PROCEEDINGS
VOLUME 1
OHIO
Younfstown
Conference
In the matter of Pollution of
the Interstate Waters of the
Mahoning River-and its Tributaries
February 16-17, 1965
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
-------
UNITED STATES PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE
DIVISION OF WATER SUPPLY AND POLLUTION CONTROL
i
__________________*
In re:
ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE ON THE
MAHONING RIVER \
Voyager Motor Inn
129 Market Street
Youngstown, Ohio
Tuesday, February 16,1965,
The above-entitled matter, pursuant to notice,
at 9:35 a. m«
MURRAY STEIN, Chairman.
CONFEREES:
Leonard Weakley - Ohio River Valley Sanitation
Commission
Edward Cleary - Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation
Commission
Dr. Charles Wilbar - Ohio Water Pollution Control
Board
Dr. E. W. Arnold - Ohio Sanitary Water Board
H. W. Poston - United States Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare
-------
INDEX
STATEMENT BY; Page
Dr. E. W. Arnold 10
George Eagle 27
Mayor Raymond F. Schryver 112
Mayor Anthony B. Flask ' 122
J. P. Richley 127
Bruce Graybill 141
Kenneth Lloyd 146
R. F. Doolittle 163
Barton A. Holl 218
Dr. C. L. Wilbar 233
-------
PROCEEDINGS
CHAIRMAN STEIN: The conference is open.
This conference, in the matter of pollution of
the interstate waters of the Mahonins River and its tribu-
taries involving the States of Ohio and Pennsylvania, the
Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission and Department
of Health, Education and Welfare, is being held under the
provisions of Section 8 of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act. This conference covers the Mahoning River
and its tributaries from Warren through Youngstown, Ohio,
across the Ohio-Pennsylvania state line to its mouth; the
Shenango River from Jamestown, Pennsylvania, to its con-
fluence with the Mahoning to form the Beaver River; and the
Beaver from this confluence to Beaver Palls, Pennsylvania.
Under the provisions of the Act, the Secretary
of Health, Education^ and Welfare is required to call a
conference of this type, when on the basis of reports, sur-
veys o? studies he has reason to believe that pollution
of interstate waters subject to abatement under the Federal
Act is occurring.
Tbo purpose of the conference is to bring to-
gether the state and interstate water pollution control
agencies, representatives of the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare, and other interested parties to review
the existing situation, to appraise the progress which has
-------
been made, to lay basis for future action, and to give the
states, localities, and industries an opportunity to take
any remedial action which-may be indicated under state and
local law.
The conference technique is rather an old one.
It is used informally by many state agencies in the normal
conduct of their business in the field of water pollution
control. The concept of the conference was proposed by
the United States Supreme Court as long ago as 1921 in
the famous case of New York against New Jersey involving
interstate pollution.
I would like to quote from this court opinion;
"We cannot withhold the suggestion, inspired by
the consideration of this case, that the grave problem of
sewage disposal by the large and growing population living
on the shores of New York Bay is one more likely to be
wisely solved by cooperative study and by conference and
mutual concession on the part of representatives of the
states so vitally interested in it than by proceedings in
any court however constituted."
We strongly support the conference technique
and consider as successes those problems which are solved
at the conference table rather than in court.
As specified in Section 8 of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act, the Secretary of Health, Education,
-------
and Welfare has notified the official state and interstate
water pollution control agencies of this conference. These
agencies are the Ohio Water Pollution Control Board, the
Pennsylvania Sanitary Water Board, and the Ohio River Valley
Water Sanitation Commission.
Ohio will be represented by Dr. Arnold, the health
officer; Pennsylvania will be represented by Dr. wilbar, the
health officer of Pennsylvania; and ORSANCO will be represen-
ted by Mr. Leonard Weakley and Mr. Edward deary. Mr, Poston,
on my right, of the Chicago Regional Office of the Department
of Health, Education, and Welfare, has been designated as
conferee for the Federal Government.
My name is Murray Stein. I am from Washington,
D.C., headquarters of the Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare, and I am a representative of Secretary Celebreeze,
The representatives of the official agencies are
privileged to invite whomever they wish to participate in
the conference. However, this a conference of the repre-
sentatives of the state and interstate agencies and repre-
sentatives of the Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare, and these parties constitute the conferees.
