogen	Nitrogen   Phenolics  Cyanide   Oil    Other
N. Ind. Public Service Co.
Baileytown, Indiana       U25

N. Ind. Public Service Co.
Gary, Indiana             U32

Universal Atlas Cement Co-
Gary, Indiana

Union Carbide Chemical Co.
Whiting, Indiana           H3
American Oil Company
Whiting, Indiana
 97
American Maize-Products Co.
Hammond, Indiana         .8.6

Commonwealth Edison Co.
State Line  Station
Hammond, Indiana          700

U.S. Steel  Corp., So. Works
Chicago, Illinois

Betnlehem Steel Corporation
Chesterton, Indiana

Midwest Steel Div., National
Steel Corporation
Portage, Indiana          2.6
              99,000
57,000
3,815
                             990
U,800
                                      13
1,088
3,951
                            860
                         250
                      60
                   7,700
              Recently began  operations,  no  data  available
                  UOO

-------
                                                  Table VI-5b

                          QUANTITIES OF INDUSTRIAL WASTES, LAKE MICHIGAN BASIN
Industry
and
City
Discharge
MOD
PE (5
Day BOD
Basis)
                                        Pounds Per Day
Ammonia      Total
Nitrogen	Nitrogen   Phenolics  Cyanide   Oil   Other
U.S. Steel Corp- Gary Works
Gary, Indiana             330

U.S. Steel Corporation
Gary Sheet & Tin Mill
Gary, Indiana

Steiner Tissue Mill
Gary, Indiana            1-85

Berry Refining Co.
Gary, Indiana             None

Cities Service Petroleum Co.
East Chicago, Indiana      80

E. I. DuPont de Menours & Co.
East Chicago, Indiana    10.8
Blaw Khox Co.
East (Chicago, Indiana     0.9

General American Trans-
portation Company
East Chicago, Indiana

Linde Air Products Co.
East Chicago, Indiana     0.5
              266,000
               26,000
               UT,UOO
               10,000(a)
                   360
                   60
             13,750
              1,1UO
                 8
(a)  Estimated equivalent of 9500 pounds per day sulfur dioxide
             17,1*00     1,500      1,700     5U,000
              1,580
                 11
                               68
130
                                                                 9500 Ib/day
                                                                 sulfur dioxide
                      83
                                                 27

-------
                                                   Table VI-5c

                            QUANTITIES OF INDUSTRIAL WASTES, LAKE MICHIGAN  BASIN
Industry
and
City
American Oil Co.
Hammond, Indiana
Calumet Nitrogen Products
Hammond, Indiana
Union Tank Car Co.
Hammond, Indiana
Sinclair Refining Co.
East Chicago, Indiana
East Chicago Storm Sewer
East Chicago, Indiana
Mobil Oil Company
East Chicago, Indiana
U.S. Gypsum Company
East Chicago, Indiana
Discharge
MOD
O.ll*
Co.
1.0
0.2
3-8
0.6
3.9
0.18
PE (5
Day BOD
Basis)
2,3^0
200
1*00
».7*
ll*,820
12,1*00
30
Pounds Per Day
Ammonia Total
Nitrogen Nitrogen Phenolic s Cyanide Oil Other
20 100 170 1*0
1,11*0 1960 (b) 330

130 200 190 290
1*0 160 1*0 1,1*00
1,130 1,200 780 Not det.
SUSP . !
Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co.
East Chicago, Indiana      250
100,200
6,000
250
250
Inland Steel Company
East Chicago, Indiana      1*80        199,800        16,800       21,000       620
 (b)  Sewer from ammonium nitrate plant has been connected to Hammond  Sanitary District System.
      of treatment not determined.  Estimated present discharge 0.8 MOD-
    18  187 lb/day
        sampled dur-
        ing strike

        Some pickle
18,900  liquor
                                                           2l*,800   pickle
                                                           Effectiveness
                                                                              V-"
                                                                              -pr
                                                                              00

-------
                                                   Table VI-6a

                            QUANTITIES OF INDUSTRIAL WASTES, ILLINOIS RIVER BASIN
Industry
and
City
Commonwealth Edison Co.
Calumet Station
Chicago, Illinois
Wisconsin Steel Works
Chicago, Illinois
Interlake Iron Corp.
Chicago, Illinois
Republic Steel Corp.
Chicago, Illinois
Lever Brothers Co.
Hammond, Indiana
Allied Chemical Company
Chicago, Illinois
Cargill, Inc.
Chicago, Illinois
Ford Motor Company
Discharge
MOD


220

UO
37
85

10
u
OA
0.5
PE (5 Pounds Per Day
Day BOD Ammonia Total
Basis) Nitrogen Nitrogen Phenolics Cyanide Oil Other




2,200 100 10 800
20,300 700 900 260
00 80

18,000
U,200
8,700 590
3,000
LaSalle Steel Company
Hammond, Indiana

Swift & Company
Burnham, Illinois

Catalin Corporation
Calumet City, Illinois
                                                                                     vo
1-5
1,800
90

-------
                                                   Table VI-6b

                            QUANTITIES OF INDUSTRIAL WASTES, ILLINOIS RIVER BASIN
Industry
and
City
 Discharge
 M3D
PE (5
Day BOD
Basis)
                                              Pounds Per Day
Ammonia      Total
Nitrogen     Nitrogen   Phenolics  Cyanide   Oil   Other
Spencer Chemical Co.
Calumet City, Illinois

Acme Steel Corporation
Riverdale, Illinois

State Street Ditch
Chicago Heights, 111.

Simmons Company
Munster, Indiana
U8
8
5,000
U,300
0.3
                            90
                                                                raw sewage


                                                          900   3,300 Ib/day*
                                                                phosphate
*Including Victor Chemical Company's share of discharge from Sanitary District of Bloom Township
                                                                                                                   VJI
                                                                                                                   O

-------
                                                                    151

                               Table VI-7

    Public Health Service Grants  for Construction of Waste Treatment Facilities
Municipality

INDIANA

Dyer

Griffith

Hammond S.D.  (STP)

Hammond S.D.
  (Munster Interc)

Highland

Hobart

Schererville

Merrillville
  (Conservancy District)


ILLINOIS

Thornton

Lansing
Date
Offered or
Approved     Amount
            Estimated
            Total Cost
            of Project  Status of Project
9/5/63

9/11/61

9/20/62

10/19/62


10/10/63

10/19/60

10/2U/63


1/6/65



3/5/58

V2/57
$250,000  $ 977,000

 250,000  1,519,000

 250,000  3,500,000

 2^3,000    810,000

 229,500    765,000

 250,000   1,01*3,200

 2^5,970    819,000
  32,880    112,800

 20U,830    682,800
Under construction

Essentially in
operation
Contracts awarded

In operation

Under construction
 I8l,7lf0    605,800     Offer made
In operation

In operation

-------
                                                                     152
            Table VIII-1 - SUMMARY OF RAW WATER PROBLEMS

            CHICAGO SOUTH DISTRICT FILTRATION PLANT,  1963-^
Time Period
1963
Jan. 2U-Feb. 7
March 3-U
April 2-7
Threshold Odor*
Average Maximum
Crib Shore
1U 9
9 6
8 6
Prevalent Odors
hydrocarbon
disagreeable
musty
septic
hydrocarbon
disagreeable
musty
chemical
hydrocarbon
disagreeable
musty
chemical
Carbon Dosage
pound per MG
Av. Max.
266
208
1*8
Dec. 11-12

Dec. 22-31
55

 6
11

 5
hydrocarbon

hydrocarbon
disagreeable
musty, fishy
septic, moldy
532

130
*Public Health Service Drinking Water Standards is a maximum of 3.

-------
                                                             153

                           liable VIII-2

    ORGANIC CONCENTRATIONS AT CHICAGO AND VICINITY WATER INTAKES
                  Results in nicrograns per liter


                          Average	Maxima	Minimum

Whiting, Indiana
     CCE
     CAE
     Total

South District Filtration Plant
     CCE
     CAE
     Total

Chicago Avenue
     CCE
     CAE
     Total

Evanston, Illinois
     CCE
     CAE
     Total

Waukegan, Illinois
     CCE
     CAE
     Total
CCE  Carbon chloroform extract
CAE  Carbon alcohol extract
1U6
169
308
Plant
k6
162
208
53
165
218
VT
162
209
k2
156
197
2k2
212
U2

76
262
315
97
227
29k
71
230
287
66
198
290
67
132
187

18
103
138
35
93
iVf
29
90
146
14
90
121

-------
                                                Chicago River
                                                 ~NTRAL DISTRICT
                                                                           660
LEGEND-
           WATERSHED BOUNDARY
           DIRECTION OF FLOW
          -FILTRATION PLANT



          • BAR SCALE: l"= 100 MILLION GALLONS DAILY
                                                                                           K
                  ,                  ,u\7
                  EAST CHICAGO—	
                  ~  GARY-HOBART WATER
                     ^ r*_
                                                                                                24
                                       4 UILC3
                                 SCALE

           V                L
CHICAGO AND CALUMET AREA
    AND MUNICIPAL WATER SUP
                                                          ) AND CALUMET AREA DRAINAGE
                                                          l MUNICIPAL WATER SUPPLIES

-------
                   t
                   I

 SSI'S99 C*      i-.LUMET SEWAGE
   """•^-SSgj^y    TREATMENT PL.ANT
        "x^  8tut ItlOAd LOCh«(lo _
         ^w fo. b« abandi




    c^s'f
%£R
T;

O
                                                                         LOCATION MAP

                                                                        CALUMET AREA
                                                                             K

-------
O
c
                                   LAKE
                            MICHIGAN
                                                                   ILL.IMICH.
                                                                   .   -J *    '•
                                                                      IND.
                                                                                       H
                 LEGEND

         E3— BEACHES
         E — PARKS
          X — MARINAS S LAUNCHING RAMPS

         •<— DtBECTION OF FLOW

         	WATERSHED BOUNDARY
o    t    4
•	|    | MILES

   SCALE
                                                   BEACHES,WATER-  ORIENTED  PARKS

                                                      8 MARINAS, CALUMET AREA

-------
o
TO
m

H
     ILLINOIS RIVER BASIN

   101 Commonwealth Edison
       Co., Calumet Sta.
   102 Wis. Steel Works
   103 Interlake Iron Corp.
   104 Republic Steel Corp.
   105 Lever Bros. Co.
   106 Allied Chemical Co.
   107 Cargill, Inc.
   108 Ford Motor Co.
   109 LaSalle Steel Co.
   HO Swift & Co.
   Ill Catalin Corp.
   112 Spencer Chem. Co.
   113 Acme Steel Corp.
   114 State Street Ditch
   115 Simmons Company
  LAKE MICHIGAN BASIN

 1. N. Ind.  Public Serv.
    Co.,  Baileytown Sta.
 2. N. Ind.  Public Serv.
    Co.,Dean Mitchell Sta
 3. Universal Atlas
    Cement Company
 4. Union Carbide Chem.Co
 5. American Oil Co.
 6. American Maize-Prod.
    Co.
 7. Comm. Edison Co,,
    State Line Station
 8. U.S.  Steel Corp.,
    South Works
 9. Bethlehem Steel Corp.
10. Midwest  Steel Div.
11. U.S.  Steel Corp.,
    Gary Steel Works
                                                    A  K  E
                                              M  I  C  H  I\G  A  N
                                                                                        IL L.| MICH.
                                                                                            IND.
                                                                                                                 H
                                                                                                                    MILCS
                                                                                                          • C«kC
12. U.S. Steel Corp.,
    Gary Sheet & Tin Mill
13. Steiner Tissue Mill
14. Berry Refining Co.
15. Cities Serv. Petro.Co.
16. E.I. duPont deNemours
    & Co.
17. Blaw Knox Co.
18. Gen.Amer.Trans.Co.
19. LLnde Air Prod.Co.
20. American Oil Co.
21. Calumet Nit.Prod.Co.
22. Union Tank Car Co.
23. Sinclair Refining Co.
    East Chicago Storm Sewer
    Mobil Oil Company
    U.S. Gypsum Company
    Youngstown Sheet  & Tube Co.
    Inland Steel Company
•^- DIRECTION OF FLOW
	WATERSHED BOUNDARY
2k.
25.
26.
27.
28.
                                  Ui
                       PRINCIPAL SOURCES OF  INDUSTRIAL WASTES

-------
e>
C
a
H
                                              LAKE
                                                                       M  I   C  H  I \G  A  N
                                                                                    ILLjMICH.
                                                                                    • «_^^B^ •» —
                                                                                       IND.
                                                                                                             H
           LEGEND

 I - CALUMET S.T.P-80,000 PE
 2 - INTERLAKE IRON CORP. - 20,300 PE
 3- AMERICAN MAIZE-PROD.CO.-44,000PE
 4 - AMERICAN OIL CO.-59.300 PE
 5— UNION CARBIDE CHEM.CO.-99.000PE
 6 — YOUNGSTOWN S.ST CO.-100,200 PE
 7 — INLANDSTEELCO.-I99.800PE
 8 — U.S. STEEL CORR-266.000PE
 9 — HAMMOND S.O.-27,000PE
 10 — CITIES SERVICE PETR.CO.-47,400PE
 II — STEINER TISSUE MILL-26,000PE
-^- DIRECTION OF FLOW
I	WATERSHED BOUNDARY
                                                  MILES
PRINCIPAL  SOURCES OF  OXYGEN  DEMANDING
       WASTES, POPULATION EQUIVALENT
                                                      VJ1
                                                      oo
                                           SCALE

-------
N
M
                                          LAKE
                    MICHIGAN
                                                                               ILL. | MICH.
                                                                                  IN 6.
                                                                                                      H
           LEGEND
    |  	 CALUMET S.T.P-12,200 LB/OAY
    2 	 AMERICAN OIL CO.-3,833 LB/OAY
    3 — YOUNCSTOWN S.8T. CO.-4,090LB/DAY
    4 — INLAND STEEL CO.-16,800LB/DAY
    5 — GARY S.D.-3,810 LB/DAY
    6 — U.S.STEEL CORP.-I3.750LB/DAY
    •^-DIRECTION OF FLOW
    	WATERSHED BOUNDARY
MILU
PRINCIPAL SOURCES OF AMMONIA
  NITROGEN.POUNDS  PER DAY
                                                               VJl
                                                               VD
                                        SCALE

-------
o
c
X
en


ti
                                           LAKE
                                                                    MICH  I\G  A  N
                                                                                 ILL. I MICH.
                                                                                 , . i   I » —

                                                                                    IND.
        LEGEND

 I — INTERLAKE IRONCORP-900LB./DAY
 2— U.S.STEELCORP.-250LB./DAY

 3—AMERICAN OIL CO.-I260LB./DAY
 4 — YOUNGSTOWN S.8T. CO.-250LB./DAY

 5— INLAND STEEL CO.-620LB./DAY
 6- U.S.STEEL CORP-1^00 LB./DAY
 7— MOBIL OIL CO.-780LB./DAY

•^-DIRECTION OF  FLOW

	WATERSHED BOUNDARY
                                                         PRINCIPAL SOURCES OF  PHENOLICS,

                                                                 POUNDS PER DAY
cr\
o
                                        SCALE

-------
LAKE
                                                                   M  I  C  H  11 G  A  N
                                                                             ILL. | MICH.

                                                                                IND.
                                                                                                    n
           LEGEND

    I — YOUNGSTOWN S.ST. CO.-250LB./DAY
    2— INLAND STEEL CO.-940LB./DAY
    3 —U.S. STEEL CORP-1700LB./DAY

   -^-DIRECTION OF FLOW

    	WATERSHED BOUNDARY
O
C
31
m
                                                MILES
               PRINCIPAL SOURCES OF CYANIDE,

                       POUNDS PER  DAY
                                       SCALE

-------
o
C
2)
m
                                                     K  E
                                                                       Ml  C  H  I\G A  N
                                                                                      ILL. I MICH.

                                                                                         IND."
                                                                                                               H
I— U.S. STEEL CORP-7.700LB/DAY

Z— AMERICAN OIL CO.-4,000LB/OAY

3— YOUNGSTOWN S.8 . CO.-18,900LB/OAY
4— INLAND STEEL CO.-24,800LB/DAY

5— E.CHI.STORM SEWER- I.400LB/OAY
6— CITIES SERVICE-4,040 LB/OAY
7	 U.S.STEEL CORP.-54.000LB/DAY

^—DIRECTION OF FLOW

	WATERSHED BOUNDARY
                                                    MILCS
PRINCIPAL SOURCES OF OIL.

    POUNDS  PER DAY
                                                                                                                         fU
                                          SCALE

-------
                                                                     163
VWINNETKA
  VKENILWORTH
     vWILMETTE
             LAKE
                       MICHIGAN
    Q  Wilton Av«.
    £  Corltr H. Horriton
    A  Four Mite
    Q  68lh St.
    Q  Hammond
     SCALE
01234  5Mile»
                       L:
                       •    •*
                       i
Do
t
 i
                                           GENERALIZED WATER  MOVEMENT
                                                    JAN. 21-24, 1963
                                                    TOTAL FLOW
                                                       19 MILES
                                                                 FIGURE m-l

-------
                                                                        164
vWINNETKA

  xKENILWORTH

     SWILMETTE
LAKE
M  I  C  H I G  A  N
    Q  Wilson Avt.

    ^  Corltr H. Horriton

    ^  Four MiM

    c{>)  68th St.

    O  Hommond
             HAMMOND


           \^
                                            GENERALIZED WATER MOVEMENT
                                                      MAR. 14-16, 1963
                                                      TOTAL FLOW
                                                         15 MILES

                                                                   FIGURE m-2

-------
                                                                            165
     \L A  K E   MICHIGAN
DEC. 1962-MAR. 1963
LAKE   MICHIGAN
                                           APR.-JULY 1963
      LAKE   MICHIGAN
                                               LEGEND
                                                       Primary Flow

                                                       Secondary Flow
                                               Norr:
                                               Arrow length i» proportional to per cent of time
                                               water moved in direction indicated.
                                                    PER CENT OF TIME	
                                               ill     i     I     i.i
                                                   10
                                                        20
                                                             30
                                                                        50
AUG.-NOV. 1963
          GENERALIZED
    LONG  TERM MOVEMENTS
                       FIGURE sn-3

-------
                                                                           166
                                                MICHIGAN
                                                                              K
Current pattern in Calumet Harbor during prevailing
conditions with light wind from southwest.
                                                     CALUMET  HARBOR
                                                          SUMMER 1963
                                                                      FIGURE 301-4

-------
           CALUMET RIVER
                                  LITTLE CALUMET RIVER
  12.000
  »,ooo-
> 6,000-
o

I
  5,000
 LEGEND

 ^9 Pollution Toieront


 |  | Pollution Intoleront


 + Troce


 O No Orgonisms


•^^ Direction Of Flow


_ _ _ Watershed Boundary
X
         BOTTOM ORGANISMS
 LITTLE CALUMET ft CALUMET RIVERS
               1961-1963

-------
     10,000,000 -
      1,000,000 -
E    100,000
O
o
\

1/1
5
(A


t
   K
   O
      10,000 -
         1,000
•n
o
c
           100
                               COLIFORM  DENSITIES —  GRAND  CALUMET RIVER
                          1
                           3258
                                     3266


                                     _~ DIRECTION
                                                                  l§
                                                                           3287
                                                                                           HAMMOND
                                                                                            L EGEN D-
                                                                                                     Moximum
                                                                                                     Number
                                                                                                     Arithmetic

                                                                                                      Average
                                                                                   5,000-



                                                                                   2,000-




                                                                                    1,000-
a\
oo
                       RIVER
                                              MILES
                                                                    ABOVE
                                                                                          GRAFTON

-------
                    MIDLOTHIAN

                      CREEK
      10,000,000-
       1,000,000-n
   E
   O
   O
   \
   
-------
                                   I
                                                     If     1111
  25-1
  20
     5 DAY BOD

LITTLE CALUMET RIVER

     (AVERAGES)
o
o
ffi
o

m
  10-
                  320



                  RIVER
                         325



                        MILES
 330



ABOVE
 335



GRAFTON

-------
             5s. s
                                                                        **  >-
                                                                        oo  5
                                                                     I   11
    20
                 5  DAY BOD

           GRAND  CALUMET RIVER

                 (AVERAGES)
 o
 o
 o>
 o

 m
    10
o
c
                                   ».•..-..--a
                        325


                        RIVER
MILES
                    330


                   ABOVE
                                                                                GRAFTON

-------
  DISSOLVED OXYGEN-LITTLE CALUMET  RIVER
                                                                       LANSING
                                                                                    MUNSTER
LEGEND-



      	Average DO Values



      (— Minimum DO Values
                                                      THORN CREEK
  2.5
  2.0
   ..5
   1.0
  0.5
o
c
2
m
                                        CALUMET UNION

                                        DRAINAGE DITCH
                   MIDLOTHIAN CREEK
                                                                                   i
       HART DITCH
                                                                                                     HIGHLAND
                                                                                                     4.9
                                                                                                                    ro
                          320
                                                                      330
                             RIVER
                                                                 ABOVE
                                                                                  GRAFTON

-------
  DISSOLVED OXYGEN-GRAND  CALUMET RIVER
           i.o-
           0.5-
o
                                 325
                         RIVER
                                          MILES
        LEGEND-




                - Average 00 Values




              i — Minimum DO Value*
                                                                          HAMMOND
                                                                                        EAST CHICAGO
                                                                                                          U)
                                                           ABOVE
330       _^



  GRAFTON

-------
                                                                           174
 42V4
 42°OO'-
 41-45'
  2.OOO
  1,800
u.

O
v. I.OOO
O
   900
   290
              87*49'
LtGENO


^1 Pollution Tolerant



|  | Pollution Intoleront



+ Troce



^ Intakes
                                   87'30
                                                          87°19'
BOTTOM  ORGANISMS

 S.W. LAKE MICHIGAN

        1961-63
                                                10 MILES
                                                                    42*00
                                                                  87eOO'
                                        SCALE
                                                                     FIGURE SHC-8

-------
COLIFORM DENSITIES PER 100 ml AT CHICAGO.HAMMOND.S WHITING  BEACHES
                          PREVAILING LAKE CURRENTS

-------
      LAKE
MICHIGAN
                                       LEGEND



                                   Scole' l" = 32 ug/l
                                                    j MILES
                                                       ILL. Mia
PHENOLS, OCT. 22,1963

-------
         87°45'
87° 30'
87° 15'
  42°I5'
o
c
             LAKE   MICHIGAN
                                                                                      10 MILES
                                                                                      j
                                                                                  4I°45'
                                                                           PHENOLS

                                                                   AVERAGE OF ALL SAMPLES

                                                                      S.W. LAKE MICHIGAN

                                                                           1962-63

-------
                                                                                     ILL. 'MICH.
 CHICAGO
o
c
                                                     M I C H I G A N
                                                        AMMONIA-NITROGEN, NOV.22,1963
                                                                           LEGEND


                                                                         Seole l"= I.Omg/l
                    IEAST CHICAGO
                HAMMOND
                        SCALE

-------
         87° 45'
87° 30'
879 lb' 0.3-1
  4 2° 15'
c
3)
m
             LAKE  MICHIGAN
                                                                                      10 MILES
                                                                      AMMONIA NITROGEN

                                                                   AVERAGE OF ALL SAMPLES

                                                                      S.W. LAKE MICHIGAN

                                                                           1962-63
                                                                           vo

-------
                                                         I8o
           MR.  LE BOSQUET:   Findings are based on data obtained

     from state,  local and  sanitary district records, industries,

     and from sampling by the Public Health Service.

                    Information presented in the report is

     but a small  sampling of the total available on this

     complex situation.