Both the' state and Federal Government has respon-
sibilities in dealing with interstate water pollution con-
trol problems. The Federal Water Pollution Control Act
states that the states have primary rights and responsibili-
ties for taking action to abate and control interstate
-------
pollution. 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 by law with
its own specific responsibilities in connection with inter-
state pollution control problems.
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act provides
that pollution of interstate waters, whether the matter
causing or contributing to such pollution is discharged
directly into such waters or reaches such waters after
discharge into a tributary of such waters, which endangers
the health or welfare of persons in a state other than that
in which the discharges originate, is subject to abatement.
The conference will be useful, we hope, in providing a
clear picture of the problems, in delineating the progress
which has already been accomplished, and in indicating
what still needs to be done to correct the problem in
these interstate waters.
All of the conferees will be called on to make
statements. At the conclusion of such statements, the
conferees will be given an opportunity to comment or ask
questions. In the past, this procedure has 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 and, if it warrants, at the end we will
attempt to describe what basis of agreement we, the con-
ferees, have arrived at.
Under Federal Law, the Secretary is required
at the conclusion of the conference to prepare a summary
of it which will be sent to all the conferees. The
summary, according to law, must include the following
points:
1. Occurrence of pollution of interstate
waters subject to abatement under the Federal Act.
2. Adequacy of measures taken toward abate-
ment of pollution; and
3. Nature of delays, if any, being encountered
in abating the pollution.
I would suggest that the conference presenta-
tions and discussions be directed toward these points so
that the Secretary may, in discharging his statutory
obligations, prepare the most useful summary possible.
Subsequent to the holding of the conference,
the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare is required
to make recommendations for remedial action if such recom-
mendations are indicated.
Now, a word about the procedure governing the
conduct of the conference, A record and verbatim transcript
-------
8
will be made of the conference by Mr. Fowler. Mr Fowler
is making this transcript for the purpose of aiding us in
preparing a summary and also for providing the complete
record of what is said here. We will make copies of the
summary and transcript available to the official state
water pollution control agencies of Ohio and Pennsylvania
and the interstate commission. We have found that generally,
for the purpose of maintaining relationships within a region
or a state, that the people who wish transcripts should
request them through their state or interstate agency rather
than come directly to the Federal Government. The reason for
this is that we would prefer people who are interested in
the problem to follow their normal relations in dealing with
the state or interstate agencies rather than the Federal
Government in these matters when the conference has been
concluded. We will be happy to make this material available
to the agencies for this distribution.
I would suggest that all speakers and partici-
pants making statements, other than the conferees, come to
the lectern and identify themselves for purposes of the
record.
I would also like to request that if you have a
prepared statement, that this be given to the reporter because,
9
while I never met the gentleman before in my experience here,
I know what a chore it is taking this down all" day and it will
-------
facilitate matters for him if he can follow some of the
statements in printed or typed form rather than have to
take down every word verbatim.
At this time, I wonder if Mr. Sam Gould is here
who, I understand, has a statement for Congressman Michael
Kirwan. Mr. Gould.
A VOICE: I am sorry to report Mr. Gould is on
his way and will be here in just a minute.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: I would suggest, in
order to expedite things, we go ahead. Generally speaking,
the protocol at the conference is to call on Congressional
representatives first or government and, as I understand,
Congressman Kirwan is the one who asked to speak, when
Mr. Gould gets here, we will put him on.
Now, the conferees had a preliminary meeting in
which the agenda was determined to the mutual satisfaction
of all the conferees and, at that time, it was decided
that we would call on Ohio first, Pennsylvania second,
QRSANCO third, and the Federal Government last to make the
presentations.
At this point, I would like to call on Dr. Arnold
of Ohio. Dr. Arnold.
DR. ARNOLD? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Fellow conferees, associates, friends: Ohio comes to this
conference with the sincere hope that our discussions will
-------
10
result in better understanding, improved cooperation, and
truly responsible partnership in programs of water control.
We admit to both puzzlement and concern about the
calling of this conference by officials of the Federal
Government, and we feel that in all honesty we should
explain our feelings on these matters. However, we do not
intend to belabor these points.
Having accepted participation in this conference,
it is our desire to throw as much light as possible on
the problems of pollution in the Mahoning River and on the
accomplishments toward abating that pollution. We believe
these accomplishments have been significant and that they
are deserving of praise rather than criticism.
With a presentation of factual information by
our own staff in the Ohio Department of Health, by municipal
officials and by industrial representatives we expect to
demonstrate the following facts:
1. That tremendous strides have been made
in pollution abatement on the Mahoning River in Ohio.
2. That a continuing program for further stream
improvement is under way.
3. That today's Mahoning River is nothing like
the Mahoning of a few years ago, which was admittedly at
that time one of the worst polluted streams in the nation.
4. That Ohio has a high goal in water pollution
-------
11
control and is working effectively toward this goal.
5. That Ohio has been cooperating with neighboring
states in its stream clean-up program, and that Ohio's program
has had the approval of these neighboring states.
Now, getting back to the subject of our concern
and puzzlement at the calling of this conference we bring
attention to the fact that Ohio is a member of an eight-
state compact, formed nearly 16 years ago, for interstate
cooperation in cleaning up the waters of the Ohio River
and its tributaries. This regional organization, the Ohio
River Valley Water Sanitation Commission better known as
ORSANCO has achieved worldwide recognition for its
accomplishments. It has given to this country and to other
countries an ideal for a major watershed approach to pollution
abatement. The State of Ohio, having the largest population
and greatest area in this watershed, is a major partner in
the compact. The award-winning accomplishments of ORSANCO
could hardly have been achieved without the cooperation of
Ohio. The Mahoning River is a tributary of the Ohio River
and is a part of this watershed program. The improvement
schedule on the Mahoning River has had the approval of
ORSANCO.
Next, we would call attention to the fact that the
Federal Government is represented on ORSANCO with three Com-
missioners, the same number as each of the states. We also
-------
12
point to the Federal Water pollution Control Act which makes
the express declaration that interstate action to abate
pollution shall be encouraged and "shall not be displaced
by Federal action."
These facts being true, we cannot understand why
the Federal Government did not make use of its membership in
ORSANCO to seek any information which it may hope to get at
this conference today. All such information would have been
easily available through ORSANCO.
We cannot understand why ORSANCO was not even con-
sulted before the calling of this conference. We cannot
understand why Ohio was not consulted. Ohio Department of
Health Engineers and United States Public Health Engineers
have been exchanging information freely for years. What is
more significant, Federal engineers and Ohio engineers
worked together in a specific survey of the Manoning River
in the early 1950*s. It was on the basis of this survey
that immediate goals were set for pollution abatement.
The accomplishments of the program as measured
in actual water Duality tests certainly have been no secret.
One of the most critical sampling points on the Mahoning,
just before the stream crosses the state line into Pennsyl-
vania, has a robot monitor which was installed cooperatively
by the Ohio Department of Health and the United States
Geological Survey. The maintenance and reading of this device
-------
13
is under Federal surveillance.
It must be apparent that the Federal Government
has been well informed about the Mahoning River. It has had
continual access to reports on the Mahoning River cleanup.
Now we are suddenly brought into a conference on
pollution of the Mahoning River by Federal action which
implies by the nature of the. call that health and welfare
may be endangered and that some sort of emergency exists.
If an emergency existed, it was 10 years ago,
and the Federal Government is considerably late. If an
emergency existed, the Federal Government has been negligent
in not making use of the for-um available to it through
ORSANCO, our interstate compact, of which it is a member.
If an emergency existed, the Federal Government had the same
rapid channels of communication with the Ohio Department of
Health that are used in connection with communicable disease
problems at all times. We have nothing but the friendliest
relations between our Department and the United States
Public Health Service.
In this case, however, what the Federal Government
seems to have chosen, instead of reasonable approaches and
contacts, is a cumbersome devise of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act by which at this late date the Federal
Water Pollution Enforcement unit, no longer a part of the
U.S. Public Health Service, may make itself a party to
-------
14
somebody else's accomplishments.