                    Principal items in the bibliography

     include the  record  of  the Supreme Court hearings which

     were terminated recently in July of '63; the Jones

 10   Committee  record already mentioned is also a very excellent

 11   document,  and we have  a number of copies and I recommend

 12   it  for your  attention;  the information collected in

 13   connection with the development of a comprehensive

 14   Water Pollution Control Program for the Illinois River

 15   and Lake Michigan Basins has been used; and finally,

 16   information  on past conditions is found in Public

 17   Health Bulletin 1?0 of 1927 which reports on an early
18

19

20
     cooperative  investigation in which I was happy to

     participate  as  a young fellow.
                         The cooperation —

21  I]        CHAIRMAN STEIN:   Mr.  LeBosquet,  if you will let

22    me  interrupt  a moment,  Mr.  Klassen just showed me

23    something  he  pulled  from his  record and it says,  "Report

24    on  Analytical Study  of  Relationship Between Sewer

25    Outlets  and Bathing  Beaches in Lake Michigan Along North

-------
                                                        ibi
 l   Shore Sanitary District by Maurice LeBosquet, Assistant
     Sanitary Engineer and Harry F. Ferguson, Chief Sanitary
 3   Engineer," and the date on this, Maurice, is August-
 4   September 1922.
 5                                     (Laughter.)
 c                  I think your qualifications speak for
 b
 7   themselves.
 8                                     (Laughter.)
 .         MR. LE BOSQUET:  I don't know whether I am decrepit
 y
     or not.
n                                      (Laughter.)
                    The cooperation provided by the Indiana
1 Zt
13    Stream Pollution Control Board, the Illinois Sanitary
j    Water Board, the Metropolitan Sanitary District of
j    Greater Chicago, the industries and others in supplying
..    valuable information is greatly acknowledged.
17                   This Industrial waste information was
10    obtained from these sources plus studies by the Public
lo
lg    Health Service.
20                   Specifically, the Public Health Service
21    conducted a sampling survey of industrial wastes in the
22    Calumet area in the latter half of 1963.
23                   The dissolved oxygen, BOD, and bacterial
24    findings for the Calumet area derive from an intensive
25    2^-day sampling survey conducted between August 20th and

-------
                                                        182


     September  12,  1963-   Samples were  collected  once  a day



     at  each  sampling  station  on some 20  days  of  the period.
 t»



 3                  This  report is  the  work of many people.




     I see  them sitting before me.   A number of these  people




     are in attendance and available to supplement  their
 D



 c   respective sections  of the report.
 b



                    The report considers  the quality




     characteristics of the waters  as they  exist  today,
 8



     evaluates  the  effects of  waste discharges on the  water
 y



     quality  and water uses, and summarizes the principal




     problems.




                    Outline of presentation:  The report
1 £*


     deals  with the entire area of  7^2  square  miles in one
13


     discussion.  For  purposes of clarity,  I propose to




     follow a description of the complex  stream system with
lo



1C   a discussion of the  various sub-areas  one at a time
lb



17   and  finish with a general summary.




,_                  The  area  selected  in the  order of
lo



ig   presentation are  as  follows:




20                 Burns Ditch Drainage  Area; Little  Calumet




21   River, Hammond to Blue Island;  Grand Calumet River and




22   Indiana  Harbor; Calumet Channel, Lake  Michigan to Blue




23   Island;  and finally,  Lake Michigan.




„.                 We have here five separate rather  complex
&4



25   situations and even  to discuss  them  lightly  I  am  afraid

-------
                                                         183
     will take a little time.  I will be as brief as possible.

                    After each area of discussion, the

     situations discussed will be further described with air

     photographs.  Special thanks are extended to Colonel

     James P. Strauss of the United States Army who provided

     helicopter reconnaissance and photographic flights.

                    The stream system:  The Calumet area is

     a flat plain with much of the land only slightly above

 9 I!  Lake Michigan water levels.

 10                  In what might be considered their natural

 11   state, the Little Calumet and Grand Calumet Rivers

 12   originated in Indiana and flowed westward into Illinois
 13

 14

 15

 16

 17

 18

 19

20

21

22

23

24
where they Joined and became simply the Calumet River

which discharged into Lake Michigan.

               However, the development of the area by

man has changed this flow pattern.

               In 1922, the Calumet Sag Channel was

completed between the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal

and the Little Calumet River at Blue Island, Illinois.

This construction caused the Calumet River and that

portion of the Little Calumet River from Blue Island

to the Calumet River to be reversed and thus flow away

from Lake Michigan.

               However, this is an unstable situation;
25   depending  on storm runoff  and  fluctuating lake levels,

-------
 1




 2




 3




 4




 5




 6




 7




 8




 9




10




11




12




13




14




IS




16




17




18




19




20




21




22





23




24




25
                                                        184
 the  stream frequently flows  toward Lake Michigan.
                When you  started,  Murray,  I might explain



 that  I  swam in that channel  before they turned the



 sewage  in it.   It  was  a  ten-mile  swimming pool, very



 beautiful and  quite pure at  that  time.



      CHAIRMAN  STEIN:   You wouldn't swim in it now,



 would you?



      MR.  LE BOSQUET:   The Indiana Harbor Canal was  •



 completed in East  Chicago, Indiana,  in  1903-   Construction



 of  this canal  connected  the  Grand Calumet River to Lake



 Michigan.



                Thus, the Grand Calumet  River  east of



 this  point is  now  tributary  to Lake Michigan  through the



 Indiana Harbor Canal.



                The Grand Calumet  River  from this point



 west  to the area near  the East Chicago-Hammond, Indiana,



 city  limit has been reversed and  now flows to Lake



 Michigan  via the Indiana Harbor Canal.



                The point where the division of flow



occurs is  rather indefinite,  and depending upon the



 local level of Lake Michigan,  dredging  operations,



 rain  fall intensity and  the  actual divide can vary over



 a distance of  several  miles.



                Under normal  dry-weather conditions, the



 East  Chicago sewage treatment plant effluent  flows

-------
                                                        185
    eastward to the Indiana Harbor Canal and Lake Michigan,
 2  while a variable part of the Hammond Sewage Plant effluent
 3  flows westward to the Calumet River.
 4                 A temporary dam on the Grand Calumet River
    at Columbia Avenue in Hammond, Indiana, has recently been
 6  proposed by the U.S. Corps of Engineers.  The purpose
 7  of this dam would be to prevent v/ater reaching the
 8  Illinois River System from the Grand Calumet River east
 9  of that point, when the locks at Blue Island, Illinois,
10  have been removed.
                   The exact location of the new dam is
12
    still subject to study.
13                  Wolf Lake is located astride the  Illinois-
14   Indiana State Line in Chicago and Hammond.  The  original
15   connecting channel from Wolf Lake to Lake Michigan has
    been blocked, and a connection to the Calumet River  in
17   Chicago has been constructed.
                   The City of Hammond has a much-used park
19   on the east shore of Wolf Lake which occupies most of the
20   Indiana shore line.  The Illinois portion is a part  of  the
21   V/olf Lake Conservation Area.
22                  So much for the general description.  Now,
23   we go to the specific Burns Ditch drainage area.
24                  Burns Ditch was completed in 1923 to
25   connect the eastern part of the Little Calumet River in

-------
                                                     186
    Indiana to Lake Michigan near Ogden Dunes.  This was
    strictly a drainage project.
                   This construction caused an indefinite
    division of the flow in the vicinity of Highland,
    Indiana, reversing the flow of the Little Calumet River
    from this point east to Ogden Dunes.
                   The Burns Ditch drainage area is
    therefore the drainage area of the Little Calumet River
    east of the new divide.
10                  Burns Ditch is a very popular recreational
    area.  There are a number of marinas and launching areas
12   and some fishing.  The Corps of Engineers has made a
13   study of a proposal for the possible development of
14   Burns Ditch as a commercial harbor.
15                  Municipal wastes:  A total of 19 municipal
16   waste sources drain to Lake Michigan by way of Burns
17   Ditch.  These sources are all relatively small, but the
18   population served totals about 93> 000 and the population
19   equivalent as discharged is about 19*000.
20                  At present, many of these sources dls-
21   charge inadequately treated sewage.  Some are in the
22   process of being corrected.  For instance, the Merrillville
23   Conservancy District has been organized to serve the
24 fl Black Oak-Ross area south of Gary, Indiana,
                   Indiana towns served by combined sewers

-------
                                                       18?
 i   which overflow at times of storm to the Burns Ditch
 2   drainage area are Chesterton, Porter, Valparaiso, East
 3   Gary, Hobart and Griffith.
 4                  Industrial wastes:  The Midwest Steel
 5   Division, National Steel Corporation, provides a high
 6   degree of treatment for its sheet and tin mill wastes.
 7   This is located at the mouth of Burns Ditch.  There is
 8   no significant pollution to Burns Ditch from this
 9   source, and this plant illustrates the degree of waste
10   control that can be achieved in a steel rolling mill.
11                  The Bethlehem Steel Company is installing
12   similar waste treatment facilities for its Burns Harbor
13   Sheet & Tin Mill now under construction.  When and if
14   the proposed Burns Harbor deep water port is constructed,
15   these two companies plan to install basic steel and coking
16   facilities.  Their plans to control waste from these
17   future facilities have not been reported.
18                  The State of Indiana has notified the
19   companies that adequate waste treatment must be provided
20   and plans must be approved before basic steel mills are
21   constructed.
22                  Water quality:  Nutrients in treated
23   sewage from towns in the drainage basin tributary to
24   Burns Ditch, and the sluggishness of the stream, combine
25   to effect the most favorable condition for planktonic

-------
                                                       188
    algal growth.
                   The subsequent die off of the algae forms
    a bottom sediment favorable for populations of pollution
    tolerant sludgeworms and bloodworms.   The stream is
    biologically degraded,  but perhaps not as severely as
    other area streams.
                   The water in Burns Ditch shows an
    average coliform density of 120,000 per hundred ml near
    its point of discharge  to Lake Michigan; and 1.7 million
10   per hundred ml about four miles inland.
11                  Fecal strep at the latter point averaged
12   83,000 per one hundred  ml.
13                  There is no evidence of interstate
14   pollution from the discharge of wastes to Lake Michigan
15   by way of Burns Ditch.   Burns Ditch has some effect on
16   the contribution of nutrients in the south end of
17   Lake Michigan, and contributes local bacterial pollution.
18   The effects of increased development in this area bear
19   careful watching.
20                  Before we go to the next area, I'd like
21   to show you a few pictures that we have of this particular
22   area.
23                  Will you please turn off that light?
24                  This is  a panorama showing the Bethlehem
25   Steel Plant under construction in the sand dunes,

-------
                                                       159
 1   Chesterton, Indiana.  The Little Calumet River  is  at  the
 2   left; Northern Indiana Public Service Company,  Baileytown
 3   Station is at the right on the shore of Lake Michigan.
 4   Midwest Steel Company is fairly visible in the
 5   middle distance.
 6                  This is the type of industrial develop-
 7   ment that may be anticipated in that area.
 8                  Can we go to the next slide?
 9                  This is another view of the Bethlehem
10   Steel Corporation and the Northern Indiana Public
11   Service Company, Chesterton, Indiana.
12        MR. POSTON:  How big is this area, Maurice?
13        MR. LE BOS:,.UET:  You mean the whole drainage  area?
14        MR. POSTON:  Well, this plant area.  I think  it  is
15   important to understand the extensive plant that is
16   being built and how big it is.
17        MR. LE BOSQUET:  The total, probably, of Bethlehem
18   Steel — I haven't the faintest --
19        A VOICE:  330 acres.
20        MR. LE BOSQUET:  330 acres; thank you.
21                  Next slide, please?
22                  This is the Bethlehem Steel Company waste
23   outfall ditch to the Little Calumet River on the left.
24                  Next slide, please?
25                  This shows boating activities on Burns

-------
 5
 6                  This is an air view of the Midwest Steel
    Division at the mouth of Burns Ditch.  A part of
 8   the industrial waste treatment facilities are
 9   visible on the east side of Burns Ditch.  Domestic
10
11
12
13                  Next slide,  please?
14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
                                                         190
    Ditch south of Highway U.S.  12,  Portage, Indiana.  You
    will note quite a number of  boat docks and marinas on
    the left.  This is a very popular area.  There is some
    fishing.
                   Next slide,  please?
sewage is piped overhead to the activated sludge sewage
treatment plant on the west side and that is Lake
Michigan in the background.
               This is a panorama view of the Midwest
Steel Division at Burns Ditch on Lake Michigan looking
west'.  That completes the slides on Burns Ditch and we
will go on.
               Do you want to ask questions in between?
     CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Yes.  Are there any questions now?
     MR. FOOLE:  I just want to remind Mr. LeBosquet that
the activated sludge plant effluent he referred to at
the last was also chlorinated.
     MR. LE BOSQUET:  Thank you for supplementing the
record.
     CHAIRMAN STEIN:  As the audience can see, the plot

-------
                                                        191



 1   is beginning to thicken.



 2                                       (Laughter.)




 3                  But on the basis of  past experience, I




 4   know what we have to do now and that is to recess for  ten




 5   minutes because we know the attention span of some of




 6   our older people gets a little strained at this point.




 7                  Vie will reconvene in ten minutes.




 8                                       (Whereupon, a recess  was  ha{3)




 9        CHAIRMAN STEIN:  May we reconvene?




10                  I'd like to at this  time -- and I hope




ii   you indulge me, because being a V/ashington bureaucrat,




12   I may have committed an unpardonable sin.




13                  We have one other Congressional repre-




14   sentative.  I'd like to call on Mr. A. J. Wakefield, a




15   representative of Congressman Mosher.  Mr. V/akefield?




16        MR. WAKEFIELD:  Greetings, ladies and gentlemen




17   from Congressman Mosher, 13th District of Ohio.  He




13   has a message I think of importance to this group because




19   pollution has many facets, but many of them are local,




20   and because of the nature of this group, I think we should




21   take a picture of the five Great Lakes, and there are




22   some things which he knows about and haven't been said




23   yet> I think.



24                  There are three facets of pollution, of



25  ! course.  One is chemical poison.  Well, that can't exist

-------
                                                         192
 1   on the Great Lakes systems because of the tremendous

 2   million to one dilution in five different steps.   That  is

 3   a problem that may be at Calumet and every  little  harbor

 4   and stream that flows into the lakes.

 5                  But, for Instance, poison can be  put  in

 6   at St. Louis in the Mississippi River and it can  be

 7   measured at New Orleans.   Why?

 8                  Because the poison goes down the

 9   Mississippi River just like a train of cars, but it  can't

10   do that in the great lakes because of that  tremendous

11   dilution.

12                  Another pollutant, of course, is  temperature.

13   We have Lake Superior in the summer at a temperature of

14   39; Lake Erie, a temperature of 75.  They flow and inter-

15   connect, one to another and that is a big factor and

16   that to a degree is cancelled out.

17                  But we have this organic pollution  and I

18   think what this movement needs more than anything  else  is
                                                  Congressman
19   something to happen and that is the message froniAMosher.

20                  Why can't we do something about it, start

21   to do something?

22                  Sure, we have these municipal problems

23   all along the lakes and they will be with us forever.

24                  My father was mayor of a little town on

p5   Lake Erie and put in the second sewage disposal  plant.

-------
 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
                                                     193
The first  one was  Lakeland,  Ohio;  the second was  Vermillion,

Ohio, 40 years  ago.
                I bring  greetings  from Professor Langlois

who is retired  now.   He sent me a postcard from

Honolulu.   He is out  where there  is  a lot of great water  --

complete dilution.  But I wish this  meeting could carry on

the enthusiasm  that we  all hold for  the  project with its

many diversifications,  by doing something also, and that

Congressman Mosher could by  consulting some of these people,

especially Langlois --  who tells  about the lakes  in Europe

where men  have  lived  on them for  2,000 years (and they are

quite acceptable,  I might say); but  they put a float on

them with  a pump on,  windmill, and an air pump.  So his
message and mine to you is let's  take care of this

organic thing by introducing a little bit of aeration.

                The first thing that  happens to human

organic waste is putrefaction.  It takes oxygen out of

the water  and people  very carelessly throw their  beer

cans and the beer  cans  rust.

                It  takes oxygen out of the water.

Everything does, and  the fish killed in  Lake Erie comes

through lack of oxygen.

     CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Thank  you,  Mr. Wakefield, fora

very interesting statement.

                Mr. Le3osquet?

-------
 !        Mr.  LE BOS'.UET:   The next section I am dealing



 2   with Is the Little Calumet River,  from Hammond to Blue



 3   Island.  This non-navigable stretch of the Little



 4   Calumet River between Hammond and  Blue Island flows



 5   west and  discharges to the Calumet-Sag Channel.  Two



 6   principal tributaries are Hart Ditch and Thorn Creek,



 7   both of which enter from the south.



 8                  Municipal waste:  The estimated population



 9   served by sewers in this area is 193*000.  The waste load,



10   Including industrial waste, totals 283,000 population



11   equivalent to treatment works which reduce the discharged



12   load to 53,000.



13                  The Sanitary District of Bloom Township,



14   Illinois, serves Park Forest, Chicago Heights, and South



15   Chicago Heights, and a large industrial district in



16   Chicago Heights.



17                  The Sanitary District has engaged two



18   firms of consulting engineers to study its problems.



19   Both reports have been received and action to implement



20   the recommendations have been taken.



21                  A number of Illinois communities having



22   combined sewers which overflow to  the Calumet River



23   system during times of storm are Calumet City, Burnham,



24   South Holland, Phoenix, Lansing, Riverdale, Dolton and



25   Posen.

-------
                                                         195
 l                  Industrial wastes:  Victor Chemical

.2   Company in Chicago Heights, Illinois, discharges an
 3   estimated 3,000 pounds per day of phosphate via the
 4   State Street Ditch and the Sanitary District of

 S   Bloom Township.
 6                  This phosphate can potentially produce
 7   algae nuisances downstream in the Illinois River.
 8                  Water quality:  Study of the biology
 9   of the Little Calumet River shows only pollution
10   tolerant bottom organisms.  Conform concentrations are
11   on the order of one million per one hundred ml and
12   5-day BODs are as high as 20 milligrams per liter.
13                  The Calumet River flows from Indiana

14   to Illinois, and sewage discharged to the river in
15   Indiana causes pollution of the river in Illinois.
16                  I have no pictures of the Little Calumet.
17                  The Grand Calumet River and Indiana
18   Harbor:  The Indiana Harbor Canal, completed in 1903>
19   drains that portion of the Grand Calumet River east of
20   the Indefinite divide in Hammond, and discharges to

21   Lake Michigan.  The main channels are used primarily for
22   navigation and for the disposal of wastes after control
23   or treatment to various degrees.  The channels also
24   supply a small amount of industrial water with low
25   quality requirements.

-------
                                                          196
 l                  The principal industrial water supply  in
 2   this area totaling 1,220,000 gallons per day, or about
 3   2,000 second feet is pumped from Lake Michigan — this
 4   area, the area outside the breakwater — discharged
 5   to the Grand Calumet River and the Indiana Harbor Canal.
 B                  This used water supply or waste is
 7   substantial in quantity and constitutes the major flow
 8   discharged and carrying pollution from the Indiana
 9   Harbor Canal to Lake Michigan.
10                  Municipal Wastes:  The largest sources
11   of municipal wastes discharged to Lake Michigan by way
12   of the Grand Calumet River and Indiana Harbor Canal are
13   the sewage treatment plants at Gary and East Chicago,
14   Indiana.  Neither plant accepts significant industrial
is   wastes.  Both provide secondary treatment.
16                  At the present time, Gary has sewers and
17   sewage treatment plant expansions under construction.
18   This construction includes chlorination facilities and
19   is nearing completion,  it is understood that the East
20   Chicago plant has chlorination facilities, but they are
21   not regularly operated.
22        MR. POOLE:  They are regularly operated now.
23                                 (Laughter.)
24        MR. LE BOSQUET:  I have to give Mr. Poole a chance
'25   here.

-------
                                                       197
 i                  The Hammond Sanitary District has a major

 2   sewer and sewage treatment plant expansion project now

 3   under construction vfhich is nearing completion.  All of

 4   the wastes from Griffith, Indiana,have been connected;

 5   part of Munster is connected, and works are under

 6   construction to connect all of it.

 7                  About half of Highland is connected, with

 8   the remainder scheduled to be.  These connections should

 9   eliminate pollution of the Little Calumet River from

10   these sources — they should — except for storm water

11   overflows, and will result in an increased discharge

12   of treated sewage to the Grand Calumet River.

13                  The State of Indiana has recommended

H   that the Hammond Sanitary District include chlorinatlon

15   facilities as part of the present construction project.

16                  Several communities having combined sewers

17   which overflow to the Indiana Harbor Canal-Grand Calumet

18   River system during times of storms are Gary, East

19   Chicago, Hammond and Whiting.

20                  Industrial wastes:  The largest sources

21   of industrial waste on the Grand Calumet River and

22   Indiana Harbor Canal are the United States Steel

23   Corporation, Gary, Indiana; the Youngstovm Sheet & Tube

24   Company, Chicago; and the Inland Steel Company, East

25   Chicago.

-------
10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
                                                    198
               Three petroleum refineries are lesser but
still major sources of waste.  They are Cities Service Oil
Company, Sinclair Refining Company and Mobil Oil Company,
all in East Chicago.
               A summary of the waste loads as discharged
from these plants is as follows:
               It takes a little time.  It is on page 20
of the blue book, but I think we should examine these
figures.
               U.S. Steel, Gary, Indiana, 330 million
gallons per day; the population equivalent is 266,000;
Ammonia nitrogen discharge is 13*750; phenol discharge is
1,500; cyanides, 1700; and oil, 54,000.  These are all
in pounds per day.
               I might insert here that these are based
on one 24-hour period of composite sampling.  A great
degree of accuracy is not claimed.
               Youngstown Sheet & Tube Company of Chicago
is 250 million gallons per day, a population equivalent
of 100,000; ammonia nitrogen, 4,000 pounds per day;
phenol, 250 pounds per day; cyanide, 250 pounds per day;
oil, 18,900 pounds per day.
               Inland Steel Company, East Chicago,
480 million gallons per day; population equivalent,
200,000; ammonia nitrogen discharged, 16,800; phenols,

-------
                                                         199
    620 pounds per day; cyanide, 940 pounds per day; oil,
    24,800.
                   The oil refineries, Cities Service, 80
    million gallons per day,47,400 population equivalent;
    ammonia nitrogen, 1,140 pounds per day; phenol, 130;
    and oil, 4»000 pounds per day.
                   Sinclair, East Chicago, 4 million gallons
    a day, population equivalent, 4,740; ammonia nitrogen,
    130; phenol, 190; and oil, 290.
10                  Mobil Oil Company, East Chicago, 4 million
    gallons a day, population equivalent, 12,400; ammonia
12   nitrogen, 1,130 pounds per day; phenol, 780 pounds per
13   day.
14                  I think I will insert in here the fact
15   that we have no mention of the settleable solids.  The
16   Corps of Engineers has been doing work in this field for
17   many years, in this area, and I hope that we will have a
18   comment from them to contribute.
19
                   All of these plants have invested in
20  waste treatment facilities.  The United States Steel
21  Corporation quenches coke with ammonia still wastes and
22  discharges waste pickle liquor to an absorption lagoon.
23                 U.S. Steel uses public waters for a
24  treatment works when it discharges residual blast
25  furnace flue dust to the Grand Calumet River and recovers

-------
                                                        200
    it with a dredge that is located in the river permanently.
                   The Youngstown Sheet & Tube Company
    recovers phenol and blast furnace flue dust with
    settling tanks or thickeners.
                   Inland Steel Company recovers phenol
    and blast furnace flue dust, but discharges waste
    pickle liquor to the Indiana Harbor Canal.
                   Analysis of the wastes from these three
    steel plants indicates that large amounts of coking wastes,
10   blast furnace waste, and rolling mill wastes are reaching
11   the Grand Calumet River and Indiana Harbor Canal.
12                  The chief identifiable constituents in
13   these discharges are oxygen-demanding wastes, oily
14   wastes, phenolic materials, cyanide and ammonia.
15                  Cities Service Oil Company provides oil
16   separators and sulfide and ammonia strippers, and has
17   installed a secondary treatment pilot plant.
18                  Sinclair Refining Company provides oil
19   separators, an ammonia and sulfide stripper, a sulfide
20   oxidation tower, and removes phenol by extraction with
21   crude oil and oxidation in a cooling tov/er.
22                  Furthermore, water reuse is practiced by
23   many of these plants thus reducing the volume of wastes
24   discharged.
>5                  Sinclair also skims oil from the Lake

-------
 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
                                                     201
George branch,  Indiana  Harbor  Canal,  to  help  decrease  the
oil nuisance.   It is  not necessaril^  their  oil.
                Mobil  Oil Company  provides oil separators,
cooling  towers  and straw filters.   A  sulfide  and  ammonia
stripper is  under construction.   A sulfide  oxidation
tower is being  installed.   Mobil  Oil  Company  uses the
Indiana  Harbor  Canal  as an industrial water supply and
I am sure it has low quality requirements.
                The DuPont  Company in  East Chicago,
Indiana,  produces hydrochloric acid as a by-product of
one of its manufacturing operations.   It is reported
that the Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board has
approved discharge to the  Grand Calumet  River through
an underwater waste diffusion  system  of  a maximum of
90,000 pounds per day of chloride,  and at a normal river
flow, a  maximum of 125*000 pounds per day of  unneutralized
hydrochloric acid that  would use  up to 25 milligrams
per liter of natural  alkalinity in the river.
                The approval was granted  with  the
understanding that the  company would  make every effort
to sell  the  acid rather than discharge it to  the  Grand
Calumet  River.   The company has advised  that  all  hydro-
chloric  acid is now being  sold, and that no chlorides  or
acid from this  operation are being discharged to  the
river.

-------
                                                        202
 i                  An accidental spill occurred in December
 2   1963* at the American Oil Company dock in the Lake  George
 3   Branch of the Indiana Harbor Canal.  A barge containing
 4   about 10,000 barrels of highly toxic toluene v/as being
 5   unloaded when suddenly the bow of the barge sank with
 6   three valves open.  An unknown amount of toluene escaped
 7   into the canal during approximately fourteen hours
 8   before the leak was controlled.  As far as is known, no
 9   serious damage resulted from the spill.  This was
10   partly due to the high volatility of the toluene which
n   evaporated rapidly.
12                  I might insert that it has been reported
13   that the diving suits dissolved when the men attempted
14   to close the valves of the toluene, which created quite
15   a problem.
16                  Water quality:  The Grand Calumet River
17   and Indiana Harbor Canal are grossly polluted and are
18   generally characterized by unsightly appearance in  the
19   form of floating debris, oil, discoloration and
20   turbidity.
21                  Channel banks, structures and boats
22   acquire a black coating from oil or tarry substances.
23   Malodorous conditions are prevalent and frequent.   There
24   is no dissolved oxygenin the Indiana Harbor Canal.
fes   The lakeward reaches of Indiana Harbor are rust-colored

-------
                                                      203



 i   from waste  pickle liquor.   The Grand Calumet River and



 2   Indiana  Harbor are practically barren biologically with



 3   all  that cyanide going in.



 4                   Although there  are thick deposits that



 5   usually  provide a suitable  habitat for sludgeworms,



 6   extended septic periods and toxic pollutants prevent



 7   their  establishment.



 8                   Sewage and industrial wastes discharged



 9   to the Grand Calumet  River  and Indiana Harbor Canal in



10   Indiana  are the principal pollutional loads that affect



li   interstate  waters of  Lake Michigan.



12                   We will show you some pictures of this



13   rather Interesting situation.



14                   This is the  headwaters of the Grand



15   Calumet  River in the  Sand Dunes at Gary, Indiana.  This



16   is relatively clean water with a clean sand bottom.



17        MR. POSTON:  What river is this?



18        MR. LE BOSQUET:   This  is  the Grand Calumet River



19   at the Dunes.



20                   The reflections you see are the cloud



21   formations; that is not pollution.



22                   The next slide, please?



23                   This is a high  altitude view of the U.S.



24   Steel  Coke  Plant at Gary.   You will note the Grand



25   Calumet  River goes along in the foreground.

-------
                                                         204



                   The next slide Is a closeup of this same



    situation.   There is  a drag line dredge here on the left.



    Maybe you can see it.  That is a six-foot sewer, by the



 4   way.



 5                  Next slide,  please?



 6                  This is another six-foot sewer farther



    west  from the U.S. Steel Coke Plant on the Grand Calumet



    River.  We would expect phenol, ammonia and tarry



    materials from this.



10        MR. POSTON:  This white material, what is that?



11        MR. LE BOSQUET:   I presume that is oil.  I



12   wouldn't identify it  specifically; probably some form.



13   It  must be — maybe one of  our aides here can answer that



14   question.



15        MR. POSTON:  Is  this the Grand Calumet River again?



16        MR. LE BOSQUET:   It is the Grand Calumet,yes.



17        A VOICE:  Hard detergent.



18        MR. LE BOSQUET:   Hard  detergent.



19                                 (Laughter.)



20                  Next slide,  please?



21                  This is the  Grand Calumet farther



22   downstream of U.S. Steel in Gary.  It is a large six-foot



23   sewer and now you see we have oil.  That is an oil slick



24   you see there, also solids.



65                  Next slide,  please?

-------
                                                         205
                   I mentioned this dredge in the Grand
    Calumet.  That Is maintained there permanently.  It moves
    up and down the river and recovers the residual iron
    deposited from the residual gas wash water settled
    effluent.  This is not the primary removal, you under-
    stand.  This is Just the residual after a rather brief
    period of settling.
 8        MR. KLASSEN:  What happens to the dredging material?
 9        MR. LE BOSQUET:  I believe it is recovered and re-
10   processed.  This is too good to waste.
11                  Next slide, please?
12                  This is a seven-foot outfall to the Grand
13   Calumet from the Gary Sheet & Tin Mills, U.S. Steel.
14   Note the black oily waste added to the other oil from
15   upstream.  The chief characteristic of this stream seems
16   to be the oil slick that is extended over the whole
17   length.
18        MR. POSTON:  This is again the Grand Calumet?
19        MR. LE BOSQUET:  This is the Grand Calumet.
20                  Next slide, please?
21                  These are outfall sewers to the Grand
22   Calumet River from Cities Service Petroleum Company of
23   East Chicago.  These large outfall sewers, each about
24   five feet in diameter, are on each side of the Cline
25   Avenue Bridge.  This picture was taken looking north.

-------
                                                      206
 i                  Next slide, please?

 2                  This Is duPont In East Chicago to the

 3   Grand Calumet and this Is one of several discharges.

 4   Note the gauging and sampling station on the ditch.  This

 5   is pure organic chemical waste.

 B                  Next slide, please?

 7                  This is the Hammond Sewage Treatment

 8   Plant on the Grand Calumet River. Sometimes the river

 9   at this point flows east to the Indiana Harbor Canal;

10   sometimes west.  This is looking south and this is

11   Columbia Avenue on the right.

12                  Next slide, please?

13                  This is the East Chicago sewage treatment

14   plant, Grand Calumet River.  We have the Indiana Toll Road

15   in the background.  This river here usually flows east

16   to the Indiana Harbor Canal.  This picture is looking

17   south along Indianapolis Boulevard.

18                  Next slide, please?

19                  This is a picture of the two parts of

20   the Grand Calumet River in the foreground flowing into

21   the Indiana Harbor Canal looking towards Lake Michigan

22   to the north.

23                  The Indiana Harbor Canal Intersects the

24   Grand Calumet River at this point.  In other words, low

25   on the slide, the Calumet River from the east comes in on

-------
                                                       207
 1   the right and the Calumet River on the west.  The  Grand

 2   Calumet comes in on the left.
 3                  The next slide is a closeup of this

 4   picture.  This shows the same situation.  Most of  the

 5   flow is from the east.  You will notice the oily sludge

 S   banks.

 7                  Next slide, please?
 8                  This is the Indiana Harbor Canal at

 9   Dickey Road, East Chicago.  The outfall sewer you  see there
10   is from the Youngstown Sheet & Tube Company.  This is

il   looking towards the lake.
12                  We also see the typical oil slicks  we

13   find in these waters.

14                  Next slide, please?

15                  This is the Indiana Harbor Canal and

16   that is the Inland Steel Company ore pile.  This is

17   heavy oil flowing towards the left which is towards

18   Lake Michigan.
19                  Next slide, please?

20        MR. POSTON:  What is this located on?
21        MR. LE BOSQUET:  This is the Indiana Harbor Canal.

22   That is the — I think it is near the E.J.& E.Railroad,
23   right in there somewhere.

24                  Next slide, please?
25                  This is a high elevation view of the

-------
                                                     208
    Indiana Harbor Canal looking west at the Pennsylvania
    Railroad bridge.  The Inland Steel Company Is In the
    foreground; Youngstown Sheet & Tube in the background.
    The flow is from the left to the right, toward Lake
    Michigan.
         MR. POSTON:  These markings on the surface of
    the water, what is that?
         MR. LE BOSQUET:  That is, I believe -- this would
    be an oil  slick that we see all over this area.
10        MR. POSTON:  Those black marks, black in appearance?
11        MR. LE BOSQUET:  Well, oil often is black.  We
12   have some  pictures showing it very black.
13                  Next slide, please?
14                  This is a closeup view of that same
15   situation.  It shows the Youngstown Sheet & Tube Company
16   outfalls.   There is very heavy oil coming in from both
17   sides.  The flow is from left to right towards Lake
18   Michigan.
19                  Next slide, please?
20                  This is that same Pennsylvania Railroad
21   bridge looking east, and those are Inland Steel Company
22   outfalls.   The flow is at this time from the right to
23   the left.
24                  Next slide, please?
25                  This is the Indiana Harbor Canal looking

-------
                                                       209
 i   east.   That Is the Inland Steel Company in the background,
 2   There  appears to be a number of varieties of oil in
 3   this picture.  The flow is from right to left.
 4                  The oil added can be different shades

 5   from the oil that is there before.

 6                  Next slide, please?
 7                  This is the Indiana Harbor Canal with
 8   the Youngstown Sheet & Tube in the background.  The flow
 9   here is from the left to the right.  This is the E.J.& E.
10   Railroad looking west.  It is another picture that shows
11   the oil slicks.
12        MR. POSTON:  Do these sewers that we see here
13   emptying out — there are two there adjacent — provide
H   treatment before discharge?
15        MR. LE BOSQUET:  I couldn't answer that without
16   checking the file through.  Many of them do have some
l?   separation.
is                  One of the things you have to keep in
19   mind is this — practically all these cases are

20   residual pollution.  It is not saying that these
21   industries haven't done a tremendous Job.  There is just

22   so much.  They are so complex, and the residual is our
23   problem.
24                  Next slide?
25.                  This is the E.J.& E. looking west; and

-------
                                                      210
 i   looking west on the Indiana Harbor Canal is the
 2   Youngstown Sheet & Tube.
 3        A VOICE:  That is on the right.
 4        MR. LE BOSQUET:  Youngstown Sheet & Tube is on the
 5   right.
 6                  You see those outfalls and you can under-
 7   stand the problem of our field men in gauging and sampling
 9   those large outfall sewers.
 9                  Those particular sewers, for example,
10   are five and eight feet in diameter.
u                  The heavy oil is flowing toward us.
12        MR. POSTON:  This is another sewer on the left
13   hand side of the picture?
14        MR. LE BOSQUET:  Yes, I think we have a picture of
15   that in the next one.
16                  That is a sewer there, the one that you
17   saw on the left.  This is looking east towards the Inland
18   Steel Company.  There is a boat shown here.
19                  The large outfall, the flow is from right
20   to left in this case.  V/e are looking east.
21                  Next slide?
22                  This is a four-foot sewer of the
23   Youngstown Sheet & Tube Company discharging to an inlet
24   to the Indiana Harbor Canal.  You don't get the full
25   benefit of these colors.

-------
                                                       211
 i                  Incidentally, we have prints of these
 2   pictures which we will put up later, so you can look at
 3   these more carefully.  These are very colorful.
 4        MR. POSTON:  You mean this sewer is four feet in
 5   diameter?
 6        MR. LE BOSQUET:  That's right.  You can see that
 7   truck there.  Sometimes,you have to have some sort of
 8   a scale to appreciate how large some of these are.
 9                  Next slide, please?
10                  This is the Indiana Harbor Canal turning
11   basin.  This is looking west.  The Inland Steel Company
12   is in the foreground; Youngstown Sheet & Tube in the
13   background.
14                  The Indiana Harbor Canal enters from
15   the left.  The open lake, Lake Michigan, is at the right.
16                  The visible wastes are the black oil that
17   you see, especially in the near part of the picture and
18   the red is spent acid pickle liquor.
19                  The next two show —
20        MR. POSTON:  Do these discolorations stay here in
21   the turning basin, or what happens to this material?
22        MR. LE BOSQUET:  Well, I imagine that iron, being
23   such as it is, neutralizes and some goes out.  There is
24   a certain amount of flushing.  There is quite a flow going
25   into this particular turning basin.

-------
 1
 2
 5
 8

 9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
                                                     212
     MR. POSTON:  Yes, but where does it go?

     MR. LE BOSQUET:  I notice up where the Indiana

Harbor Canal comes from the left, you can see the

differentiation between the water in the turning basin

and the waste in the canal which indicates the amount

of water — we estimate about 2,000 cubic feet per second

coming out of that canal, so that it maintains its

current integrity.

     MR. POSTON:  Well, this 2,000 cubic feet per second

that you talk of, where does that go?  Just in the turning

basin, does it stay there?

     MR. LE BOSQUET:  That goes from here.  It goes

out into the Lake, the Lake which is on the right there.

     MR. POSTON:  I see, out into Lake Michigan.

     MR. LE BOSQUET;  The next detailed two slides will

show each in the lower right.  I might explain that this

picture that we just passed by, this is the picture that

you observed when you fly into Chicago from the east, and

everytime I come in, I look over it, especially in the

daytime, to see if it looks differently, and you get a

very excellent view flying from the east, because the

flight channel, as I recall it, is right over this

particular area.

               This is a close-up detail of the turning

basin.  It shov/s the oily wastes.  These are black, and

-------
                                                        213
    the discoloration from the pickle  liquor, acid  pickle

    liquor.  A barge has entered the picture  since  these two

    pictures were taken.

 4                 The next  slide, please?

 5                 Thife is a picture which  shows  the  same

    turning basin and we have the black oily  wastes on the

    left and the yellow-red  acid pickle liquor  on the right.

 9                 Now, that is what we conjecture  those are.

 9                 Now, if we can have some lights, we will

10  go on to the next.

11       MR. POSTON:  Mr. Le Bosquet,  you flew  over this

12  area in a helicopter for a period  of about  three  hours

13  here last month.  You studied in this area  in the 1920's.

14                 Do you have any .comparisons  with your

15  impressions on this trip?

16       MR. LE BOSQUET:  Going by U.S. Steel,  which  in

17  those days was known as  the Illinois Steel  Company, it

18  looked about the same,

19                                 (Laughter.)

20                 I can remember some of those outfalls

21  at the time.  I can't say that it  is the  same,  I  don't

22  believe it is; but Just  from a superficial  recollection.

23  You realize that this is quite a while  ago.

24                                 (Laughter.)

25                 It's been pointed out to me  that this is

-------
                                                      214
 1   quite a while ago.

 2                  The  Calumet Channel, Blue Island to Lake

 3   Michigan:   The Calumet Channel from Blue Island to Lake

 4   Michigan connecting the Calumet-Sag Channel and the lake,

 5   consists of the navigable portion of the Little Calumet

 6   and the Calumet Rivers.  Waters entering this section

 7   are the Little and  Grand Calumet Rivers and the Wolf

 8   Lake.  Water generally also enters from Lake Michigan.

 9                  Plow reversals:  The direction of flow

10   in the Calumet River under normal conditions is from

n   Lake Michigan toward the Calumet-Sag Channel.  This

12   flow is induced by  the hydraulic control of the

13   sanitary and ship canal system maintained by the

14   Metropolitan Sanitary District in connection with the

15   diversion of water  from Lake Michigan for dilution

16   purposes.

17                  The  Blue Island controlling works,•owned

18   and operated by the Sanitary District, is one of the

19   points of diversion from Lake Michigan.

20                  The  record low stages of Lake Michigan

21   during the past year have contributed to reversals of

22   flow in the Calumet River under two different sets of

23   conditions:

24                  (l)  A rapid drop in the lake level, and

25   (2) a major storm.

-------
                                                       215
 1                  With the present lov; lake stages and
 2   the requirement to maintain a nine foot navigation
 3   depth in the Calumet-Sag Channel, the hydraulic
 4   head at the Blue Island controlling works is minimal,
 5   varying from zero to a few tenths of a foot most of the
 6   time.
 7                  Local variations in the level of Lake
 8   Michigan of 0.5 to 1.0 foot due to wind and/or
 9   barometric pressure effects are common.  These changes
10   occur in a few hours'  time, and the effect may persist
11   one or more days.
12                  When the lake drops a half foot or
13   more at Calumet Harbor, this can produce a hydraulic
14   gradient which causes the Calumet River to flow toward
15   the lake for periods ranging from a few hours to more
16   than one day.  This may occur even though the lock
17   gate at the Blue Island Controlling Works are fully
18   opened in an effort to induce the flow to the Calumet-
19   Sag Channel.
20                  You might say the day that Mr. Poston
21   and I flew over this area, the Blue Island Canal was
22   wide open.
23                  (2)  Major storms which produce
24   excessive runoff in the Little Calumet River Basin in
25   the past have resulted in occasional flow reversals in

-------
                                                     216



    the  Calumet  River.  These have  been due  to the inability



    of the  Calumet-Sag  Channel  to carry the  flood flows away



    from the  area fast  enough,  or to  operation of the Blue



    Island  Controlling  Works for prevention  of flood damage



    in the  area.



                  The  duration of  these flow  reversals



    varies  greatly, depending on the  storm rainfall distri-



    bution.   It  was estimated that  the  Calumet River flowed



 9   into Lake Michigan  for about 72 hours during the storm



10   of October,  1954.



11                 During the storm of  July, 1957> when



12   flooding  became critical in the Calumet-Sag Channel, the



13   lock gates at Blue  Island Controlling Works were opened



14   to permit a  flow out of the Canal toward Lake Michigan.



15   The  entire Calumet-Little Calumet system flowed into



16   Lake Michigan for several hours.



17                 In September 19&1, heavy  rains on the



18   13th and  14th resulted in general flooding which caused



19   the  Calumet  River to flow into  the  lake  for several




20   hours.



21                 The  Metropolitan Sanitary District



22   operates  recording  water level  gauges located on the



23   Little  Calumet River at the Acme  Steel Plant and on the



24   Calumet River near  its mouth.



25                 The  recorder charts  for the period of

-------
                                                        21?
 1   January through March, 1964, were examined for periods
 2   of flow reversal.  On the basis of 12-hour average gauge
 3   heights obtained by inspection, eight periods of flow
 4   reversal were found.  The duration of reversal varied
 5   from 12 to 36 hours.
 6                  The Thomas J. O'Brien Lock and Dam will
 7   provide a positive barrier between Lake Michigan and
 8   all of the municipal treatment plants and some of the
 9   industrial waste sources on the Little Calumet-Calumet
10   system.
11                  When the O'Brien Lock is put into
12   operation, these wastes will be excluded from the Lake,
13   except during infrequent periods of major flooding when
14   the control gates might be opened to alleviate flood
15   damage.
16                  Water uses:  The Calumet River and the
17   navigable portion of the Little Calumet River are used for
18   navigation, industrial water supplies, receipt of
19   municipal and industrial wastes, and recreational
20   boating.
21                  A number of parks, golf courses and forest
22   preserves are located along the banks of the Little
23   Calumet River.  These are made less attractive because
24   of unsightly streams.  The Cook County Forest Preserve
25   District has not developed picnic areas along the Little

-------
                                                        218
 i   Calumet River because of its polluted condition.
 2                  To provide water-oriented recreation, an
 3   official of the Forest Preserve reports that a policy of
 4   building lakes and ponds in the interior of the preserves
 5   av/ay from the polluted streams has been adopted.
 6                  Municipal wastes:  The Calumet Plant of
 7   the Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago is
 8   by far the largest sewage treatment plant in the whole
 9   Calumet area.  It discharges 50 percent of the residual
10   municipal waste after treatment in the Illinois River
11   portion and 40 percent of the residual municipal waste
12   in the entire Calumet area.
13                  Effluent disinfection is not practiced,
14   and no plans for disinfection have been announced.
15                  The Calumet plant serves the southeast
16   part of Chicago and many suburbs such as Blue Island,
17   Calumet City, Rlverdale and Dolton.  It receives and
18   treats domestic and industrial wastes.
19                  Particularly significant, it treats
20   coking wastes from the steel plants located along the
21   Calumet River in Chicago so that phenolic and other
22   constituents of these wastes receive secondary treatment.
23                  The Sanitary District operates three
24   small sewage treatment plants in the Calumet area, each
£5   achieving 85 percent or higher biochemical oxygen demand

-------
                                                        219
 1   removal efficiency.  These plants are at East Chicago
 2   Heights, Hazelcrest and Orland Park.
 3                  In addition, the Sanitary District

 4   supervises through analytical control 19 additional
 5   small operations.  These small operations show between
 6   80 and 90 percent BOD removal efficiency.
 7                  Three of these latter small plants will
 8   be eliminated within six months and become part of the
 9   interceptor system in accordance with the overall policy
10   of the Sanitary District pertaining to such Installations,
11                  Chlorinatlon is carried out at all small
12   Sanitary District treatment plants, and a number of small
13   private plants in the district have begun chlorination.
14                  Except as otherwise noted, all domestic
is   wastes from industries in the Calumet area either are

16   connected to municipal systems or receive secondary
17   treatment at the site.
18                  There is a storm water overflow at the
19   Metropolitan Sanitary District Calumet Treatment Plant.
20   In addition, a pumping station operated by the
21   Metropolitan Sanitary District, located at 95th Street
22   near the Calumet River, at times discharges combined
23   sewage to the river through jthe Howard Slip, about one
24   river mile from the Calumet Harbor.
25                  This discharge will reach Lake Michigan

-------
 10

 11

 12

 13

 14

 15

 16

 17

 18

 19

20

21
                                                         220
     if the Calumet River flow is toward the lake at the time
     of discharge.   Since the pumping takes place during
     severe storms, it is likely to coincide with river flow
     toward the lake.   This overflov; is likely to contain
     coking wastes  from steel plants located on the Calumet
     River.  Pumping to the Calumet River from the 95th Street
     Pumping Station is confined to severe storm periods and
     has varied from only two to 100 hours per year.
                    The pumping station outfall is located
     between the O'Brien Lock and Lake Michigan and will
     therefore continue to discharge to the lake during flow
     reversals, even after the O'Brien Lock is put into
     operation.
                    Industrial wastes:  The principal
     sources of industrial wastes that discharge into the
     Calumet-Little Calumet navigation channel are the
     United States  Steel Corporation, South Works; Wisconsin
     Steel Works;  Interlake Iron Corporation; Republic
     Steel Corporation; Cargill, Inc., all in Chicago; Lever
     Brothers, Hammond, Indiana; and Acme Steel Company,
     Riverdale,  Illinois..
22  II                 Their wastes are summarized as follows:
23                   U.S.  Steel Works,  South Works, 210 million
24    galons per  day; ammonia nitrogen,  990 pounds per day;
25    phenol,  250 pounds per day; oil,  7*700 pounds per day.