Let us talk now about these accomplishments. We
shall summarize them briefly in this opening statement, which
will be followed with more detailed reports by our state
engineers, by municipal officials, and industrial repre-
sentatives.
The Mahoning River is a relatively small stream
but mighty in its capacity to provide for the development
of a major industrial complex. That the stream once was
used to the point of abuse cannot be denied. Representatives
of the Ohio Department of Health described this stream as
one of the worst in the State, if not one of the worst in
the Nation, more than 10 years ago.
After joining ORSANCO in 1948, Ohio adopted a
completely new and strongly effective Water Pollution Control
Law in 1951. This law sets a high standard for pollution
abatement. Accomplishments under this law have been con-
siderable throughout the state briefly summarized in the
figure of nearly a billion dollars worth of waste treatment
facilities constructed in the last 12 years much more
than in all the previous history of the state.
This law provides for an administrative and
enforcement Water Pollution Control Board which functions
jn the Department of Health. This Board has the authority
to set reasonable and practicable time schedules for
-------
15
accomplishing the goals of the law, arid is charged with
considering the total effects of its orders as they relate
to benefits that may be derived. The Bo'ard considers
\
physical, economic, social and political situations along
i
with the technical and engineering problems.
It is recognized that the Mahoning River is
essential to the economy of the area. Water usage in the
area sometimes has reached 14 times the normal dry weather
flow of the river, without a useful Mahoning River, the
industries would wither and the communities become ghost
towns.
It is also recognized that a river has many uses
and that all.of these uses mustr be protected and preserved.
Under its new Water Pollution Control Law, Ohio made an
extensive survey of the Mahoning River in 1952, 1953 and
1954, taking into consideration all uses and also all
abuses that would interfere with these uses. Engineers
of the United States Public Health Service participated in
this study. A report was published, setting forth guidelines
for the pollution abatement program which has been carried
out during the last 10 years.
The 'following primary needs and uses were set
forth;
Above-Milton Dam -- domestic water supply,
agricultural and industrial purposes and recreation.
-------
16
From Milton Dam to the corporate limits of the
City of Warren -- agricultural and industrial purposes
and recreation.
From the upstream corporate limits of Warren to
the Pennsylvania-Ohio state line -- industrial purposes.
All tributaries to the Mahoning River domestic
water supply, agricultural and industrial purposes and
recreation.
At the Ohio-Pennsylvania state line -- water
of such quality as not to be harmful or inimical to domestic
water supply uses in Pennsylvania.
The policy of Ohio's Water Pollution Control
Board is to require continuing progress on a schedule
considered as reasonable. Several factors determine the '
reasonableness and order of priority of requirements for
a given municipality or industry -- importance and degree
of interference with water usage; magnitude of the project;
technical knowledge of means for handling the project;
economic feasibility; concurrent development of programs
by area municipalities and industries.
Since waste treatment for most municipalities on
the Mahoning was non-existent arid since waste treatment by
industry was minimal in 1951, the recommendations for improve-
ment- encompassed a very great program which has taxed the
economy of the area and the ingenuity of municipal officials
-------
17
and industrial executives in"devising means of accomplishment,
The course of action has not been entirely smooth. It
involved some enforcement proceedings by the Water Pollution
Control Board of Ohio. It was delayed by some local taxpayer
suits. It was even marked by a criminal investigation .and
imprisonment for one group of municipal officials who became
involved in an unfortunate misuse of local anti-pollution
funds. Despite these handicaps, the progress is such that
the entire area can take pride.
We are now at a stage where the municipal sewage
treatment program outlined 10 years ago is virtually accom-
plished 10 percent complete when the new Youngstown
sewage treatment plant reaches full operation.
While some phases of the industrial program are
not completed, a large portion of them have been accomplished,
Emphasis has been given to elimination of those increments
of waste which have the most deleterious effects on water
quality requirements. These priority requirements have
been met and will be detailed in the technical report of
our engineers.
The industrial waste treatment goals not yet
achieved have been placed on a definite time schedule with
completion dates in the near future -- none more than two
years away.