-------
                                                        221
                    Wisconsin Steel Works,  40 mgd, population
     equivalent,  2,200;  ammonia nitrogen, 110 pounds per day;
     phenol,  10;  and oil,  800 pounds per day.
                    Interlake Iron Corporation, 37 million
     gallons  per  day, 20,300 population equivalent; ammonia
     nitrogen,  700 pounds  per day; phenol,  900 pounds per
     day;  and oil, 260 pounds per day.
                    Republic Steel Corporation has 85
     million  gallons per day.  All we have is 80 pounds of
10    phenol.
11                   Cargill, Inc., 4/10ths million gallons
12    per day, population equivalent Is 8,700.
13                   Lever  Brothers, Hammond, Indiana, 10
14    million  gallons per day, a population equivalent of
15    18,000.   This goes to Wolf Lake.
16                   Acme Steel, Riverdale,  48 million gallons
17    per day  and  a population equivalent estimated at 4,300.
13                   I might say about some of these results
19    being 24-hour composites might not be too accurate.
20         MR. POOLE:  How  many of these are between the
21    O'Brien  Locks and the lake?
22         MR. LE  BOSQUET:   I would say all but the Acme
23    Steel.
24         MR. POOLE:  And  Lever Brothers?
25         MR. LE  BOSQUET:   No, Lever Brothers is on Wolf Lake

-------
                                                         222
 !    which is  also —
 2         MR.  POOLE:   Someplace  between,  that's right.
 3         MR.  LE BOSQUET:   That's right.
 4         MR.  POSTON:  You indicated that some of these
 5    results are results of 24-hour composite samples.  Does
 6    this  mean that the averages could be higher?
 7         MR.  LE BOSQUET:   Well, we have  industrial information
 8    from  one  or two plants that indicated their actual figures
 9    are much  higher.  Others,  I am sure, might be lower.
10                   We also get  into the  problem of what is
11    an oil, and this oil is by Standard  Methods; and some
12    of the oil companies don't  agree to  this as a proper
13    definition.
14                   However, as  far as I  know, that hasn't
15    been  a problem in this area.
16                   The United  States Steel Corporation,
17    South Works, Chicago, Illinois, has  no coke plant.  Its
18    principal wastes are blast  furnace flue dust, oil, and
19    hydraulically quenched blast furnace slag known as
20    popcorn slag.
21                   Located at  the very mouth of the
22    Calumet River, U.S. Steel  discharges wastes both to the
23    river and to Lake Michigan.  The amount of flue dust
24    that  overflows the thickeners is not known, but
25    discoloration of Calumet Harbor and  Lake Michigan is

-------
                                                       223
 i    evident from the air.
 2                   I will show you the picture.  The company
 3    provides oil separators.
 4                   Popcorn slag at times is discharged and
 5    washes ashore at such places as Calumet Park Beach in
 6    Chicago where it becomes  a nuisance to bathers.  No
 7    significant amount of pickle liquor is discharged.
 8                   Wisconsin  Steel Works, Interlake Iron
 9    Corporation, and Republic Steel Corporation, all in
10    Chicago, have their coke  plant wastes sewered to the
n    Calumet Sewage Treatment  Plant.
12                   The Public Health Service studies,however,
13    indicate that some coke wastes are probably discharged to
14    the Calumet River by Interlake Iron Corporation.
15                   Only Republic Steel Corporation discharges
16    a significant amount of pickle liquor.  It has not been
17    reported whether this pickle liquor is neutralized before
18    discharged.
19                   All three  plants provide settling tanks
20    or thickeners for recovery of blast furnace flue dust.
21    Some popcorn slag has been traced to the Wisconsin Steel
22    Works.
23                   Carglll, Inc., Chicago, Illinois, provides
24    septic tanks for sanitary wastes.  Wastes from refining
25    soybean oil contribute 8,700 population equivalent to the

-------
                                                    221
      ^
 j    Calumet River.

 2                   An industrial waste treatment plant

 3    providing neutralization and anaerobic-aerobic treatment

 4    has been constructed, but has not been reported to be

 5    in operation.

 6                   Lever Brothers Company, Hammond, Indiana,

 7    discharges about 18,000 population equivalent to the

 8    extreme northern end of Wolf Lake.  Several acres of the

 9    lake have been polluted and fish kills have been

10    reported.  Tainting of the flesh of game fish caught in

n    Wolf Lake has been reported, and I might say the fish

12    seem to swim Interstate.

13                   Acme Steel Company, Riverdale, Illinois,

,.    discharges raw sewage from approximately 2,900 of its

15    employees.  It also discharges a substantial amount of

16    unneutralized pickle liquor.  The company provides

17    scale pits,  oil separators and a thickener.

18                   Acme Steel Company is drawing plans to

ig    separate the sanitary wastes from the combined system

20    so that the sanitary wastes may be discharged to the

21    existing sewer system.

22                   Further, plans are being made for revi-

23    sion of production operations needed for the installation

24    of acid pickle liquor waste disposal system.

          CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Mr. Le Bosquet, just for the

-------
                                                          225
 !    purpose of clarification,  I notice here you are using the
 2    term "sanitary wastes" throughout.  For the people in the

 3    audience,  this might mean a contradiction in terms.

 4    What do you mean by sanitary wastes?

 5         MR. LE BOSQUET:  Well, I mean human wastes.

 6         CHAIRMAN STEIN:  You mean human wastes?

 7         MR. LE BOSQUET:  Yes, there is a lot of it in this

 8    area.
 9                                  (Laughter.)

10         CHAIRMAN STEIN:  You know, this field has the most

n    antiseptic terminology you ever saw.  I don't know that
12    the sanitary wastes implied is necessarily sanitary.

13         MR. LE BOSCiUET:  Well, it is well known to

14    sanitary engineers and we call it bread and butter.

15                                  (Laughter.)

16                   Water quality:  Biological studies showed

17    that the Calumet River from its confluence with the Grand

18    Calumet River to its mouth in Calumet Harbor is severely
19    degraded.   The stream was highly turbid.  Oil slicks and

20    floating sewage solids were observed.

21                   At stations at the mouth and five miles

22    upstream from the mouth, the bottom was composed mainly
23    of organic ooze that had a sewage and petroleum odor.

24    Near the mouth of the Grand Calumet River, the bottom

25    deposits of the Calumet River were composed of inert or

-------
                                                      226
 1    inorganic materials.
 2                   Only very pollution-tolerant sludgeworms
 3    existed in the reach from Lake Calumet downstream.   Down-
 4    stream in this case means away from Lake Michigan.
 5                   Prom Lake Calumet upstream more towards
 G    the lake, sludgeworms dominated, but the presence of
 7    fingernail clams indicated a slight improvement in water
 8    quality and bottom conditions.  Sludgeworms averaged
 9    more than 5,000 per square foot in this stream reach.
10                   Attached filamentous algae routinely
11    scraped from under water surfaces in this river were
12    very pollution-tolerant blue-green forms.  No pollution-
13    sensitive filamentous forms were found.
14                   The Calumet River exhibited average
15    collform densities of 2,900 per 100 ml near its junction
16    with Lake Michigan, increasing to 24,000 per 1OO ml
17    about three miles farther inland.
IB                   Interstate pollution occurs with
19    reversals of flow in the Calumet River.  Both municipal
20    and industrial wastes from Illinois enter Indiana
21    waters of Lake Michigan which lie about one-third mile
22    off shore.  I was looking at the map the other day and
23    I found that you could stand on the pier in Calumet
24    Harbor and dive into Indiana; that the Indiana line,
25    apparently, coincides with this bulkhead.

-------
                                                         22?
                    In addition, blast furnace flue dust

     and oily wastes have been observed to flow from U.S.

     Steel, South Works, into Indiana waters.

                    The United States Lake Survey of currents

     in Calumet Harbor show that strong northerly winds

     produce a strong southeast current through the harbor.

 7   This current would carry pollution along the Indiana

 8   shore line.

 9                  Unquestionably, the flow reversals are

10   detrimental to beaches and other water uses in Illinois

n   along the shore line immediately adjacent to the mouth

12   of the Calumet River.

13                  Now, we might stop for a moment to show

14   you some more pictures.

15                  This is a high altitude — well, not too

16   high -- picture of Wolf Lake in Indiana.  That is the

17   Indiana Toll Road to the left; Hammond parks are at the

18   right and Lake Michigan is in the background.

19                  The American Maize-Products Company and

20   their waste treatment lagoon is shown at the left of the

21   channel, and Lever Brothers is at the north end of the

22   channel.

23                  The original Wolf Lake channel to Lake

24   Michigan is now blocked.  That is in the background.

25   That is blocked.

-------
                                                      228


                    The next slide?



 2                  This is a close-up picture of that



 3   former lake channel.  The American Maize Products
 4
     Company has a waste treatment lagoon in the foreground.
 ,    There is an anaerobic section on the right there of
 0



 c    the lagoon and is partly covered to conserve heat in
 o



     the cold weather.  The aerobic section has a mechanical




 0    aerator which is operating.  It wasn't operating the
 O



     day that Mr. Poston and I were flying over it.
 y



10                   Treatment wastes — it was zero,




     incidentally.




12         MR. POOLE:  Those are not connected to Wolf Lake,




     however, Mr. Le Bosquet.




14         MR. LE BOSQUET:  That's right.




15                   Treated wastes are discharged to the




16    Hammond Sanitary District and to Lake Michigan, but not




17    to Wolf Lake.




18                   You were one sentence ahead of me, Mr.





19    P°°le '



20         MR. POOLE:  It's good to be ahead of you.




21                                  (Laughter.)




22         MR. LE BOSQUET:  Lever Brothers Company, in the




23    background, discharges wastes to the north end of Wolf




24    Lake Channel.  Hammond Water Plant is at the shores of




 .    Lake Michigan.
 o i

-------
                                                        229



                    The next slide,  please?



                    This is the Calumet Sewage Treatment



     Plant  of the Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater



     Chicago.  This activated sludge plant is the largest



     sewage treatment plant in this  area by a considerable



     portion.



 7                   Next slide, please?



 8                   This is the Acme Steel Company, one of



     the  15 outfalls that they have.  This is the Calumet



10    River  at Riverdale.  Untreated  sewage is discharged from



n    the  plant.  We can see visible  wastes as far out as we



12    can  see; solids, pickle liquor.



13                   Next slide, please?



14                   This is a marina on Calumet River near



15    the  junction of the Grand Calumet River on the right



16    here.   You can't see it.  This  picture is looking



17    northeast.



18                   The next slide,  please?



19                   This is soybean  processing wastes to



20    Calumet River from Cargill, Inc., Chicago.  You will



21    notice that in this particular  picture, the river is



22    flowing to Lake Michigan or from left to right.



23        MR. POSTON:  Does this waste receive any treatment?



24        MR. LE BOSJUET:  This waste is — I am not too sure.



25    It is  not a tremendous --

-------
                                                        230
 !         A  VOICE:   Yes.
 2         MR.  LE BOSQUET:   We have a "yes"  from the audience
 3    I don't have it recorded.
 4                   Next  slide,  please?
 5                   This  is a picture that  Mr. Poston and I
 6    took on a day when it was zero outside.   We put it in
 7    because to me it was  a rather sensational picture,
 8    mostly  because of the weather.  You don't get fumes
 9    coming  up from the Calumet  River except  when it is
10    zero outside,  and of  course,  you have  a  lot more con-
n    densation of the steam during such weather conditions.
12                   This  is the  Calumet River at Wisconsin
13    Steel on  the right.   That's right, isn't it?
14         A  VOICE:   Republic.
15         MR.  LE BOSQUET:   Republic, I'm wrong; yes,
16    Republic  Steel on the right;  U.S. Steel  is behind the
j7    steam.
18                   Next  slide,  please?
19                   This  is a picture of oily wastes in the
20    Calumet River from the Republic Steel  Corporation in
21    Chicago.   Lake Michigan is  on the left.   There doesn't
22    seem to be much of a  flow at  this point.
23                   Next  slide,  please?
24                   These  are more outfalls to the Calumet
'25    River from the Republic Steel Corporation.  This is

-------
                                                      231
 l    looking east.
 2                   The bridge carries a gasline from
 3    Interlake Iron Corporation between the coke plants on
 4    one side and the blast furnace on the other.
 5         MR. POSTON:  What is this waste?
 6         MR. LE BOSQUET:  You can see the oil slick on this
 7    river.
 8                   Next picture, please?
 9                   This again is Republic Steel Corporation.
10    We take it from the color that that is waste acid pickle
11    liquor discharged to the Calumet River.
12                   Next slide, please?
13                   This shows Republic Steel in the foreground,
14    Across the river, there is the intake, the Interlake
15    Iron Corporation.  This picture is interesting.  It
16    shows that the waste flow is from the outfall over into
17    the Intake.
18                                  (Laughter.)
19                   Next slide, please?
20                   Apparently, this is the Wisconsin Steel
21    Works of the International Harvester Company in
22    Chicago.  This again is the color of acid pickle
23    liquor.
24                   Next slide, please?
25                   This is the U.S. Steel Corporation, South

-------
                                                         232
  1   Works,  in Chicago  on the  north  bank of  the Calumet River.
  2   An outfall  sewer is to  the  left.   At- the left edge is a
  3   discoloration.  It is a little  difficult to see in this
  4   picture.  Is  this  —
  5         MR. POSTON:   How big is  that  sewer there?
  6         MR. LE BOSQUET:  This  is Wisconsin.  I stand
  7   corrected.  This is Wisconsin Steel Works.
  8                   You will notice  there we have mentioned
  9   the  settling  tanks and  thickeners  several times.  Now,
 10   that is one of  them.
 H                   The length of  time  is rather brief in
 12   these,  but  they do carry  out  — take out the heaviest
 13   material.
 14                   Next slide,  please?
 15                   This is  the  U.S. Steel,  South V/orks, at
 16   the  north bank.  There  is a discoloration along the left
 17   edge here as  you can bearly see in the  slide.  That is
 18   residual blast  furnace  flue dust.   This would indicate
 19   to me that  the  river was  flowing towards the lake when
 20   this picture  was taken.
 21         MR. POSTON:   Do you  care to estimate the size of
 22   that sewer?
 23         MR. LE BOSQUET:  I don't know.  Most of these are
 24   quite large,  four  to six  feet at least, and we have some
K   of them higher  than that.

-------
                                                     233

                   That is all the slides we have  on the

    Calumet, and before going into Lake Michigan,  which

    is a final section, are there any comments, Mr.  Chairman?

         CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Are there any comments or

    questions?

                   Are you going to make summaries when

    you complete this, as to the total amount of ore,  for

    example, going into Lake Michigan?

         MR. LE BOSQUET:  Yes.  Well I have totaled  it

10   for Indiana Harbor and I will mention that on  Lake

    Michigan.

12        CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Yes.

13        MR. LE BOSQUET:  It is a little difficult to total

14   it for the Calumet River because you'd have to have some

15   factor of reversal of flow, so that this cannot  be done

16   accurately.

17        MR. POOLE:  Mr. Chairman?

18        CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Mr. Poole.

19        MR. POOLE:  Your table, or one of your slides

20   showed oil in the vicinity of Republic's plant,  as I

21   recall it, and your table has a dotted line under the
                                                 /
22   oil column for Republic.  What does that mean?

23        MR. LE BOSQUET:  That explains that — I  explained

24   that this is based on one — in some cases two — 24-hour

25   composites and also in industries that take water from

-------
 i    the Calumet River.   There  is  quite  a  substantial amount



 2    of oil in the water  supply and  you  can't  properly charge



 3    this to the industry.



 4                   In fact, you will  find some of these



 5    plants, no doubt,have a negative  oil  contribution and



 6    that they pump  their water supply from one of these



 7    waters, treat it and use it and add oil to it,  but they



 8    don't add as much oil as they take  out.



 9                   This  is the kind of  factor that you



10    cannot explore  in one 24-hour composite.



11        MR. POOLE:  Let's see if I know  what you are saying,



12    Are you saying  that  in your Judgment  there is no oil



13    from Republic that reaches the  river?  Is that what you



14    are saying?



is        MR. LE BOSQUET:  No,  I am  saying that you cannot



16    get accurate results based on one 24-hour composite, and



17    I would not testify  with a high degree of accuracy on



18    any of our industrial waste results.



19                   By and large,  they are an  indication of



20    the order of magnitude, and I would suspect that there



21    is some oil coming from Republic  Steel.



22        CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Mr.  Le  Bosquet, would you think



23    there are significant amounts of  oil  in the Calumet



24    River system?



55        MR. LE BOSQUET:  Oh,  yes.  There are significant

-------
                                                        235
     amounts, of course, amounts which you can see on
     the surface; and if you can get your oil low enough,
     these will disappear.  You will still have oil but
     you don't have the slicks; but with the heavy slicks that
     we have in the Calumet River, as you saw from those
     pictures, I will say that they were significant.
                    I won't say there is a large amount if
 8   you want to compare it.  The amount of oil going  into
 9   the Calumet is less than that in Indiana Harbor,  quite
10   a good deal; and also it goes down — most of it  goes
11   down the Illinois River.
12        CHAIRMAN STEIN:  But it is still oil, wherever it
13   goes?
14        MR. LE BOSuUET:  Yes, that's right.
15        MR. KLASSEN:  Mr. Le Bosquet, do you have any
16   estimate of the time of reversal of flow of the Calumet ?
17   What percentage of time does the Calumet flow during
18   your study toward the lake or toward the Illinois River?
19        MR. LE BOSQUET:  Well, the Sanitary District has
20   that recorded and we confined our exploration, you might
21   say, to examining Just by visual observation, to
22   confining ourselves that it was a substantial part of
23   the time.
24                  And to get that information, we Just
25   looked, just a couple years recent records, so I  cannot

-------
                                                      236
 i   say what percentage of the time  the  Calumet  River does
 2   reverse.
 3        CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Again, that  is a  significant amount
 4   of the time?
 5                  In other words, let us see  if I can
 6   phrase this:  Is the reversal of that river  frequent
 7   enough to cause concern about the  v/aste being put in
 8   the river having an effect on Lake Michigan?
 9        MR. LE BOSQUET:  Yes, I think that is a fair statement,
10   It comes in the form of slugs during these reversal
11   periods, and some of these have  been quite substantial
12   but not too frequent.
13        MR. CHESROW:  I would add that  it  is  not frequent
14   at all and that the statement is not correct.
15                  We will go into the detail  of that in our
16   presentation.
17        MR. LE BOSQUET:  Fine. I will expect  that you would
18   get other figures; however, I do know that looking at
19   that stream, I have observed the reversal  on several
20   occasions.
21        MR. CHESROW:  We will present the  information in
22   detail.
23        MR. LE BOSQUET:  Good, good,  fine.
24        MR. POSTON:  With the closing of the  O'Brien Locks,
25   the new locks, this will prevent considerable amounts of

-------
                                                         237
     waste from going back to the lake, is that right?

          MR. LE BOSuUET:  Yes, that's right.  There will not

     be as much flow to carry the wastes.

                    See, most of these Industrial concerns,

     all but Acme Steel, are below; that is, towards the

     lake from O'Brien Locks, but those locks will certainly

     reduce the amount of reversals.

          MR. POSTON:  There will not be the opportunity for

     waste from the Calumet Sewage Works to get back out

10    into the lake after the closing of the O'Brien Lock?

u         MR. LE BOSQUET:  No, that will be over.  No,

12    the Calumet Plant is west of Lake Calumet, if I

13    remember rightly, and that will go below —

14    west of the O'Brien Locks.

15         MR. POSTON:  Where on that map does the effluent

16    from the Calumet waste treatment works go into the river

17    system?

18                   Then, the O'Brien Locks are —

19         MR. LE BOS ;UET:  Between that and the lake.

20         MR. POSTON:  So that will,  In effect, form a dam

     that will prevent this treated effluent from getting

22    back out into the lake?

23         MR. LE BOSQUET:  The industries, however, by and

24    large, are on the lake side of the lock and dam.

25                   We mentioned Acme as the only one, shall

-------
                                                          238
  1   we say, downstream to the left or west of  the  O'Brien
  2   Locks.

  3        CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Are there any further  questions  or

  4   comments for Mr. LeBosquet up to this point?  If not,

  5   we will stand recessed for lunch.  I understand  there  are

  6   ample facilities in this building and we will  continue with

  7   Lake Michigan at that time.  Thank you.

  8                                 (Whereupon,  a  recess was had

  9                                 until 1:45 o'clock p.m.,

 10                                 this date.)
 11

 12

 13

 14

 15

 16
 17

 18

 19
20

21

22

23

24
25

-------
                                                        239
 ,              AFTERNOON   SESSION
 1              ^™~  ' "~~ "•"• ~™" "™"~ ~™ ™~~ "™~   ^"" "^~ ~"~ "™ ™"™ ™^™ ™"*
          CHAIRMAN STEIN:  May we reconvene?
 f»
 3                   Mr. LeBosquet.
 .         MR. LE BOSQUET:  The last of the five sections  I
 4
 5    was going to discuss was Lake Michigan.  The area  of Lake
 6    Michigan under present consideration extends from  the
 7    Cook-Lake County, Illinois line, to east of the mouth of
 8    Burns Ditch in Indiana.
 9                   Attention has been concentrated, however,
10    on effects of pollution on the water quality south of
n    the Chicago Loop.
12                   Water supply:  There are six major
13    municipal water systems in Chicago and the adjacent
14    Calumet area in Indiana which use Lake Michigan as a
15    source of water supply.
16                   The largest is the recently constructed
17    Central District Filtration Plant near the center  of
18    Chicago.  This plant serves a population of about
19    2,800,000 and pumps 606 mgd.
20                   The second largest in Chicago is the
21    South District Filtration Plant located Just north of
22    Calumet Harbor.  This plant serves a population of
23    1,600,000 and pumps an average of 380 mgd.
24                   The other users are Gary, 200,000 people
25    and 24 mgd; Hammond, 112,000 people, 23 mgd; East  Chicago,

-------
                                                           240
 1    56,000 people  and  14  mgd;  and  V/hiting,  8,000 persons and
 2    1.5  mgd.
 3                   The Gary-Hobart Water Company is
 4    constructing a new municipal water plant at Ogden Dunes,
 5    Indiana,  about two miles west  of Burns  Ditch.  This
 B    plant  will  have an initial rated capacity of 16 m^d.
 7                   Nearly all  of the independent water
 8    supplies  in the Calumet area are surface supplies.  The
 9    total  pumpage, excluding cooling water,  is about 2,760
10    mgd, of which  about 2,480  mgd  is pumped from the Lake
11    Michigan  Basin.
12                   The steel industry uses  about 2,400 mgd,
13    87 percent  of  the  total.   The  petroleum refining
14    industry  uses  250  mgd, 9 percent of the total.  The
15    remaining 4 percent is used by the paper, food and
16    chemical  industries.   Ninety percent of the industrial
17    water  pumpage  is taken directly from Lake Michigan.
18                   Recreation:  Recreational activities
19    such as swimming,  boating,  water skiing and fishing are
20    engaged in  by  a large segment  of the population of the
21    Calumet area.   During the  summer, millions of people
22    visit  the beaches  in  Chicago,  Gary and  Indiana Dunes
23    State  Park. Hundreds of pleasure boats can be observed
24    on Lake Michigan,  and at times,there is a virtual parade
125    of boats  to and from  the marinas and mooring facilities.

-------
                                                         241
 l                  As the population grows, the need for

 2   recreational facilities will expand.

 3                  Lake Michigan and Wolf Lake provide  the

 4   only swimming waters.  The streams are not safe for

 5   swimming because of the bacterial pollution.  The Lake

 6   Michigan beaches at Chicago, Gary, and Whiting are

 7   packed on summer weekends, but there is an increasing

 8   tendency for people living in the Calumet area to drive

 9   to the Indiana Dunes State Park or the Michigan beaches

10   where the water is clearer and the sand is cleaner.

n                  The Hammond-owned beach on V/olf Lake is

12   used by thousands of swimmers and sunbathers.  The

13   Lake Michigan beach at Hammond has been closed for

14   several years because of high coliform bacterial counts.

15                  The popularity of water skiing has

16    paralleled  the growth in pleasure boating.  Water skiing

17    is a popular sport on both Lake Michigan and Wolf Lake.

18                   In recent years, the growth of interest

19    in pleasure boating has increased at a phenomenal rate.

20                   Marinas, mooring facilities and launching

21    ramps are hardly able to handle the peak traffic.   There

22    are now 24  such boating facilities in the area.  This

23    number would undoubtedly increase markedly if the

24    sheltered waters of the area were not polluted.

25                   The boat registration records of Indiana

-------
                                                      242
 !    and  Illinois  show how  popular  pleasure  boating has  become.

 2    In the  three  Indiana counties  bordering on Lake

 3    Michigan,  there were 11,000  boats,  and  in Lake and  Cook

 4    Counties  in Illinois,  there  are  43,000  registered boats.

 5                  Many of the boaters  of the area moor

 6    their boats in clear waters  as far  away as Saugatuck and

 7    Holland in Michigan.   The waters of the Calumet River

 0    stain boat hulls with  a tar-like substance that is
 o
 g    unsightly and difficult to remove.

10                  In the  Calumet  area,  there are several

u    water oriented parks that provide recreational oppor-

12    tunities  for  thousands of people.  Mar  ;uette Park at

13    Gary and  Wolf Lake Park in Hammond  are  two of the larger

14    parks of  the  area.  Both are located on relatively  clean

15    waters.  Calumet Park  beach  in Chicago  is also heavily

16    used, but the bacteria content of its water is higher

17    than desirable, and accumulation of popcorn slag on the

18    beach from steel mills make  the  beach unattractive  to

lg    bathers because of its gritty  texture.

20                  Municipal wastes: Municipal sewage  is

21    not  generally discharged directly to Lake Michigan  in

22    this area, although discharges may  reach the lake

23    through tributary streams.   At least one city, Whiting,

24    Indiana,  has  a combined sewer  overflow  which discharges

25    directly  to Lake Michigan.

-------
 1
 2
 3   Harbor and on occasion from the Calumet River.
 4                  Industrial wastes:  The principal  sources
     of wastes that discharge directly to Lake Michigan  are
 6   Union Carbide Chemicals Company, Whiting, Indiana;
     American Oil Company, Whiting, Indiana; American  Maize-
 8
 9
     three are summarized as follows:

11
10
                    Union Carbide in Whiting has 43 mgd,
12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
                                                        243
                    Indirectly, sewage treated to various
     degrees,  reaches the lake by way of Burns Ditch, Indiana
     Products Company, Hammond, Indiana; and United States
     Steel Corporation, Chicago; and wastes from the first
     99,000 population equivalent.  They have 13 pounds of
     phenols.
                    American Oil Company, Whiting, Indiana,
     97 mgd, 57*000 population equivalent, 3*800 pounds of
     ammonia, 1100 pounds of phenol and 3*950 pounds of oil
     daily.
                    American Maize-Products Company in
     Hammond, Indiana, 9 mgd and population equivalent of
     44,000.
                    Union Carbide Chemicals  Company has a
     quench water recirculation system.  Other wastes are
     mostly soluble in water and no treatment is provided.
                    Recently, large amounts of pellets of
     material similar to polyethylene have been found washed

-------
                                                       244
     ashore on the beaches In Chicago.  It is believed that

     Union Carbide is a possible source of this material.

                    Conferees, here is a sample of the

     pellets.

                    American Oil Company provides oil

     separators on both process wastes, including water return

     flow, and secondary treatment on process wastes.

 8                  American Maize-Products Company discharges

 9   some wastes to the Hammond Sanitary District.  Other

 10   wastes are treated in an anaerobic-aerobic lagoon and

 n   chlorinated before discharge.

 12                  I showed you a picture of that, you will

 13   recall, just before lunch.

 14                  A decrease of 80 to 90 percent in BOD

 15   in the lagoon system is reported.

 16                  In addition, the U.S. Steel, South Works,

 17   is located at the mouth of the Calumet and a number of

 18   sewers discharge directly into the lake.  Also important

 19   are the discharges reaching the lake from the Indiana

20   Harbor ship canal.  Using rounded figures, the discharges

21    previously discussed have the following totals, and what

22   I have done here is added the totals to an earlier table.

23                   1*150 million gallons a day, total flow;

24    630,000 population equivalent; 37,000 pounds of ammonia

25    nitrogen per day; 3>500 pounds of phenol per day; 2,900

-------
                                                        245
     pounds of cyanide per day; 102,000 pounds of oil per day.

                    I might say that these are added at the

    outlets of the individual industries and it could be

     that some of these have become somewhat stabilized before

     they reached the lake and in the case of cyanides, they

     are probably oxidized and in the case of oil, 102,000

     pounds of oil, it is reported that Sinclair was skimming

     oil from the lake from the Indiana Harbor ship canal,

     so that they may be reducing this.

 10 I                But, these are the totals of those

 11   industries  I listed for you this morning.

 12                  Lake currents:  Intensive studies of

 13   currents and temperature changes were made by the Public

 14   Health Service in the Illinois-Indiana boundary waters

 15   from November, 1962 through July 1964.

 16                  The study used automatic recording

 17   current meters and free floating current measuring devices.

 18                  Additional current meter studies were

 19   conducted in the Calumet Harbor area during the summer

 20   and fall of 19&3 by the U.S. Lake Survey.

 21                  The studies indicate a prevailing flow

 22   from south  to north along the southern and adjacent

 23   southwestern portion of Lake Michigan.

 24                  The most important types of motion in

25   water are mixing and transport.  Mixing refers to the rate

-------
                                                         246
     of dilution of a pollutant.  Transport is the net move-
     ment of a water mass from one area to another.
                    During two specific periods, January 21-24,
     '63, and March 14-16, '63, the City of Chicago Water
     Department experienced severe taste and odor problems
     from water taken at the cribs.
                    On January 20, 1963, the odor threshold
     level at Whiting and Hammond were recorded at a value
 9   of 8 at both intakes.
10                  As a frame of reference, the Public
     Health Service drinking water standards provide that the
12   threshold of water shall not be over 3 in the finished
13   water.  This is the raw water, of course.
14                  This value of 8 Jumped four to five
15   times by the following day and nearly 15 to 20 times
16   by January 22nd.
17                  The flow of water past the intakes was
18   measured and found to be towards the northwest.
19                  On January 24th, just two days later,
20   the Chicago South District Filtration Plant recorded its
21   first taste and odor problems in 1963.  Taste and odor
22   problems were not experienced farther to the north at
23   this time, thus confirming the fact that the pollution
24   occurred to the south, as shown by the water movement.
25                  During the March 14th to l6th, 1963 period,

-------
                                                         24?
     there was a second occurrence of severe taste and odor
     problems at Chicago.  A water flow during this second
     period was measured and was again from the south to
  .  I the north.
  c                  We had water meters in the water at all
  o
     these periods.
  6
  7
 14
 15
 16
 17
 18
20
21
22
23
24
                    Mixing rates can vary widely depending
  Q   on the weather conditions.  During the times of waste
  o
     and odor difficulties experienced by Chicago, both in
   ..
     January and in March, 1963 chemical analyses showed that
     the water mass was diluted about four times while in
10
11
    transit from the Whiting-Hammond areas to the Chicago
 12
 13   intake.
                   Studies made during April 1963, near
    Chicago indicate that the dilution ratio following near
    calm conditions is less than five for currents up to one
    foot per second and five miles of travel, indicating that
    these pollution concentrations travel as a body pretty
19   much.
                   Regardless of the season of the year,
    the prevailing flow in the Illinois-Indiana region is
    from the south, although flows from the north also occur.
    The winds over the lake during the summer are primarily
    from the south and southeast, and in the winter are from
25    the northwest, both of which maintain the northward flow

-------
                                                         248
 1    of water.
 2                   Based  on  independent results of continuous
 3    summer  and  fall studies,  the  U.S.  Lake Survey concluded that
 4    the northwestward  flow past the  Calumet Harbor was a typical
 5    summer  condition.   This  flow  was reversed  only by strong
 6    northerly winds.
 7                   Current speeds along the shore and in
 8    the upper layers moved between two and five miles per
 9    day   for 60 percent of the time.  A movement from the
10    Indiana area to the Chicago vicinity will  normally take
11    from  three  to four days  for average conditions.  Under
12    storm conditions or periods of high winds,  it could travel
13    the distance in less  than one day.
u                   Water  quality:  The effects of wastes
15    entering Lake Michigan in the Calumet area on the quality
16    of the  lake and the uses  made of it were studied by the
17    Public  Health service during  the period from 1962 to 1964.
18    Wastes  entering Lake  Michigan come from the Indiana
19    Harbor  Canal,  from industries discharging  along the
20    shore line  in Indiana and Illinois,  from reversal of flow
21    of the  Calumet River  in  Chicago, to a lesser extent from
22    the discharge from Burns  Ditch in  Indiana,  and from at
23    least one storm water overflow in  Whiting,  Indiana.
24                   Between 1961 and  1963,  more than 450
'25    bottom  dredgings were made in the  lake area from Willamette,

-------
                                                        249
     Illinois, to Indiana Dunes State Park and Lakewood about

     30 miles.

                    The bottom animal communities in this

     area of Lake Michigan were composed of only a few

     different kinds of organisms.  Sludgeworms and aquatic

     scuds were more numerous, but bloodworms and fingernail

     clams were sometimes abundant.

                    Of these four different kinds of animals,

     only one, the scud, is sensitive to pollution, preferring

 10   a clean sand or gravel bottom and relatively clean water.

 11                  Where the lake quality is subjected to

 12   deposits of organic materials, the conditions are more

 13   favorable for sludgeworms, bloodworms and fingernail clams.

 14                  Off shore from the Calumet area streams,

 is   pollution tolerant organisms averaged 400 per square foot,

 16   and there were only a few clean water associated organisms.

 17                  Along the Chicago shoreline, pollution

 18   tolerant organisms averaged about 1,000 per square foot

 19   of lake bottom and pollution intolerant forms averaged

20   about 50 per square foot.

21                  This more than two-fold increase in

22   pollution tolerant organisms is attributed to an organic

23   sediment that is more suitable a habitat for organisms

24   such as sludgeworms and less favorable for clean water-

25   associated organisms such as scuds.

-------
                                                         250
                    The reason sludgeworms were less numerous
     offshore from the Calumet area was that the heavier
     suspended particles contained in wastes from the steel
     industry settle out before they are carried northward to
     the Chicago waterfront.
                    In addition, toxic and inhibitory
     materials are more highly concentrated in the Calumet area
     than off the Chicago shoreline.
 9                  The lower concentration of toxic substances
10   in the Chicago area would permit larger populations of
11   organisms to develop.
12                  Further evidence that wastes from the
13   Calumet area are deposited in the lake near Chicago is
14   in the odors of the dredgings from this area of Lake
15   Michigan.
16                  Some of the dredgings from this sector
17   along the shore contained organic sediments described
13   as ooze.
19                  Sewage odors were detected in some of the
20   dredgings near shore from the Chicago River to Burns
21   Ditch, and petroleum odors were detected in bottom muds
22   from the Calumet area.
23                  These dredgings, of course, are the
24   dredgings made by the biologists in examining bottom
     deposits.

-------
                                                         251
                    Pollution of this large area of Lake
     Michigan is especially serious because it tends to be
     irreversible; that is, the conditions that now exist
     improve but slowly with the cessation of present waste
     discharges.
                    In a stream where there is a current
     moving in one direction, there is a tendency for the
     bottom deposits to be scoured away; however, lake
     currents are weak and shifting and bottom deposits
10   might move only slightly over a long period of time.
n                  This comment about irreverslbility I have
12   changed a little for the reason that as far as dissolved
13   matters are concerned, it is almost entirely irreversible,
14   but as far as tastes and odors are concerned, and oils, if
is   you stop them tomorrow, why, they would soon disappear.
16                  Bacteriology:  The offshore waters;
17   that is, a mile or so off the Calumet area and the
18   Chicago areas were studied during 1962 and  '63 in a
19   series of sampling cruises.
20                  Conform and fecal streptococcus deter-
21   minations were made.
22                  Virtually, none of these organisms were
23   found in the deep water of the main body of Lake Michigan.
24                  Highest coliform concentrations occurred
25   in the waters extending from the mouth of the Calumet

-------
                                                         252

     River to the Indiana Harbor and out to a distance of



     approximately two miles offshore.
 tt


                    That is between those two peninsulas, you
 3


     might say,  going out in the lake.
 4


                    Coliform densities as high as 7,000 per



     hundred ml  were observed in this area.
 6


                    In the zone extending on eastward to



     Burns Ditch, all determinations were 1,000 or less per
 8


     hundred ml  at a distance up to two miles offshore.
 y
10



11



12



13



14



15



16



17



IS



19



20



21



22



23



24
               Coliform densities in the range of 100


to 1,000 were observed for a distance of five to seven


miles extending outward from the Calumet Harbor area.


               Such densities were detected at the


Indiana-Illinois boundary lines running east and west in


Lake Michigan, due north to Whiting.


               The waters of the south end of Lake


Michigan are thus shown to be receiving large loads of


fecal pollution originating in the Calumet area and


moving out into Lake Michigan.


               I might say these cruises were made in


fairly large boats so that the samples were collected


offshore.


               It was impossible to get in close so that


these are the waters away from the immediate effects of


the shore pollution.                               '

-------
                                                         253
                    Data from records of the Chicago Park

     District on the occurrence of coliform bacteria on

     beaches in the Calumet area and northward along the lake

     shore in Chicago have -been examined.

                    Each beach was sampled on 20 to 30

     different days during the bathing season each year.

                    You will find the table on page 37 of the

     blue book and there is a slide on this particular subject,

     if you will show it now.

10                  The left hand part is, of course, at

11   about 3?th Street and those last three points are Indiana

12   Harbor, Hammond, I believe, and Whiting.

13                  Calumet Beach is where that big rising

14   line goes on the lower curve.  It is evident that Whiting

15   Beach and Hammond Beach in Indiana and Calumet Park

16   Beach in Chicago are the most heavily polluted.

17                  So the last three beaches on the right,

19   these beaches lie within the artificial bay created by

19   the Calumet Harbor breakwater and Indiana Harbor, as was

20   shown in this map Just a couple minutes ago, and are

21   directly subject to pollution by wastes discharged to

22   Lake Michigan in the Calumet area.

23                  Coliform density usually exceeds 1,000

24   per 100 ml and are often over 100,000 per 100 ml.

25                  The beach at Hammond is closed to swimming

-------
by orders of the Hammond Health Department due to high



coliform concentrations.  The beach is posted for no



swimming.



               Put the lights on again, please.



               The water intakes of Chicago's Dunne crib



and South District Filter Plant are often affected by



those polluted waters moving northward from Indiana and



the mouth of the Calumet River.



               Rainbow Beach and the filtration plant



are immediately adjacent, and Dunne Crib is two miles




offshore.



               The bacterial records of water from both



the plant and crib intakes substantiate the presence of



waters carrying fecal pollution.



               At times, the quality of the water



abruptly worsens and coliform densities increase sharply.



               During the last part of November, '63, for



example, coliform densities as high as 5*800 were recorded



through an eight day period.



               Higher coliforra densities have been



recorded in other seasons and years since 1950.



               The picture of the phenolic materials



is pretty similar to the picture on tastes and odors so



we will skip over here to tastes and odors on page 36.



               Tastes and odors is the second paragraph,

-------
                                                       255
     not the first.

                    The filtration plant in the City of Chicago

     reported that one of its most serious taste and odor

     problems occurred between January 24th and February 7th,

     1963, lasting 15 days.

                    During this period, threshold odor

     numbers increased from the usual number of four to a

     maximum value of 50 at Dunne Crib and 15 at the shore

     intake.

IQ                  Odors during this period were characterized

     as hydrocarbon.

12                  This description is usually associated

13   with industrial wastes;

14                  These high odor numbers are reflected in

15   the heavy use of carbon in an effort to remove the odor.

16                  Associated with these objectionable odors

17   were high ammonia nitrogen results.

18                  Other periods referred to by the Chicago

19   South District Filtration Plant as causing similar

20   problems included March 3 and 4,  '63, when threshold odor

21   values of 8 at the shore and 12 at the Dunne Crib were

22   reported.

23                  On April 2nd to 7th,  '63, threshold odor

24   numbers up to 10 at the shore and 14 at the Crib were

25   reported.

-------
                                                   256
               Again, these odors were reported as
hydrocarbon.
               Another critical period recently reported
was a 20-day period from December llth to December 31st,
1964.
               During this period, an excessive threshold
odor of the hydrocarbon — that means it was a taste  —
that the taste was described as hydrocarbon, was obtained
at Dunne Crib and 16 was obtained at the shore.
               The high threshold odor numbers in
January and March  1963* were associated \vith movements
of water from Indiana towards Chicago intakes.
               Pour Indiana water plants also take their
water from Lake Michigan in the Calumet area.
               The Gary-Hobart Water Plant reports that
when high carbon dosages are required, hydrocarbon odors
are always responsible.
               Acute problems were experienced at this
plant in January, February and March 1963* and less
severe problems were experienced in January, February,
March and December 1964.
               Threshold odors and phenol analyses were
not reported.
               The East Chicago Water Treatment Plant
reports that beginning December 15, 1964, a strong phenol

-------
                                                       257
 !    odor  was  detected.
 2                   Threshold  odor numbers for the next eight
 3    days  ranged from eight to 35*  maintaining 35 for three
 4    consecutive days.
 $                   Normal or  average carbon dosages are 24 to
 6    27  pounds per million gallons.
 7                   During these eight days, dosages were
 8    between 63 and 163  pounds per million gallons.
 9                   The  Hammond Water Plant reports that when
10    winds are from the  southeast or northeast, intensive
n    pollution due to phenols  is experienced.
12                   In the past, phenols were experienced
13    only  during winter  months, but they are now expected at
14    any time.
15                   Threshold  odor numbers of 2,500 or higher
16    have  been recorded.
17                   On March 24th and 25th and April 2, 1964,
18    a severe  taste was  experienced characterized as a
19    gasoline  or paint type.
20                   This continued with less severity for
21    two weeks.
22                   An insecticide spill was identified on
23    July  10th and llth, '64,  which took one week to eliminate
24    from  the  system.
25                   During December 1 to 26, 1964, threshold

-------
                                                   258
odors from 30 to 79 were experienced for 77 percent of
the time.
               Whiting,  Indiana, is located with
Industrial plants in close proximity on both sides.

               Industrial pollution never ceases to be a
problem.  Threshold odors are usually high, running 15 to
25 when severe problems  are absent.
               During 1963 and  '64, much higher
average chemical dosages were required.
               Only one  period of phenol results was
available.  The results  from January l6th to February 6th,
'63, ranged from 1 to 26 micrograms per liter or — this
is commonly referred to  as parts per billion, with an
average value of 8 micrograms per liter.
               Threshold odors during this period
averaged 18 with a maximum of 100.
               In contrast, during the week of December.
24, 1964, threshold odors ranged from 300 to 2,000.
               Because of the taste and odor problems
reported in the first part of 1963, the Public Health
Service began monitoring water intakes in Chicago and
vicinity for organic contaminants.

               This program was continued until June
1964.  The stations selected were Whiting, Chicago's
South District Filtration Plant, Chicago Avenue, Evanston

-------
                                                       259
 i    and Uaukegan.
 2                   The carbon absorption method was used for
 3    this study.
 4                   The Whiting,  Indiana plant showed signifi-
 5    cantly greater amounts of carbon chloroform extract than
 6    the other intakes.
 7                   This is an indication of Industrial pollution,
 8    An average value of 242 micrograms per liter found at this
 9    station can be considered a  serious pollution load.
10                   Threshold numbers up to 3,000 have been
n    reported at Whiting.
12                   The Public Health Service drinking water
13    standards recommends a threshold of 3.
14                   A study by Rosen and Rubin showed that
15    70 percent of the organic carbon in the carbon-chloroform
16    extract from samples of intake water at Whiting, Indiana,
17    was fossil carbon, originating from petroleum and coal,
18    and indicated industrial sources.
19                   The other 30  percent was contemporary
20    carbon, indicating sewage origin or else it could be
21    algae.
22                   The carbon filter extracts from the other
23    water plants Indicate they are receiving organic pollu-
24    tants in their raw water of  the same magnitude as obtained
25    in the South District Filtration Plant.

-------
                                                       260
                    The pattern as far as nitrogen ammonia,
     organic and nitrate  — nitrate  pretty  much follows  the  same
     pattern as this taste and odors.  In other words, originating
     in northern Indiana  and following the  currents up into  the
     Chicago area.
                    On Page 43, you  have information from the
     South District Filtration Plant.
                    I think it is significant  and of interest
  9   and summarizes the situation.
 10                  During 1963 at the South District Filtration
 11   Plant, ammonia nitrogen results exceeded  0.02 milligrams
 12   per liter on 187 days.  That is incorrect in that blue
 13   book if it isn't marked.  (See "Report  on  Pollution  of the
 14   Waters of the Grand  Calumet River, Little Calumet River,
 15   Calumet River, Lake  Michigan, Wolf Lake and their Tributaries,
 16   Illinois-Indiana."   February 1965, page 43, para. 3,  line 2.)
 17                  Shown below is a breakdown of the number
 18   of days this and higher values  were exceeded at the Dunne
 19   Crib and at the shore.
 20                  Greater than 0.02, 182  days at the shore
 21   and 187 at the crib.
 22                  0.05, 72 and 77; 6 and  15; and greater
 23   than 0.20 milligrams per liter, 3 days at Dunne Crib.
 24        CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Mr. Le Bosquet,  you  are a true
•5   engineer.  You may eliminate part of your text,  but you

-------
                                                        261
 1    never eliminate the —
 2         MR. LE BOSQUET:  Well, that's a City of Chicago
 3    table and I didn't feel at liberty to do it.
 4                   Ammonia problems are also reported by the
 5    Gary-Hobart Water Company which draws its water from Lake
 6    Michigan at Gary.
 7                   Gary-Hobart reports odors suggesting
 8    gasoline, and that high ammonia concentration are common
 9    in the raw water, the average magnitude being 0.10
10    milligrams per liter.
n                   Water Company officials report that each
12    pound of ammonia in the raw water increased the chlorine
13    demand by 10 pounds.
14                   On seven days during January 19^3*
15    ammonia concentrations ranged from .4 to .65 milligrams
16    per liter.
17                   On three days in March, the ammonia
18    values were between  .3 and .4.
19                   During  '64, ammonia values of  .15 and  .27
20    were reported on eight days in January, six days in
21    February and one day in March.
22                   Popcorn slag:  Conferees, here is a
23    sample of popcorn slag.
24                   An investigation was conducted in
25    September 19&3* to determine the source of popcorn slag

-------
                                                      262
 1    which fouls the Calumet Park Beach on Lake Michigan at
 2    95th Street in Chicago.
 3                   Popcorn slag is a very light,  porous
 4    solid which is formed by rapid cooling of molten blast
 5    furnace slag by water jets.
 B                   Some escapes the recovery facilities and
 7    is then discharged in washing or cooling water to the
 8    adjacent water course.
 9                   The slag floats and is moved by winds
10    and current.  Thus, it frequently collects on bathing
n    beaches where the sulfide odor and gritty texture are
12    both annoying and uncomfortable to bathers.
13                   This problem is a more or less continuous
14    nuisance throughout the summer.
15                   Field investigations have indicated that
16    at least two plants discharge this waste and the
17    largest source of popcorn slag is the U.S. Steel Works,
18    South Works, in Chicago, and a lesser source is the
19    Wisconsin Steel Works in Chicago.
20                   I understand that our field people spent
21    a week out in the waters trying to find out where these
22    slag contributions were coming from.
23                   Now, I have some pictures of Lake
24    Michigan which I would like to show you.
2s                   Before that, I want to apologize and say

-------
                                                        263
     that  this map is right as far as Calumet Beach is con-
     cerned,  and also report that Acme Steel Company is no
     longer Acme Steel Company, that is the Interlake Iron
     Corporation, that it is still Acme Steel Company Plant
     and that describes it very well.
                    So if we will show a few slides, and
     then  I will summarize it up very quickly.
                    This is the Central District Filtration
     Plant in Chicago, Illinois, which you all recognize, I
10   am sure.
n                  Next slide, please?
12                  These are —
13        MR. POSTON:  Just a minute.
14                  I think it might be interesting to know
15   that  this is a $100 million investment in a water treat-
16   ment  plant for clean water for the people of Chicago.
17        MR. LE BOSQUET:  Yes, and I think you can also see
18        MR. POSTON:  Just recently, it's been put into
19   operation.
20        MR. LE BOSQUET:  This is the largest filter plant
21   in the world, I believe.  It is really tremendous.
22                  Next is the South District Filter Plant.
23   Notice there is a slight bit of wash water coming over
24   the left edge there, putting the mud back into the lake
25   that they took out of the lake.