The State of Ohio now expects to make periodic
-------
18
re-evaluations of reasonable water uses and water quality
requirements, in cooperation with the State of Pennsylvania
and the Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission,
ORSANCO. The schedules of those discharging wastes --
municipalities, industries and other entities -- will be
revised as needs indicate.
Ohio requires monitoring of pertinent stream
quality data under its permit program for those discharging
wastes into waters of the state. This is supplemented
by a state-sponsored monitoring program conducted by water
treatment plant operators. In addition, ORSANCO has a
monitoring program on the Beaver River (into which the
Mahoning flows in Pennsylvania). And Ohio has a U.S.
Geological Survey automatic monitoring station on the
Mahoning River at Lowellville near the Ohio-Pennsylvania
state line. Data from all these points show progress in
water quality improvement.
The points I have made'here are going to be
detailed by our engineers and by representatives of munici-
palities and industries who have been invited by us to be
participants in this conference.
We in Ohio are proud of the accomplishments by
the municipalities and industries of the Mahoning River
Valley in combating water pollution. We frankly resent the
affront to them which we believe has been implied by the
-------
19
calling of this conference.
Pollution control is being accomplished on this
river in a reasonable and practical program which is little
short of amazing when its pace is balanced against the size
of the problem 10 years ago.
It is our feeling that the people of the Mahoning
Valley should be praised rather than criticized.
We think the Mahoning Valley water pollution
control program might truly serve as a model for other parts
of the country with seriously polluted rivers. Perhaps the
Federal Government's water pollution enforcement unit will
be wise enough to recognize this. The Federal unit would
then have gained a valuable lesson from this conference.
It would have a practical guide for a pollution abatement
program that works. It could take this guide to some of
those areas of the country where no programs for pollution
abatement exist at all".
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you, Dr. Arnold.
... Applause ...
CHAIRMAN STEIN: I think we may withhold
comment if we might since Mr. Gould is here, until Mr. Gould
speaks. Mr. Gould, would you want to speak for Congressman
Michael Kirwan?
MR. GOULD: Mr. Chairman, members
-------
20
of the conference, ladies and gentlemen: My name is Sam
Gould, Jr., I am the County Engineer and also the County
Sanitary Engineer, and I have the unique distinction of
reading a statement prepared by our Congressman, Michael J.
Kirwan.
Gentlemen, I speak to you today as the member
of Congress who has represented most of the district through
which the Mahoning River flows and I represented it for
almost 30 years. As such I believe I am as knowledgeable
as any person with respect to the Mahoning River and the
other sources of water supply, for whatever purpose they
may be used, in this district. Nor do I think I am being
immodest if I say that I have worked long and hard over
the years, and that we have accomplished a great deal, on
this matter of water sources and their conservation.
Permit me to make this observation, based on my
own, long experience: what has been done with and to water
in the Mahoning Valley is truly an outstanding example of
what can be done when local people work with local -- and
I include state in that term authorities on their problem.
You have already heard, or will hear, others even
more experienced than I in the nuts and bolts work being
done on the Mahoning recite in great detail just what it is
that has been accomplished toward the solution of the problems
of the Mahoning, whether these problems are real or imagined.
-------
21
These men know whereof they speak. They are experts from
industry and from the state authorities. If you get the
impression that they are telling you that, working together,
they have an adequate program for solving the problems of
the Mahoning, and that, working together, they have accom-
plished a great deal in this direction, then I say to you
now, I endorse their conclusions, for they are based on
fact.
Now, I have heard the expression used hereabouts
that the condition of the Mahoning must be that it will
sustain life. Well, sustain whose life? People? Fish?
If one means sustain the life of people, that is just what
the Mahoning is doing now. It is now and always has been
and, I trust, always will be, an industrial stream. Certainly,
without it, there would be no economic life in the Mahoning
Valley. There would be no roaring steel mills, nor humming-
associated and supporting industry. I submit the Mahoning
is doing a workhorse type of job in sustaining life right
now.
So that leaves fish.