-------
                                                        264

         CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Where do you want  them to  put it,


    in the tap water?


         MR. LE BOSQUET:  No, I am Just presenting the fact,


    Mr. Chairman.


 5       CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Right.


 6                                 (Laughter.)


 7       MR. LE BOSQUET:  Next slide, please?


 8                 This is the lakefront  in  Chicago  at Grant


 9  Park on the left and there is McCormick  Place somewhere


10  along in there.


u                 This shows the popular boating that we


12  have today.


13                 Next slide, please?



14


25  Chicago, Indiana.


16                 That is Inland Steel Corporation  in the


17  background.  The water intake for Inland Steel is right


18  in this area.


19                 Is that where it  is?


20                 Next slide, please?


21                  This is the East  Chicago  Beach, the


22  Universal Atlas Cement Company in the background.  It is


23   approximately the same location  as the previous  picture.


24                  Next slide, please?


                   This is Marquette Park Beach in Gary,
i
                    This is also a marina that is at East

-------
                                                       265
 i    Indiana.  Indiana Harbor is in the background.
 2                   See, this is west of all we have been
 3    talking about — east, rather, to the east.
 4                   Next slide, please?
 5                   This is the 12th Street Beach in Chicago.
 6    The foreground is the wife and small family of one of our
 7    technical staff.
 8         MR. POSTON:  Can we focus that in?
 9                                   (Laughter.)
10         MR. LE BOSQUET:  Focus that in a little more clearly.
il                   These have been pictures of water use.
12    Now, we go to the waste sources, and will you show the
13    next slide, please.
14                   This is the United States Steel Corporation
is    in Gary, east of the main outfall, and this is evidently
16    seepage of pickle liquor into Lake Michigan.
17                   Can you show him the automobile to get a
18    real idea of the scale.  That is a truck, okay.
19                   Next slide, please?
20                   This is the Indiana Harbor Light.  You
21    can see the discoloration of water as it comes out of
22    Indiana Harbor compared to what is on this side of the
23    light.
24                   There is continued filling across the bay
25    there by the Youngstown Sheet & Tube Company looking west,

-------
                                                        266



 i    therefore adding to these two peninsulas that enclose —



 2    gradually enclosing the Calumet area.



 3                   Next slide, please?



 4                   This is a panorama of Lake Michigan at



 5    Whiting and East Chicago, Indiana.



 6                   The American Oil Company waste treatment



 7    plant is shown in the foreground.  There is Just a trace



 8    of a slick coming out from it.



 9                   The effluent from the Union Carbide



 10    Chemicals Company enters Lake Michigan near the center of



 11    the bay and Indiana Harbor is in the background with



 12    Youngstown Sheet & Tube in the middle distance and Inland



 13    Steel in the far distance.



 14                   A continued filling operation can be



 15    observed.



 16                   The American Oil Company, I might explain,



 17    provides secondary treatment for its processed wastes.



 18                   Next slide, please?



 19                   This is a six-foot sewer.  It doesn't



 20    look very big, but that is a six-foot sewer from the



 21    Union Carbide Chemicals Company.  Fifty million gallons a



 22   day is the flow from this sewer.



 23                   Next slide, please?



 24                  This shows the two outfalls of American



P5    oil Company and a part of the sewage treatment pant — the

-------
                                                         26?
 l    waste treatment plant, excuse me.
 2                   The next slide, please?
 3                   This is the U.S. Steel Company, South
 4    Works, Chicago, Illinois, and that is a five-foot sewer.
 5                   The visible effluent is the residual of
 6    blast furnace flue dust being discharged into Lake
 7    Michigan.
 8                   I would say that the right end of the
 9    picture is approximately the state line, so that discharge
10    is very close at this point.
n                   Next slide, please?
12                   This is a higher view of the same situation.
13    There is a discoloration on the right, mostly blast furnace
14    dust.  There is a dredge.
15                   I would say that dredge is probably in
16    Indiana.
17                   The middle left is what appears to be an
18    oily waste discharge.  The Calumet River is there on the
19    extreme left.
20                   That completes the slides.
21                   In winding up this report, I have a couple
22    of pages of summary which you are welcome to read.  I have
23    a few comments at the end, however.
24                   The DHEVJ Report recognizes the numerous
25    water pollution control measures in operation in the

-------
                                                         268
     Calumet area.
                    Typical comments from the report are that
     nearly all municipal wastes receive secondary treatment,
     and I quote again "all of these plants —" this is
  5   within the Grand Calumet — "have invested in waste
  6   treatment facilities."
                    The Calumet area is the site of one of
  8

  9

 10

 11

 12

 13

 14

 15

 16

 17

 18

 19

 20

 21

 22

 23

 24

125
the greatest industrial complexes of the country.
               Water pollution control is likewise large
and complex.
               The residual waste after millions of
dollars have been spent for control measures still
constitutes a major problem.
               Now, as far as the Individual areas, in
the Burns Ditch area, there is no evidence of interstate
pollution.
               Burns Ditch has some effect on the
contribution of nutrients in the south end of Lake Michigan
and contributes local bacterial pollution.
               The effects of increased development in
this area bear careful watching.
               Wolf Lake receives the discharges of
industrial wastes from one company in Indiana resulting in
pollution of a portion of the lake and causing fish kills.
               Tainting of the flesh of game fish caught

-------
                                                        269
 1    in  the  lake has been reported.
 2                   Finally,  in the  Little and Grand Calumet
 3    Rivers,  sewage and industrial wastes discharged in Indiana
 4    cause pollution of these waters in Illinois.
 5                   Sewage and Industrial wastes discharged
 6    to  Lake Michigan and the Calumet River system,  especially
 7    as  discharged through the Indiana Harbor Canal  in Indiana,
 8    cause pollution of the waters of Lake Michigan  in Illinois
 9    and sewage and industrial wastes discharged to  the Calumet
10    River system and Lake Michigan  in Illinois cause pollution
11    of  Lake Michigan in Indiana.
12                   This pollution endangers the health or
13    welfare of persons in a state other than that in which
14    the discharges originate, and therefore is subject to
is    abatement under the provisions  of the Federal Water
16    Pollution Control Act.
17                   That completes my presentation,  Mr.
18    Chairman.
19        CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Thank you, Mr. LeBosquet.
20                   Just wait a moment to see if we  have any
21    comments or questions.
22                   Are there any comments or questions?
23        MR. KLASSEN:  Yes, I'd like to ask Mr. Le  Bosquet
24    a question.
25                   Your compilation of your various waste

-------
                                                      270



     loadings, of course, were all important.  There  is  one



     that  I would like a little more information  on.



                    I think you indicated  2,900 pounds of cyanide



     were  discharged into the lake every day and  we know that



     temperature and pH affects the oxidation  and the lethal dose



     is  .2 parts per million and you indicated the prevailing flow



     of  the lake currents.  (See self-correction on record, Page 364.)



                    The thing that concerned me about your



     statement is — I hope I am quoting you correctly  — that



10    probably this  cyanide is oxidized.



11                   I think that this  is too Important an Item



12    just  to sweep  under the rug by saying probably it  is



13    oxidized.



14                   Do we know it is oxidized  and to  what



15    extent does this cyanide loading  into the lake extend



16    until it reaches less than two-tenths parts  per  million?



17         CHAIRMAN  STEIN:  Mr. Le Bosquet,  if  you want to



18    call  on any of the staff on any of these  technical



19    questions, feel free to do so.



20         MR. LE BOSQUET:  Yes, well,  I get details,  but I



21    think in general it does oxidize  rather rapidly.



22                   I didn't point out that these were



23    measured at the outfall and maybe several days before



24    it  actually gets into the river so that you  have this



     period of time.

-------
                                                         271
 i                   As far as your experience is concerned,
 2    does  anybody have that?
 3                   This is Mr.  Eklund,  a staff member, whose
 4    wife  you saw in the picture.
 5                                  (Laughter.)
 6         MR. KLASSEN:  Who, incidentally, was not in the
 7    water.
 8                                  (Laughter.)
 9         MR. EKLUND:  I will try to answer the question.
10                   We sampled some selected outfalls where
11    we had  reason to think there might  be cyanide, and we
12    found that as far as — I know I can be corrected by other
13    people, but I think we never analyzed for cyanide in the
14    lake  or even in the rivers.
15                   We did not investigate this, so to answer
16    the question, we don't know the concentration of cyanide
n    in the  river or lake water.
18         MR. KLASSEN:  In other words,  the 2,900 pounds of
19    cyanide going into the lake every day, you don't knew
20    what  happens to it?
21         MR. EKLUND:  That's right.
22         MR. POOLE:  I want to clarify this a little bit.
23    I believe the answer has been at least twice.
24                   They don't know how much it is, but there
25    is 2,900 pounds that originate in the sewers that discharge

-------
                                                       272
 !    from various  portions  of  the  stream.
 2                   What  is it when it  gets to the lake and
 3    that is- undetermined,  apparently?
 4         MR.  LE BOSQUET:   That is right.
 5         CHAIRMAN STEIN:   The point is with all that being
 6    discharged, you don't  know what the effect is on the lake.
 7    You haven't analyzed that?
 8         MR.  EKLUND:   That is correct.
 9         CHAIRMAN STEIN:   Do  you  know  if anyone analyzed it?
10         MR.  LE BOSQUET:   We  do know that aquatic life
n    in that outlet channel is completely missing.
12         CHAIRMAN STEIN:   The outlet channel is before it
13    comes to the  lake?
14         MR.  LE BOSQUET:   That is right.
15                   There is probably a high degree of
16    toxlcity In the water  along the main Indiana Canal,  yes.
17         CHAIRMAN STEIN:   By  the  way,  I don't think this is
18    an easy question to get around.
19                   As I understood the thrust of Mr.
20    Klassen's question, it was:   If a  large amount of cyanide
2I    such as has been recorded here has been discharged in
22    reasonably close proximity to the  lake into a watercourse
23    that leads to the lake, don't you  think we should have a
24    pretty firm answer as  to  what happens to that stuff when
25    it gets into  the lake  without relying on conjecture?

-------
                                                       273
 l        MR. LE BOSQUET:  That would be highly desirable, yes.

 2        MR. POOLEr  Mr. Chairman?

 3        CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Mr. Poole.

 4        MR. POOLE:  I don't want to start introducing the

 5   Indiana report now, but — as thick as it is — but you

 6   won't hear all of it anyway, but here we have a sampling

 7   station at Dickey Road which is about as close as you

 8   can get to the lake by foot.

 9                  This is the Indiana Harbor ship canal.

10                  Now, the average cyanide in I960 was

11   six-hundredths of a part per million and these samples

12   are taken twice a month, and there was a maximum there

13   of five-tenths of a part per million.

14                  In  '6l, the average was one-tenth of a

15   part per million and from a minimum of zero to eight-

16   tenths of a part.

17                  '62, the average was eighteen-hundredths

18   of a part.  It ran from zero to 1.7 parts.

19                  '63* the average was two-tenths with a

20   minimum of zero and a maximum of 1.3.

21                   In  '64, the average was two-tenths with

22   a minimum of zero and a maximum of six-tenths.

23                  I wouldn't want to stake my complete

24   reputation on this assumption, but on the basis of those

25    figures, I personally am not much concerned about the

-------
                                                        274
     cyanide  content  at  the waterworks  Intakes,  and we have
     several  independent waterworks  Intakes  that are closer
     to  this  poin't.  that  I have  been  discussing than the Chicago
     intakes.
 5        CHAIRMAN  STEIN:  Are  there any  further questions?
 6        MR.  LE BOSQUET:  I  think a brief computation:
 7                 If you don't have any stabilization at
     all,  this 3,500  pounds in  2,000 cubic feet a second
     works out to be  perhaps  three-tenths of a part per million.
10        CHAIRMAN  STEIN:  Thank you.
11                 Colonel Chesrow.
12        MR.  CHESROW:   Do you  have  any reports on what
13   happens  after  it gets into the  lake? Is there any oxida-
14   tlon  there?
15        MR.  LE BOSQUET:  No,  sir.   We don't — it does
16   oxidize  in natural  streams, yes, sir.
17        MR.  CHESROW:   When  you say you  have a controlling
18   station  there, to what extent do you carry out your
19   control  or is  control carried out?
20        MR.  LE BOSQUET:  We have no controlling station
21   there.
22        MR.  CHESROW:   There is no  controlling station?
23        MR.  LE BOSQUET:  The  State of Indiana, you're
24   talking  about?
          MR.  CHESROW:   Yes,  the State  of Indiana said that

-------
                                                       275
     they had a controlling station there.
          MR. POOLE:  That is just a sampling station, a
     monitoring station,  to accumulate records on the quality
     of the ship canal at that point.
          MR. CHESROW:  Does the Federal study show what
     happens after it gets into the lake?
 7                  Is there oxidation or has no study been made?
 8        MR. EKLUND:  No Study.
 9                  I would like to add one other thing, Mr.
10   Poole?
11                  I believe that all the blast furnaces
12   from Youngstown Sheet and Tube Company, Inland Steel Company
13   are between Dickey Road and the lake, so you wouldn't
14   sample —
15        MR. POOLE:  That's right.
16        CHAIRMAN STEIN:  I don't know.  Let's check this
17   and I think this is a very clear point.
18                  If the cyanide question is & real question —
19   and I am certainly not disputing it, I wouldn't after all thes
20   years, nor am I disputing Mr. Poole's conclusions on this —
21   but if we say that "In I960, the Public Health Service started
22   a comprehensive water quality survey on the Great Lakes-
23   Illinois River Basin," -- and I am quoting I think from Mr.
24   Poston's remarks — this is the biggest and most thorough
25   investigation ever undertaken in water quality in the

-------
                                                       2?6
 l    country.
 2                   The greatest part of the activities of
 3    the Great Lakes-Illinois Basin project to this state
 4    have been in the Illinois River Basin and Lake
 5    Michigan.
 B                   The study started in 1960.  This is 1965.
 7                   Mr. Klassen asked a question on cyanide;
 8    Colonel Chesrow asked a question-on cyanides, and we'd
 9    be glad to say you don't know what happens to the cyanides
10    in the lake?
11         MR.  LE BOSQUET:   Well, I might explain.
12         MR.  CHESROW:   You sound like you are on our side.
13                                  (Laughter.)
14         CHAIRMAN STEIN:  I didn't   know that there were any
15    sides to  clean water, but if that is your side, I am
16    with you.
17         MR.  LE BOSQUET:   Well, in making these studies,
18    I might say in defense of my cohorts> if that is necessary,
19    I think they stand on their own; but normally, we look
20    for things when we have reason to believe there is a
21    problem,  and look for things when there is some evidence
22    and this, as Mr. Poole has indicated, we did not feel
23    was a major problem.
24         MR.  CHESROW:   There is a variance in the percentages
25    that were quoted.

-------
                                                        277
                    Don't you think this is a field that the
     Federal Government should step in or could step in to
     find out what happens to the cyanides?
          MR. LE BOSQUET:  I asked our research people if they
     were willing to come up and indicate — work on some
     probing problems that came up before this particular
     conference, and they said, "Well, that is one of the
     reasons we are here."
                    We will have a laboratory in Ann Arbor
10    before too long and this type of thing would be one of
11    their Jobs.
12         MR. CHESROW:  Thank you.
13         CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Do we know that happens to the
14    cyanides when there is an ice cover on that lake, Mr.
15    Le Bosquet?
16         MR. LE BOSQUET:  No studies were made of this.
17         CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Do you feel as optimistic about
18    the problem of cyanides with an ice cover as you were
19    without them?
20         MR. LE BOSQUET:  Well, what was the question?
21                   Well, in this case, the wind would not
22    blow it over to the Chicago intake quite so fast,
23    definitely.
24                                  (Laughter.)
25         CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Are there any further questions or

-------
                                                        2?8
     comments or any aspect of Mr.  Le Bosquet's presentation?
                    If not, thank you very much for a very

     comprehensive analysis of the situation and we will call

     on Mr. Poston again.
 5                  Mr. Poston.

 6        MR. POSTON:  I have asked Mr. W. Q. Kehr, Director

     of our Great Lakes-Illinois River Basin project to give

     a brief statement based on project studies as to the

     long range effect of continued waste discharges into

10   Lake Michigan.

                    Mr. Kehr.

12        MR. KEHR:  Mr. Poston, conferees, ladles and

13   gentlemen:

u                  In our studies of the Great Lakes, we

15   have considered the long range effect of waste discharges

16   into Lake Michigan.

17                  This problem we consider even more

18   serious than the pollution problem which exists today.

19                  Our projections indicate substantial

20   growth in the metropolitan area and as well a tremendous

21    expansion of industrial activities.

22                   The quantity of wastes now discharged
23    into the lake must inevitably Increase.

24                   The impact of these increasing waste loads
     could be very serious.

-------
                                                        279
                    There are three physical features of

     Lake Michigan which greatly interfere with the normal

     ability of the lake to assimilate wastes.

                    First, the normal flushing pattern which

     removes wastes and prevents unduly high concentrations

     in a stream and in most of the Great Lakes is so small

     in Lake Michigan as to be practically nonexistent.

                    This ability to carry wastes out of the

 9   lake, if reduced in proportion to size and described in

10   easily understood terms, could be likened to a ten gallon

li   barrel of water into which a bottle of ink has been

12   poured.

13                  The flushing action existing in Lake

14   Michigan with present Inflows would be comparable to the

15   problem of trying to dilute the ink In this ten gallons

IS   of water by adding one drop of water an hour.

17                  Second, there is a shallow ridge running

18   between Milwaukee and Waukegan which Interferes with the

19   deep water circulation in the lake.

20                  In effect, this divides the lake into a

21   northern and a southern basin, the southern basin being

22   that which is under consideration at this conference.

23                  The quantity of inflows from rainfall and

24   runoff is so small in comparison to the great size of the

25   southern basin that there is virtually no tendency for

-------
                                                     280
     gradual displacement of the water In a northward direction
     to push pollutants towards the Straits of Macklnac where
     they will be carried out of the  lake.
                    The effect of this silt is to restrict
     the mixing of the waters of the  southern and northern
     basin to wind-induced shallow currents which causes flow
     sometimes in a northerly direction and sometimes in a
 8   southerly direction.
 9                  We have found no  dominant tendency for
10   currents to continuously sweep waters of the southern
11   basin northwardly.
12                  The third of these physical features is
13   the lack of mixing in the lake.
14                  We have found that lake currents are made
15   up of large masses of water which can move for extended
16   periods of time without effective mixing.
17                  Thus, pollutants  discharged into such
18   a mass tend to remain concentrated and can move many
19   miles and for aa long as several days without being effec-
20   tively dispersed.
21                  Perhaps the most  serious problem facing
22   us is the possibility that the effects of the accumulations
23   of persistent materials may be irreversible in a lake as
24   large as Lake Michigan and into  which is consistently
25   being discharged natural pollution; that is, silts, nutrients

-------
                                                        281
 1   and chemicals  contained  in the  surface  runoff  from
 2   rainfall.
 3                   It  is  quite likely  that  once  concentrations
 4   have reached levels which  Interfere  with water uses,  it
 5   may not be  possible to reduce the  contaminants in waste
 6   discharges  to  the  level  that any significant improvement
 7   In the quality of  the lake waters  can be secured.
 8                   The limitations  created  by these physical
 9   characteristics of Lake  Michigan are such that we must
10   make variant efforts  to  reduce  it  to the lowest possible
11   level both  present and future waste  discharges Into the
12   lake.
13                   Failure to  do this  will  result  in gradual
14   impairment  of  the  water  quality to the  extent  that many
15   future water uses  will be  interfered with or seriously
16   curtailed.
17                   Thank  you.
18        CHAIRMAN  STEIN:  Thank you, Mr. Kehr.
19                   Are there any comments or questions?
20                   We  want to  thank you  very much, sir.
21                   Mr. Poston.
22        MR.  POSTON:   As  a result of this report,  Mr.
23   Le Bosquet  has made summaries and  conclusions, and I
24   would like  to  make a  statement  as  to the corrective
25   actions needed.

-------
                                                         282
                    We would  recommend that:
                    No. 1.  The Industrial plants in both
     Indiana and Illinois take immediate steps to improve
     practices for exclusion  or treatment of  wastes especially
     the following constituents;  oil and tarry substances;
     phenolic compounds or  other persistent organic chemicals
     that contribute to taste and odor problems; ammonia and
     other nitrogenous material;  phosphorus;   suspended matter,
     and highly acidic or alkaline materials.
 10                  No. 2.  Major industrial  plants institute
 11   permanent programs of  sampling their effluents to provide
 12   more complete information about waste outputs.  Location
 13   and frequency of sample  collections should be sufficient
 14   to yield statistically reliable values of waste output
 is   and its variations.
 16                  Analyses  should include the following:
 i?   pH, oil, tarry residues, phenolics, ammonia, organic
 18   nitrogen, total nitrogen, cyanide, toxic metals,
 19   phosphorus,  suspended solids and biochemical oxygen
 20   demand.
 21                  Wastewater flows should be measured and
 22   results should be reported in terms of both concentrations
 23   and tonnage rates.
 24                  Monthly reports of results should be
fts   submitted to the appropriate state water pollution control

-------
                                                         283

     agencies, where they will be available in open files.



                    Unusual increases in waste output and



     accidental spills should be reported immediately to the




 4   State agency.



 e                  Third, appropriate state or local
 o


     agencies establish a system of water quality monitoring



 7   stations at strategic points in the public waters of the




 8   area.



 9                  Analyses should include the indices



 1Q   recited above, plus dissolved oxygen, conform and fecal



     streptococcus counts and stream temperature.



                    At selected locations and for selected
 1 A


     indices, continuously recording monitors should be
 13


 14   maintained and daily transmitted to a central receiving



 ,c   office.
 13


 ..                  Effective loading procedures should be
 15


 17   instituted by state or other appropriate agencies, for



 18   quickly informing interested parties of sudden changes



 lg   or hazards to water quality.



2Q                  The Thomas J. O'Brien Locks should be



21    closed and placed in conventional lockage operation to



22   provide more positive control of flows and reduce the



23    frequency and duration of backflows to Lake Michigan.



24                   No. 5* a dam be built across the Grand



25    Calumet River to prevent uncontrolled flows from Lake

-------
                                                    284
Michigan to the Illinois River through that channel.
               Preferred location of the dam Is east of
the outfall from the East Chicago Municipal Waste Treatment
Plant.
               At this time, I'd like to add something
that I didn't have in the Blue Book but which I would
like the conferees to consider during their deliberations
here and that would be the placing of a dam or lock
control works at the headwaters of Indiana Harbor.
               The purpose of this would be to prevent
the flow of waste to Lake Michigan.
               This could permit, then, the flow to be
down to the Grand Calumet River and then to the Cal-Sag
Channel.
               I think that treatment of the waste would
certainly be required in either case, but that this would
prevent and could prevent the long term despoiling of our
lake and the potential damages to all of our water uses
here.
               As a sixth recommendation, all municipal
wastes in the area receive secondary treatment.
               The trend toward consolidation of small
community facilities into integrated sewer systems should be
accelerated to achieve better operating conditions and
reduce the proliferation of sewage treatment plants

-------
                                                      285
 !    discharging into small tributaries and dry watercourses.
 2                   Hammond and East Chicago investigate the
 3    feasibility of constructing lagoons for the further
 4    treatment of waste effluents.
 5                   Part of the existing poorly-drained
 6    flood plain of the Grand Calumet River might be utilised
 7    for this purpose, with levees around the lagoon high
 8    enough to prevent flooding, and improved bypass channels
 9    for storm drainage.
10                   All sanitary wastes be disinfected before
n    discharge.  Disinfection should be practiced in the
12    manner prescribed by State Water Pollution Control
13    Agencies and mutually agreed upon between the two
14    states.
15                   This Is the summary of our recommendations
16    as a result of our studies and in our report today, and
17    this concludes our presentation.
18         CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Are there any comments or questions
19    from the conferees?
20                   If not, I don't know if you are going to
21    cover this, Mr. Poston, but perhaps the Corps of Engineers
22    and I am not sure that I understand your recommendation
23    No. 4, the Thomas J. O'Brien Lock be closed and placed
24    in conventional lockage operation.
25                   Why isn't it closed now?

-------
                                                        286



 1                   Would you rather have the Corps answer



 2    that when they come up?



 3         MR. POSTON:  I think we might point this out now.



 4                   The Blue Island Locks which are in use at



 5    this time, and control the flow of water down the Cal-Sag,



 B    this water coming from Lake Michigan or from the Grand



 7    Calumet River are small and the larger locks than the



 8    O'Brien Locks have been constructed.



 g                   If the O'Brien locks are closed, or



10    open at this time, and if they were closed, it would



11    permit flow to come through Indiana Harbor down to



12    the Grand Calumet and then uncontrolled flow down past



13    the Blue Island Locks.



14                   The Blue Island locks are to be removed



15    so that the O'Brien — and then, the O'Brien Locks can



16    be used for control purposes.



17                   With the addition of the dam about —



18    present talk is about a dam at Columbia Avenue which is



19    about the divide there.



20                   I would propose that consideration be



21    given to placing this lock out at the mouth of Indiana



22    Harbor so that all of the wastes could go down Instead



23    of going out In our Lake Michigan.



24         MR. CHESROW: Mr. Chairman?



'25         CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Colonel Chesrow.

-------
                                                        28?




          MR. CHESROW:  I believe Colonel Mattlna of the Corps



     of Array Engineers does have a lengthy statement on the



     operation of the locks.



                    Now, I'd like to correct one statement.



     "They are closed to navigation, but have been operational



     for water control."



 7                  We have called upon them a number of times



 8   this past year for water control.



 9                  Prom they are "closed" for navigational pur-



10   poses — to they are "open" for navigational purposes.



n        CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Do you want to comment or not?



12        MR. POSTON:  Well, all I have to say is that we



13   had flown over the locks at — the O'Brien Locks, and I



14   am sure that Colonel Mattina could answer this question



15   as to what amount of time —



16        COL. MATTINA:  Let me pick it up in ray statement.



17        MR. POSTON:  Okay.



18        MR. BACON:  He will pick it up.



19        MR. POSTON:  He will pick it up.



20        CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Are there any other comments or



21   questions?



22        MR. CHESROW:  I don't think we want to go into



23   the actual spotting of the dam at this time.



24        CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Well, at least, from my point of



25   view, the placement of a dam in any particular place,

-------
                                                    288
whether It was here or anywhere else is a very delicate
matter that needs very mature consideration.
               However, I think the technique we use
at the conference is to let the participants, whoever
they may be, make their Judgment on what is relevant
and the conferees will give it such weight as they deem
appropriate.
     MR. CHESROW:  Again, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
     CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Does that conclude the H.E.W.
presentation, Mr. Poston?
     MR. POSTON:  That concludes our presentation.
     CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Do you have any other Federal
agencies?
     MR. POSTON:  In line with the regulation —
     CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Just one moment.
               Do you have any more discussion on that?
     MR. CHESROW:  No, not on that.
     CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Good.
     MR. POSTON:  In line with conference procedures,
we have asked other Federal agencies having interest in
water pollution control to make such statements as they
desire that may have a bearing on this.
               The Army Corps of Engineers, Colonel
John C. Mattina, District Engineer for the U.S. Army
District here in Chicago, has indicated that he will make

-------
                                                        289
     a  statement.
                    Colonel  Mattina.
 2
          COL.  MATTINA:   Mr.  Chairman,  honorable conferees,
 3
     ladles  and gentlemen, I am Colonel John C.  Mattina,
     District  Engineer of the Chicago District,  Corps  of
 O
 .    Engineers for civil  works responsibility.
 6
                    The area which we are discussing today,
     the  southern  part of Lake Michigan,  is part of our
 8
     responsibility.
                    This  is the reason I am representing
     the  Corps of  Engineers.
                    I appreciate this opportunity to discuss
     with you  the  responsibility of the Corps of Engineers on
13
     matters affecting water pollution  in the Greater  Chicago
14
     area.  I  propose to  develop the relationship of our
15
._    activities to the problem of water pollution in two
IB
     general areas, regulatory and operational.
                    In the regulatory area, I will enumerate,
18
     describe  and  explain the laws and  the administration
jy
     thereof for the protection of navigable waters; in the
2u
21    operational area, I  will discuss aspects thereof  that
22    affect  or may affect the problem of pollution.
                    The Corps of Engineers is responsible for
23
     the  administration of laws for the protection of
25    navigable waters and for the construction,  maintenance

-------
                                                        290



 i    and  operation of  Improvements  authorized by Congress



 2    for  navigation and flood control,  including multiple  uses



 a    embracing power,  water supply,  and low river flow



 4    augmentation.



 s                   The principal laws  having a relationship



 6    to water  pollution in which the Corps is involved are



 7    the  River and Harbor Act approved  3 March 1899,  and to



 8    a lesser  extent the River and  Harbor Act approved 3



 9    March 1905.   Section 10 of the 1899 Act provides for



10    the  regulation of construction, excavation and filling



11    In navigable  waters,  and Section 13 of the same Act makes



12    mnlawfwl the deposit of "refuse matter of any kind or



13    description whatever other than that flowing from streets



14    and  sewers and passing therefrom in a liquid state ..."



15    in navigable  waters or their tributaries.



16                   Section 4 of the 1905 Act charges the



17    Secretary of  the  Army with regulation of dumping of



18    "dredgings, earth,  garbage and refuse materials of every



19    kind ..." when  necessary in  the  interest of navigation.



20                   The Oil Pollution Act of 1924 is not



21    applicable to waters in the Great  Lakes area, since It



22    concerns  only waters in which  "the tide ebbs and flows."



23    However,  oil  discharged from vessels has been held to be



24    refuse matter and,  therefore,  its  discharge into



•25    navigable waters  of the United States is a violation  of

-------
                                                        291
     Section 13 of the 1899 Act that I mentioned previously.
                    In brief therefore, Section 10 of the
     River and Harbor Act of 3 March 1899 is the law by means
     of which construction and dredging in waters of the
     United States are controlled to prevent interference with
     the navigable capacity thereof.
                    Section 13 of this same Act is the law
     available to the Corps of Engineers to control oil
     pollution and Illegal deposits, again in navigable waters
10   or their tributaries, insofar as these acts affect
11   navigation.
12                  The Corps of Engineers'  activities in
13   connection with the administration of the laws enacted
14   by Congress for the preservation and protection of the
15   navigable waters of the United States cover the
16   establishment of navigation and bridge regulations,
17   harbor lines, anchorage areas, danger zones, seaplane
18   restricted areas, dumping grounds and fish stake limits;
19   the issuance of permits and approval of bridge plans;
20   and the investigation of obstructions,  wrecks, oil
21   pollution and Illegal deposits.
22                  Since the primary purpose of these statutes
23   is to protect navigation from obstruction and injury, en-
24   forcement has been concentrated on prevention of illegal
25   deposits, including oil, that will impede or adversely

-------
                                                 292
affect navigation.
               The most serious problem in oil pollution
enforcement rests in the difficulty of securing the
necessary evidence to warrant prosecution.  The large
expanses of open water, the isolation of vessels navi-
gating thereon, and the devious and hidden methods of
discharging oil make it frequently impossible to
ascertain the vessels and persons responsible.  Inspections
of probable sources of pollution from industrial
establishments are made frequently, particularly in areas
where violations are common, with a view to keeping the
navigable waterways free from oil pollution and obstruc-
tive and injurious deposits.
               A major source of oil pollution, not
curable under existing laws administered by the Corps
of Engineers, is the untreated effluent from municipal
and industrial sewers.  The extent of municipal sewer
systems and of the connections thereto render identifica-
tion of the oil sources a practical impossibility.
               The only case in the Chicago District
involving illegal deposits which was prosecuted through
the courts is that involving the depositing of flue dust
and other industrial solids in the Calumet River, Illinois,
by three major steel companies.  This case resulted in
a successful conclusion.

-------
                                                       293
                    The three  steel companies  in  1951,and
    I would  like  to underscore the date  1951*  since  it became
    a long,  hard  trek, and  prior years dredged their  waste
    materials  deposited  in the Calumet River  upon  demand by
    the Corps  of  Engineers.
                    However, in 1953, they  refused  to remove
    additional deposits  which had formed in the  river channel
    when requested  by the  Corps of Engineers. After pro-
    longed attempts at negotiation and continued refusal by
10   the steel  companies, suit was initiated by the Government
    in the U.S. District Court in 195^ to  compel the steel
12   companies  to  remove  the Illegal deposits  under Sections
13   13 and 10  of  the  River and Harbor Act  of  3 March 1899
14   that I have explained  previously.  The District  Court on
    24 June  1957  rendered  a decree favorable  to  the
16   Government.
17                   The steel  companies appealed  the  U.S.
18   District Court's  decision to the U.S.  Court  of Appeals
19   for the  Seventh Circuit on 7 November  1957.  The
20   Court on 22 January  1959  rendered a  decision in  favor
21   of the steel  companies dealing only  with  the
22   applicability of  the 3 March 1899 Act  to  the case and
23   reversed the  decree  of the District  Court.
24                   In other words, at that time, we  found
25   ourselves  with  no law  that we could  apply.

-------
                                                        294
 j                   The  U.S.  Department  of Justice petitioned
 2    the  U.S.  Supreme  Court  in April  1959 for a writ of
 3    certiorari.   The  case was argued In January I960,  and
 4    on 16 May I960 the  Court rendered a decision reversing
 5    the  U.S.  Court of Appeals on the question of law;  that
 6    is,  upholding the applicability  of  the law, and remanded
 7    the  case  to  it for  proceedings and  sufficiency of
 8    evidence  in  conformity  with the  opinion.
 g                   In other words, they were told to go
10    ahead and try the case,  that the law was applicable.
jj                   Defendants petitioned the U.S. Supreme
12    Court for a  rehearing which was  denied on 6 December
.„    I960.
Jo
14                   After oral arguments in the Court of
15    Appeals a decision  was  rendered  affirming the decree as to
j6    the  prohibitory injunctions but  reversing It as to man-
17    datory injunctions  and  remanding the case to the
18    District  Court for  a new trial on 17 February 1961.
19                   In other words, we were told that the
20    law  was applicable,  but we could not, until we proved
21    our  case, force the steel companies to do any dredging.
22                   Negotiations between the defendants and
23    the  District Engineer were undertaken in 1962 and  1963.
24                   A  tentative agreement was reached by
WL    which the three steel companies  would pay $620,000 to the

-------
                                                     295
     United States for removal of existing deposits of flue
     dust and industrial solids and an annual amount of
     $25,000 for removal of future deposits.  The agreement
     was approved by the Department of Justice and the
     Secretary of the Army, and a final decree terminating
     the litigation was issued by the District Court on 2
     August 1963.
                    Permits were issued by the Department of
     the Army to the steel companies on 1 August 19^3* per-
10   mitting discharge and deposition of flue dust and
11   Industrial solids in the Calumet River and requiring
12   payment of an annual amount of $25*000 for its removal.
13   This payment is to be reduced as the companies decrease
14   their deposition of solids into navigable waters.
15                  The above case is cited to point out the
16   extended period of litigation involved, almost nine
17   years, and the difficulty in interpreting the existing
18   law.  Now, we'd like to point out that other steel
19   companies in Cook County, Illinois, and Lake County,
20   Indiana, the area in which we are concerned here are
21   continuing to cooperate with the Corps of Engineers by
22   the removal of their deposits from the Federal channels
23   involved.
24                  In its administration of Section 10 of
25   the River and Harbor Act of 3 March 1899, covering

-------
                                                 296
issuance of permits and this is important because most
people have contact with us in the Corps on this problem
of permits.  These permits are for construction of
wharves, piers, dolphins, booms, weirs, breakwaters,
bulkheads, Jetties, or other structures in navigable
waters of the United States, the whole consideration of the
Corps of Engineers is whether the proposed structures
themselves constitute an unreasonable obstruction to
navigation.
               However, coordination is effected with
fish and wildlife agencies whenever, upon consideration
of the work proposed under a permit application, it is
indicated that the work might have a detrimental effect on
fish and wildlife.
               Permits involving the construction of
outfall sewers from industrial establishments are
thoroughly investigated.  In cases where it is determined
there may be a deposit of solids in navigable waters
that may cause an obstruction to navigation, a special
condition is now included in the permit making the
applicant responsible for removal of the shoal material
upon request of the Corps of Engineers.
               So much now for regulatory function.
I would like to turn now to the operation problems.
               With respect to current operations of the

-------
                                                        297
 i   Corps of Engineers  in this area,  I  shall discust  i,.-»~  two
 2   structures  contained in the Calumet-Sag Project referred
 3   to in the Department of Public Health's February  1965
 4   report as well  as our dredging activities.
 5                   Congress, in the River  and Harbor  Act  of
 6   19^6, authorized the Calumet-Sag  navigation  project.   As
 7   part of this  project there were included a lock and
 8   controlling works on the Calumet  River and a lock and
 9   controlling works on the Grand Calumet River.
10                   The  design purposes  of  these  locks and
n   controlling works were threefold:   maintenance of a
12   lower water surface elevation landward thereof, thereby
13   minimizing  bridge alterations; in other words, we want
14   to maintain a 25-foot vertical clearance between  the
15   water surface and the bridges now being built on  the
16   Cal-Sag; control of diversion from  Lake Michigan; and
17   reduction of  pollution into Lake  Michigan.
18                   At present, diversion of flow from Lake
19   Michigan through the Calumet, Little Calumet and  Grand
20   Calumet Rivers  is controlled  by the non-Federal Blue
21   Island lock at  the  easterly end of  the Calumet-Sag
22   Channel.  This  lock is owned  and  operated by the
23   Metropolitan  Sanitary District of Greater Chicago. Since
24   the Blue Island lock is only  50 feet wide, it does not
25   permit navigation to take advantage of the widened

-------
                                                        298



     channels in the Calumet-Sag project.



                    The Gal-Sag channels are being widened



     to 225 feet.  The current width of the channel is only



     60 feet.



                    The Blue Island lock is one of the two



     50-foot restrictions.   As the result,  with the continued



     existence of the 50-foot lock there,  the new chemical



     and oil barges that are built to 50 foot and 52 foot



     width specifications cannot be used to go through the



 10   Cal-Sag project.



 n                  It is for that reason now, and this is



 12   a navigation reason, that we are concerned with the



 13   early removal of the Blue Island lock.



 14                  Now, provision of the locks and



 15   controlling works on the Calumet and Grand Calumet Rivers



 16   would permit the removal of the obstructive Blue Island



 17   lock and would permit the achievement of the aforemen-



 18   tioned design purposes.



 19                  To date, the lock and controlling works



 20   on the Calumet River have been completed and are known



 21   as the Thomas J. O'Brien Lock and Controlling Works.



 22                  Normally, simply, the Thomas J. O'Brien



 23   Lock, because of lack of local interest in the project



 24   at this time, it appears unlikely that the Grand Calumet



•25   River improvements which is considered as Part 2 of the

-------
                                                        299



     Cal-Sag project including the proposed locks and



     controlling works will be provided in the near future.



                    Thus,  some substitute control in the



     Grand Calumet River is needed to permit completion of



     the first part of the Calumet-Sag navigation project, and



     when the Federal Government is expending almost $85



     million for the improvement of the Cal^Sag Channel,



     naturally, we would like to see some results from the



     money being expended as soon as possible.



10                  Now, such control that I have referred



n   to would take the form of a simple barrier dam which



12   would restrain flow from Lake Michigan into the westerly



13   portion of the Grand Calumet River.



14                  The location of the barrier dam has been



15   the subject of recent discussions with numerous agencies.



16   These agencies include the U.S. Public Health Service,



17   our host today, the Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board,



18   the Indiana Flood Control and Water Resources Commission,



19   the Illinois Division of Waterways, the Illinois



20   Sanitary Water Board, the Metropolitan Sanitary District



21   of Greater Chicago, the City of Chicago and the City of



22   Hammond.



23                  Several alternative sites are being



24   considered for the location of the barrier dam.  The



25   selection of the site will ultimately be based upon

-------
                                                         300
  1   these factors.
  2                  One, the needs of navigation which,  of
  3   course,  is to provide a barrier dam.
  4                  Two, the effect upon other water  uses
  5   and  there are several; the desires of  local interests
  6   and  the  availability of right of way for the  facility.
  7                  It  is expected that the barrier dam
  8   can  be completed in fiscal year 1966;  that is, the
  9   Federal  fiscal year beginning 1 July 1965 and ending
 10   30 June  1966, probably the latter portion of  the fiscal
 n   year.
 12                  This v/ill  permit removal of the Blue
 13   Island lock  and the operation of the Thomas J. O'Brien
 14   lock and controlling works for navigation purposes.
 15                  Now, by mutual agreement, the  O'Brien
 16   lock and controlling works and the barrier dam,  will be
 17   operated, insofar  as flows from and to Lake Michigan are
 18   concerned, that is, for non-navigation purposes, in
 19   accordance with the request  of the Metropolitan  Sanitary
 20   District of  Greater Chicago  and under  the general
 21   supervision  of the Chicago District Engineer.
 22                  The barrier dam across  the Grand  Calumet,
23   as now envisioned, will consist of a single row  of steel
     sheet piling with  a spillway section.   The top of the dam
25   will be  seven feet above  the Chicago City datum. It will

-------
                                                        301
 1   not  be  an enormous  structure,  I  assure you.
 2                   The  spillway section will be  a steel panel
 3   three feet high and 18,5 feet  long,  constructed so that it
 4   can  be  raised or lowered by a  manually operated screw type
 5   life mechanism.
 6                   During dry weather periods,  the spillway
 7   section will be kept closed.   During periods of heavy
 8   runoff,  in the Grand Calumet River,  the spillway section
 9   will be opened at the request  of the City of Hammond and
10   coordinated with the Metropolitan Sanitary District of
n   Greater Chicago in  order to permit a temporary flow
12   toward  Lake Michigan through the Indiana Harbor Canal.
13                   Now, let us turn  our attention to the
14   Thomas  J. O'Brien lock.  This  lock is not now fully
15   manned  for lockage  of navigation, and it is intended to
16   continue this status until the removal of the Blue
17   Island  lock.
18                   However, sufficient crew has been assigned
19   to this location to manipulate the various appurtenances
20   as required to control river flows.
2i                   Since 17 January  19^5* at tlie request of
22   the Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago,
23   the lock gates and  sluice gates  in the control works were
24   closed  on 12 occasions  for various periods of time in
25   order to stop the lakeward flow  of the Calumet River througH

-------
                                                   302




the lock in order to reduce pollution of Lake Michigan



at Calumet Harbor.



               These closures were occasioned by southerly



winds which lowered the water surface at the southern end



of Lake Michigan, inducing the Calumet River to flow



lakeward.



               It is understood that the Metropolitan



Sanitary District of Greater Chicago plans to request



the closing of the gates and valves of this lock whenever



warranted in order to prevent insofar as possible,



further pollution of Lake Michigan.



               In summary, therefore, insofar as the



Thomas J. O'Brien lock is concerned, although we are



not manned to operate it for navigation purposes, there



is no need to so man that particular lock as long as



the Blue Island lock is there; however, we have sufficient



crew that we can close it or open it at the request of



the Metropolitan Sanitary District to control flow of



water toward Lake Michigan.



               Now, the Corps of Engineers in this



area also has another major civil works responsibility;



and that is for dredging, and of course, if the waters



are polluted, so too are the materials being dredged from



the rivers and the harbors.



               Our dredging contracts in the Chicago,

-------
                                                        303





 i   Illinois  and Indiana Harbor area;  and that is,  the area



 2   that we are concerned with today,  requiring disposal of



 3   the excavated material in deep water in Lake Michigan



 4   specifies that the  material be transported and  deposited



 5   in the authorized dumping ground approved by the



 6   Secretary of War in 1924.



 7                   This dumping ground complies with the



 8   following laws:  The Act of Congress, approved  23 June



 9   1910, which makes it unlawful to dump or deposit refuse



10   matter of any kind  or description whatever, other than



n   that flowing from streets and sewers and passing there-



12   from in a liquid state,  in Lake Michigan at any point



13   opposite  or in front of Cook County, Illinois,  or Lake



u   County, Indiana, within eight miles from the shore of



is   said lake,  unless said material is placed Inside of and



16   is retained by a breakwater; certain regulations for



17   the control of navigation in Chicago Harbor, and I am



18   referring to the Harbor where navigation — where Navy



19   Pier is located.



20                   I will repeat again:  Certain regulations



21   for the control of  navigation in Chicago Harbor,



22   particularly Section 38-8, Befouling Public Waters, of



23   the Municipal Code  of Chicago, which prohibits  the



24   deposit of materials in Lake Michigan within ten miles



25   of the corporate limits,  the corporate limits are three

-------
                                                   304





miles from the shoreline.



               Therefore, our dredged materials have



to be transported at least 13 miles from the shore



and this law, too, prohibits the towing of loaded



dump scows, that is, within the harbor unless a



City of Chicago inspector is on board at the time of



towing.



               These laws we comply with and enforce



both in our contract work and such dredging as may be



accomplished with Corps of Engineers'  plant.



               This is what makes dredging operations



in the Greater Chicago area much more expensive than



other parts of the country, but we comply with them as



a necessity for the health of our community.



               The foregoing presents broadly Corps of



Engineers activities in this immediate area, particularly



those which are considered to have a relationship to



water pollution.                                      •



               The importance of preserving and improving



the quality of our water resources is, we all agree,



unquestioned.



               Within the framework of the laws and



regulations governing our activities,  we shall continue



to take such actions which are feasible and possible to



improve or protect water quality.

-------
  1
                                                        305
                    We stand ready to cooperate wholeheartedly
 2   with other Federal, state and local agencies dealing
 3   with this problem.
 4                  Thank you very much.
 5        CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Thank you, Colonel Mattina.
 6                  Are there any comments or
 7   questions?
 o        MR. POSTON:  I noted at the top of page ten that
 o
 9   the gates were closed on the O'Brien locks  on  12 different
10   occasions since mid-January which  is about  a month and
n   a half.
12                  This means that had the gate not been
13   closed, then, 12 times during the  month-and-a-half period
14   there would have been flow backwards to the lake?
15        COL. MATTINA:  Very definitely.
16        MR. POSTON:  This would carry back from the
17   Calumet Sewage Plant effluent back to the lake, then,
18   possibly?
ig        COL. MATTINA:  That is true.
20         MR. POSTON:  Thank you.
21         MR. POOLE:  Could I assume, Colonel, that during
22    those 12 times there was flow between the O'Brien  locks  and
23    the lake backward to the lake?
24         COL. MATTINA:  There would have been.
25         MR. POOLE:  Well, anything that came in —•

-------
                              306




     COL. MATTINA:  You mean from the O'Brien lock In



the Calumet River itself?



     MR. POOLE:  Yes, back to the lake.



     COL. MATTINA:  Yes, there was.



     MR. POOLE:  Thank you.



     CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Panel?



     MR. CHESROW:  Colonel Mattina, I'd like you to



comment on Mr. Poston's suggestion and recommendation



with reference to the dam to be built.



     COL. MATTINA:  Oh, is this the control —



     MR. CHESROW:  Yes.



     COL. MATTINA:  — the control dam?



               There has been no decision reached.



There are several locations:  One, of course, is the



Public Health location now which will include the



effluent from East Chicago as well as Hammond.



               There is another one that will Include



only Hammond and another one that will exclude both



East Chicago and Hammond and be built -- oh, somewhere



on the divide there.



               No decision has been reached on that,



Colonel Chesrow.



     MR. CHESROW:  Yes.  Now, one other question with



reference to the dam at Indiana Harbor that was injected



in this afternoon.

-------
                                                        307



 l         COL.  MATTINA:   I know there was some thinking in



 2    that respect.



 3                   Since it is our responsibility for



 4    navigation,  this would not be a navigation lock at all.



 5    I mean,  actually, it would have to be approved for other



 6    than navigational purposes.



 7                   If I have any feeling of navigation



 8    Interest,  of course, they would resist having a lock and



 9    control  works there at the head of navigation at Indiana



10    Harbor because of the normal interference that there



n   would be.



12                   But it is not impossible.  This is



13    something that, perhaps, should be given study from a



14    public health point of view.  However, I think the



15    important thing is to get everybody to clean up that



16    pollution as fast as they can, rather than to try to see



17    if we can stop it,  or at least open that bulkhead in



18    the form of a lock and control works which won't be



lg    completely safe.



2Q         MR. CHESROW:  Thank you.



2i         CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Any more questions?



22                   Thank you, Mr. Boston, do you have any



23    other presentations?



24         MR. POSTON:  The U.S. Department of Commerce has



25    asked to be heard today and Mr. K. L. Kollar will make a

-------
                                                        308
     statement for the  Department  of  Commerce.
                    Mr. Kollar.
          MR.  KOLLAR:   Mr.  Chairman,  conferees,  ladles and
     gentlemen,  I am K. L.  Kollar,  Director of  the Water
     Industries  and Engineering  Services  Division, Business
     and  Defense Services Administration,  Department of
     Commerce.
 8                  Off the record, that  is quite a mouthful
 9   and  I have  cut it  down some.
10                  The Department of Commerce  has spearheaded
11   a nationwide drive to  modernize  U.S.  industry over the
12   past two  years. Briefly, the purpose of this drive is
13   to Improve  our competitive  position  in the emerging one-
u   world market,  and  to increase our rate of  economic growth.
is                  It  is not necessary to present Department
16   of Commerce statistics which  Indicate that our economy
17   is strong.   Nor Is it  necessary  to show that we cannot
18   stand still.  We must  continue to increase productivity,
19  tower costs,  decrease unemployment, and increase consumer
20   buying if we wish  to compete  profitably in today's and
21   tomorrow's  market  and  leave the  same legacy of opportunity
22   for  our children and grandchildren.   Part  of the answer
23   rests in  modernization.
24                  Certainly this Administration has provided
     incentives  and laid the groundwork for greatly increased.

-------
                                                        309
     economic activity with the $11.5 billion tax cut, the
     liberalized depreciation regulations, and the investment
     tax credits.  These measures have been instrumental in
     pumping more cash into corporate coffers for expansion
     and modernization.
                    The Government can only set the stage
     while business initiative, ingenuity, and enterprise,
 8   powerfully stimulated by the profit motive, are always
     the factors most responsible for our economic growth.
 10
 11
 12
 13
 14
 15
 16
 17
 18
 19
20
21
22
23
24
25
               Modernization generally brings to mind
plant production equipment and the associated economic
benefits in addition to finance and research development.
One of the most important benefits could be the effect
on water.
               The Department of Commerce would like to
emphasize to this Conference that great water pollution
benefits can accrue from modernization.  Modernization
could decrease water use by conservation, recirculatlon,
reuse, multiple use, and stepped-up use, while water
pollution could be decreased by reclaiming wastes and
preventing leakage and spills.
               Pollution need not always be controlled
by treatment.  It could involve diligent process control,
employee education, and recovery systems which in a
way are part of modernization.  Companies spend money to

-------
                                                        310
 i    study and  survey  efficiency of  organization,  operation
 2    and  production.   Considerable savings  can be  effected
 3    from surveys  of in-plant water  use and sources of
 4    pollution  for the purpose  of minimizing both.  Time does
 5    not  permit recounting cases where companies acting on
 6    their own  initiative  and with an eye to the future,
 7    have developed programs which will create very few
 8    problems to the enforcement of  water pollution control
 9    laws.
10                  This short  presentation so far has
n    emphasized the industrial  aspects of water pollution
12    because the Department of  Commerce has the responsibility
13    of assisting  and  advising  businessmen  and acting as
14    liaison between business and Government.
15                  Industry has already invested  hundreds
16    of millions of dollars on  control and  abatement facilities,
17    These investments support  the objective of President
18    Johnson's  message to  Congress on the national beauty of
19    our  county in which he charged  municipalities as well as
20    industry,  and I quote:
21                  "To organize for action and rebuild and
22         reclaim  the  beauty we Inherited."
23                  It is  therefore  encumbent on all local
24    governments and industries to continue working hand in
PS    hand to solve pollution problems where they exist.

-------
                                                        311
 i




 2




 3




 4




 5




 6




 7




 8




 9




10




11




12




13




14




15




16




17





18




19




20




21




22





23




24




25
     CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Thank you, Mr. Kollar.



               Are there any comments or questions?



               If not, thank you very much for your
statement.
               Mr. Poston,
     MR. POSTON:  The Department of Interior has asked



to be heard, but Mr. H. C. Jordahl, Jr., who was to make



this statement requested that his presentation be made



first thing Wednesday morning, tomorrow morning, March



3rd.  Would that be satisfactory?



     CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Without objection, we will try to




do that.



     MR. POSTON:  This is the end of the Federal



presentation.



     CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Thank you, Mr. Poston.



               Are there any comments or questions on



the whole presentation now?



               If not, I'd like to indicate a few things



               One, if anyone else has a presentation



and has slides, please see the projectionist so he can



make arrangements to make you slides.



               Secondly, I would like to indicate some



of the ground rules here.  Under the Federal law, the



Federal Government and the states are the conferees.



The invitees here within the jurisdiction of the Federal

-------
                                                        312
     Government to invite are the ones you see at the table,

     and the ones who have been called up, plus the Department

 3   of Interior tomorrow.

 4                  We are one Government, and we invite other

     people if the need is established.

                    Other than that,  we have asked that the state

     agencies concerned with pollution from industry in Illinois.

     They in turn, are authorized to have anyone else participate

     if they wish.

10                  Now — and this is Just to clear this

     up so you will understand the extent of our Jurisdiction

12   here, and the balance that the Congress decided to have

13   in the Federal-state relationship.

14                  At this stage of the proceedings, our

IS   relationship is with the states and the states have the

16   right to Invite anyone within their states to participate.

17                  Our schedule at the present time will very

18   shortly call for a ten-minute recess.

19                  We will reconvene and go to about five

20   o'clock.

21                  There are some agendas in the back of

22   the room to give you an idea of who may be coming up.

23   You have to understand that the agendas are Just for

24   the guide of the conferees.  The agendas are for our

25

-------
                                                        313




 1    assistance and from time to time, adjustments are made



 2    in the agendas to fit the schedule of the people who



 3    come here to make statements.



 4                   At this time, we will stand adjourned



 5    or recess for ten minutes and reconvene after that until



 6    about five.



 7                                  (Whereupon, a recess was had.)



 8         CHAIRMAN STEIN:  May we reconvene?



 9                   Mr. Klassen.



10         MR. KLASSEN:  There has been a number of



il    references to the multipurpose use of the water in the



12    south end of Lake Michigan and the tributary waters.  One



13    of those uses that is of extreme importance, of course,



14    is recreation.



15                   Prom the State of Illinois standpoint,



16    any questions of legal, political, financial differences,



17    all must be secondary to the one overriding objective and



18    that is to clean up the lake and the streams so that they



19    will be ftce from pollution and will be suitable for



20    the various multipurpose uses.



21                   It has been said that nobody likes to talk



22    about sewage, much less their own; but, however, this is



23    a factual conference.



24                   It is necessary, sometimes, that we talk



25    about the pollution that originates in our own area.  This

-------
                                                   314
will be done.
               We want to start off this afternoon,
however, with some facts on one of the extremely
important uses of water in Lake Michigan, particularly,
and this is recreation.
               The Chicago Park District has been long
noted for its operation of a number of very excellent
beaches.  Chicago always has been proud of the fact that
its beaches have been used and have been suitable for use.
               The effect of pollution on the quality
of the water to Chicago's southside beaches, particularly,
comes into sharp focus in this conference, and the first
presentation for Illinois will be in that vein.
               It will be given both by Dr. Gerald P.
Atlas, Director of Medical Services, and Glenn W.
Metcalfe, Supervisor of Sanitation.
               Dr. Atlas.
     DR. ATLAS:  Mr. Chairman, honorable conferees,
ladles and gentlemen, I am Dr. Gerald Atlas, and In my
official capacity, I serve as the Director of Medical
Services for the Chicago Park District.
               The Chicago Park District Beach sampling
program started in 19^9 as a result of the recommendation
of the tri-state survey committee on bathing water
quality in the Great Lakes conducted by the United States

-------
                                                         315
  i    Public  Health Service.
  2                   There  were 17 original beach sampling
      points  in this program  and this  number has varied through
      the years to Its  present schedule.
                     The rate of sampling was determined by
  6    economics and also varied as the need arose.
  7                   At present, we have  32 beach sampling
  8    points.
  9                   The people of the City of Chicago take
 10    great pride in its lakefront water  facilities,  and the
 n    Chicago Park District is charged with the responsibility
 12    of insuring the safety  of these  facilities under its
 13    Jurisdiction.
 14                   Chicago  is one of the few cities on
 15    the Great Lakes that  has relatively uncontaminated water
 16    for  recreational use.  It is our  goal to continue to
 17    provide the use of this natural  recreational facility
 18    to the  people of  Chicago and if  this goal is to be
 19    achieved, it is necessary to remove the source  of
20    contamination from the  southernmost portion of  our lakefront.
21                   Now, if  I may,  I  would like to introduce
22    Glenn Metcalfe, our Supervisor of Sanitation, who will
23    demonstrate to you in graphic form  the results  of a
24    ten-year compilation  of sampling data.
25                   Mr. Metcalfe.                               i

-------
                                                        316



          MR. METCALFE:   Samples collected or analyzed for



     coliform organisms,  fecal streptococcus organisms and



     total bacteria present according to the procedures and



     recommendations and  standard methods for the examination



     of water, the American Public Health Association, the



     ten year sampling period from 1955 to 1964 was used to



     Illustrate graphically these sampling results for



     coliform organisms.



 9                  The coliform most probable number was



10   determined by using  533 dilutions of ten mlllillters,



     one milliliter, a tenth milliliter, a hundredth milliliter,



12   a thousandth milliliter, portions of a hundredth



13   milliliter sample, and for those of you who have



14   copies of our report,  we can go into it and start with



15   graph No. 1.



ie                  Graph No. 1 illustrates on semi-logarithmic



17   graph paper the averages at 29 beach sampling points and



18   you can see from Juneway Terrace on this to Rainbow



19   Beach, south sampling point, we have a fairly average



20   trend.



21                  When  we go to Calumet Beach, the trend



22   starts to rise, and  to illustrate this further, graph



23   No. 2, the same coliform averages on standard graph



24   paper, using 1,000 coliform MPN index to the Inch.



                    So we can go to graph No. 2 and you see

-------
                                                        317






 i    what happens when you use it on standard graph paper.



 2                   Hammond Beach --



 3         CHAIRMAN STEIN:   Mr. Metcalfe?



 4         MR.  METCALPE:  Sir?



 5         CHAIRMAN STEIN:   This is very dramatic and I



 6    appreciate the point, but I'd like to come to an accommo-



 7    datlon with you on your reproduction of this in the re-



 8    cord.



 9                                  (Laughter.)



10         MR.  METCALPE:  You don't know the problem that was



11    involved.



12         CHAIRMAN STEIN:   I can very well know the problem



13    Involved.  I am intimately concerned with it.  However,



14    you have  to recognize that while your problem is really



15    Involved, we have a joint committee on printing, and we



16    also have a bureaucratic organization of over 80,000



17    people, and this is the hardest thing to get set up.



18                                  (Laughter.)



19                   We are going to have to either reduce



20    your charts or make adjustments and have a rather severe



21    limitation on the kind of folding charts we will have in



22    the printed record.  If that meets with your approval —



23         MR.  METCALFE:  Well, what you will have to do then



24    is revert to such as graph No. 1, using the semi-aogarithmlc



25    graph.

-------
                                                        318



 l         CHAIRMAN STEIN:   Yes.   Thank you.



 2         MR.  METCALPE:   Again —



 3         MR.  KLASSEN:   Mr. Metcalfe,  if you would speak in



 4    more legal terms,  my attorney friend here — you have



 5    got to overlook this.  This is a lawyer's interpretation



 6    of a graph.



 7                                  (Laughter.)



 8         MR.  METCALPE:   So then, we go to graph No. 3 and



 9    we start  at the 49th Street Beach sampling point.



10                   As  you can see, 49th Street Beach sampling



11    is fairly good.  It is one of the finest beaches that we



12    have in the City of Chicago.  It is stable for this



13    period of ten years.



14                   Then,  we go to graph No. 4 which is



15    57th Street Beach,  going a little further south.



ig                   As  you can see, we start showing a little



17    trend.



18                   Then,  we go to graph No. 5 at Jackson



19    Park Beach sampling point,  and the trend,you can see,



20    is starting to go  upward.



21                   Now, we have graph No. 6 which is Rainbow



22    Beach, north sampling point, and at Rainbow Beach, north



23    sampling  point, as you notice, we had what is considered



24    a slug of contamination twice in the year of 1961.



 5                   On  June 30th, the sampling shows what the

-------
  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
                                                   319



graph looks like with the dotted lines, and with the



August 4th sampling, it shows you what it looks like with



dotted lines, and eliminating these two samples, it



shows you that there is a steady average there going



upward.



               The same with Rainbow Beach south



sampling point, only I included these two samples of



June 30th and August 14th in this, and showing the



dotted lines as being eliminated, but as you notice at



Rainbow Beach south sampling point, the trend.



               Then, we get into the graph No. 8, and



starting with graph No. 8, we can go back to using semi-



logarithmic and standard paper using the 1,000 conform



average to the inch.



               Mr. Stein will probably say we have a



problem there, too.



               So in the period of 1955 to 1964 on



graph No. 8, semi-logarithmic paper, but then on graph



No. 8, it goes to the standard paper, and it shows how



the trend is rising.




               In the year 1959 we had an average of



over 12,000 coliform for the summer and on 9-8 that



breaks down all the samples collected during the summer



of 1959* and it shows you that in this graph, the



samples are up and down.

-------
                                                        320






 l                   The contamination is there,  but it is not



 2    general,  and you can see that.



 3                   Then, we go to the Calumet Beach north



 4    sampling  point.  This,  the same thing occurs,  on graph



 5    No.  10 which shows on semi-logarithmic paper which



 6    converts  to graph No. 11 on standard graph paper that



 7    we have a summer of 1958 and 1959 that the coliform



 8    MPN was high.



 9                   And on 11-A, 11-B, and 11-C, we break



10    down 1958*  1959 and 19&3,  and it shows again that the



11    contamination is not general.



12                   Then, graph No.  12 is on semi-logarithmic



13    paper showing the Calumet Beach south sampling point



14    which when you go to graph No.  13 on standard graph



is    paper shows the flexibility and variability of your



16    coliform  index.



17                   For the year 1959* and on 13-A, B and C,



18    is the breakdown of these individual years of high



19    coliform  density in 1957,  '58 and '59.



20                   Again, a sampling shows it goes up and



21    it comes  down.



22                   Then, we also sampled Hammond Beach which



23    is graph  No. 14,  which is on your semi-logarithmic paper.



 4                                  (Laughter.)



25                   Then, we converted to the standard graph

-------
                                                        321






 i    that extends out 88 inches long.



 2                                  (Laughter.)




 3                   It is rather dramatic, isn't it?



 4                   Then, we have the last sampling point



 5    which is Whiting Beach and Whiting Beach on graph No. 16,



 B    using semi-logarithmic paper shows you the variability



 7    there, too, which, converted to standard graph paper isn't



 8    quite as bad as Hammond Beach, but you can see that this



 9    extends 53 inches.



10                   So I don't know how they will be able to



n    get this into booklet form, but if they have to, they



12    can use the semi-logarithmic graph for that purpose.



13         CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Let me go off the record here.



14                                  (Discussion omitted from



15                                  the record.)



16                   All right, on the record again.



17         MR. METCALPE:  That is the presentation of the



18    Park District for this committee.



19         CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Okay.  Thank you, Mr. Metcalfe.



20                   Are there any questions or comments?



21         MR. POOLE:  There are.



22         CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Mr. Poole:



23         MR. POOLE:  You went through these graphs and I



24    went through them very hurriedly.  You studied them in



25    advance and we Just got them, but my inspection indicates

-------
                                                         322





     that in about 1959*  it was your high year as far as all



     these southernmost beaches were concerned,  and I am



     looking now at the Calumet Beach  south and the curve



     goes down materially after 1959.



  5                 Have  you  got  any explanation for that?



  6       MR. METCALPE:   No,  we don't  have any explanation



     except that I hope the thing is improving.



          MR. POOLE:  Well, the point  I  want to make was the



  9  graphs certainly do  not  indicate  that since 1906 it had



 10  been deteriorating,  do they?



 11                  If you look at your  graph —



 12       MR. METCALFE:   I know what you mean, Ed.



 13       MR. POOLE:  It  looked to me, as I said, I went



 14   through them very hurriedly, but  it did look like '58



 15   and  '59 were your high years and  admittedly they are



 16   still high.



 17        MR. METCALPE:   That's right, that's right, admittedly



 18   they are still high.



 19        MR. POOLE:  But all of  the later graphs do indicate



 20   a trend that it has  dropped  down.   I don't know that it



 21   is still going down, but it  may have leveled off a little



 22   bit, anyway.



 23        MR. METCALPE:   We will  find  out a little more about



124   it this summer.



 25        MR. POOLE:  It  will be  interesting to see what your

-------
                                                        323

 i    '65 results are.
 2         MR. METCALFE:  See, I am not looking for dirty
 3    water.  I am looking for clean water, and any Improvement
 4    makes us happy.
 5         MR. KLASSEN:  Mr. Metcalfe, was there any correla-
 &    tlon that you found between wind direction and your
 7    results, and also between bathing load and your results?
 8                   Were these taken into consideration?
 9         MR. METCALFE:  Bathing load apparently does not
10    have too much effect on the coliform, but your wind
n    directions do, and your turbulence of the lake does.
12                   Rough days,you will get 50 percent of
13    your 110,000 coliform count and it seems like 50 per-
u    cent of the time the wind is from the south.  So that is
15    the way it roughly breaks down.
16         MR. KLASSEN:  Also, I think this is probably a
17    followup to Mr. Poole's question.
18                   How would you summarize the trend or
19    isn't there any conclusive trend that you see?  Are
20    things getting better and if so how much better and how
21    fast?
22         MR. METCALFE:  Well, 1964 was a fairly good year
23    for the bacterial samplings, and this I attribute to
24    being a fairly cool summer.  The entire month of August
25    was a cool month.

-------
                                                   324






     MR. KLASSEN:  This Is not in the form of a



question, but Just a comment.



               It looks like with all of the technical



experts that are here and particularly the laboratory



people, you probably can come up with a new bathing



beach index, something that you have been looking for



and this is inches of paper per graph.



     MR. METCALPE:  Inches of coliform.



                              (Laughter.)



     MR. POOLE:  I have one more question, Mr. Chairman.



     CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Mr. Poole, yes.



     MR. POOLE:  Have you any correlation between the



incidence of disease or difficulties with the bathers in



the southerly beaches compared to the beaches on the



north side of Chicago?



     MR. METCALPE:  No, we have no correlation of that.



     MR. POOLE:  In other words, it is the same story



we found back when the '48 survey was started?



     MR. METCALPE:  Was started, yes, when that was



taking place.



     MR. POSTON:  At what level of coliform would you



close the beach or would you close the beach?



     MR. METCALPE:  Dr. Atlas.



     MR. POOLE:  This I have been looking at for years.



     DR. ATLAS:  I can see that there is no specific level

-------
                                                        325



     at which we would close a beach unless there was a



     general and consistent contamination as revealed by



     successive samples.



                    As you can see by these graphs, there is



     an Intermittency of contamination that we find on the



     beaches.  We have gone into conference many times.



     In fact, Calumet-Outer has been closed for a number of



     years.



 9                  The decision to open It is based upon the



10   consistency of sampling.  One day, as you can see by the



     graph,  we will get high counts.  The next day, it will



     show a falling index and it will fall even further and



13   then go up the day after.



14                  You must realize that this is sampling



15   that is done according to the standard methods, and when



16   we get a negative sample, we achieve the results much



17   faster than if we get a positive sample.



18                  Many times, after the confirmation of a



lg   sample, and we have resampled it, it will prove negative,



20   bacterialogically and by that time the horse is already



21   out of the barn.



22                  As a result, we can only base the decision



23   upon persistent contamination.  Other than that, I don't



24   think there is any rule of thumb that one might follow.



25        MR. KLASSEN:  Do you make any analyses except

-------
                                                   326




coliform, Dr. Atlas?



     DR. ATLAS:  Yes, we try to get the strep, et cetera.



               These graphs are very dramatically involved



as to the southern end of our beaches.



               The northern portion, we feel, is good



water and healthy water.



               The southern portion causes us inter-



mittent concern and concern on the very questions that



were asked here, when do we close, when do we open.



               And we have Just gone by the rule of



consistency and general contamination.



     MR. POSTON:  Have you ever considered a practice



of treatment such as chlorlnation of the water in the



lake to reduce this number?



     DR. ATLAS:  We have considered it, however, our



engineers have advised us that it is not a practical or



economical method of achieving this goal.



     CHAIRMAN STEIN:  Are there any further comments or



questions?



               If not, we have carefully reviewed the



list of the people who may have wished to speak today.



               We have also taken an Informal poll of



the conferees up here and we sense that we are pretty



close to the saturation point, and I think we get this



from the audience, too.

-------
                                                          327






                    With that, we will  stand, I think, recessed




    until 9:30 tomorrow morning.



3 u                                 (Whereupon, the Conference in



4 u                                 above-entitled matter was

  II

5 u                                 continued until March 3*



6 "                                 1965, at  9:30 o'clock a.m.)




7



8



9



10



11



12



13



14



15



16



17



18



19



20



21



22



23  u
   !,                   ''Chicago^' 60604-3507


24



25

-------