I have no wish to be cavalier about the interests
of our sporting population when it comes to fishing. Being
practical, I might just say that I recognize that fishermen
vote, too, along with everybody else, including the steel-
worker and others employed in industry. I'm for fish, and
-------
22
lots of them, but in the right places. Certainly in the
stretch of the Mahoning River where the steel mills are
located isn't one of those places. Furthermore, the
Youngstown district people who want to fish are certainly
noc deterred from the pursuit of their favorite hobby
because there are no fish in the Mahoning River. Every
fisherman hereabouts knows that there are many, many fine
fishing sites in easy driving distance from Youngstown.
Countless places, in fact, where the fishing is good, put
there by the Federal Government that recognized the Mahoning
as an industrial stream years ago, especially in war time.
I leave you with this thought: there was no
doubt a day on the Mahoning when the Indians fished the
stream in pristine cleanliness. I don't know how long ago
that might have been. But I do know this. The Indians had
no television to watch nor jet airplanes on which to ride.
And I ask you now, who was better off, the Indians or you
and I, here, today? If losing the fish in the industrialized
stretch of the Mahoning was the penalty we had to pay, then
I say and I think you will agree, it was a penalty well
worth payinge
Once again, may I state to you, that it is my
considered judgment that, first local and state authorities
are doing the job that needs to be done on the Mahoning
and, second, that the job is being done, as the record of
-------
23
accomplishment is well documented. We are doing as much,
or more, than any district in the country to accomplish this
purpose.
Furthermore, dredging of the Mahoning River is
inevitable some day and this, too, will further improve its
condition. Steel plants have already started to do this on
their own.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you, Mr. Gould.
Are there any comments on Mr. Gould's statement?
If not, may we go back to Dr. Arnold and see if there are
any comments on your statement. Are there any from ORSANCO,
Pennsylvania?
MR. POSTON: I might ask to do a
little clarification here, if I might. Dr. Arnold talked
about the understanding of the reasons for this conference
and I might read out of the Federal Water Pollution Control
Act where it says, "The Secretary shall also call such a
conference whenever, on the basis of reports, surveys, or.
studies, he has reason to believe that any pollution
referred to in Subsection (a) and endangering the health
or welfare of persons in a state other than that in which
the discharge or discharges originates is occurring."
This, it says, "He shall call this conference,"
and this, I think, he has done. I would like to ask, if
-------
24
I may, one question of Dr. Arnold. I think we probably
will answer it later, and that is: Is the Mahoning River
polluted?
DR. ARNOLD: I don»t know whether
you referred the question to me but I think in the presen-
tation of our technical appraisal of this river, this
question will be answered, and if it is appropriate now,
I would like to call
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Well, let»s see if
there are any more comments. If not, I would like to say,
Dr. Arnold, you made one remark to the effect that the
enforcement group was no longer in the PHS. I don't worry
about these remarks on the record except we may have a
payroll analyst or clerk read the record sometime and I
would like to keep my pay check coming in. This is still
part of PHS and this is where we get our money from. And
I would not like to stand uncorrected in the record. By
the way, would you people want to find seats back there?
You may be more comfortable.
The second point I would like to make of this
comes back to Mr. Poston's remark and :I think, of course,
you know that Shakespeare said a lot of things better than
any of us. But I wonder if directed at the end, the con-
ference might not show what the main thrust of your statement
is, that "Me thinks you may protest too much," that the
-------
25
calling of this conference is an implied criticism, expressed
or implied, of anything that Ohio has done.
(
No one has indicated that this is an implied
criticism except the first I have heard of that has been
in your statement three or four times. I think the calling
of a conference, which is mandatory under the Federal Act,
is just a procedure that the Secretary is charged with. I
\
am sure that the Secretary does not mean any criticism,
expressedimplied, or otherwise, of any state or interstate
agency.
Dr. Arnold, would you go on?
DR. ARNOLD: The first I heard of
this conference was when I received a letter from the Secretary
dated the 15th of December. There had been no previous com-
munications with the Ohio Department of Health or with ORSANCO
for the need of any such conference regarding the Mahoning
River. Sometime after that, we had requests from the Public
Health Service for certain information that we could make
available to them and for certain information that we could
not make available to them. There was a great scurrying
about by the Public Health Service after the date of calling
this conference to get information and data of water quality
to support the need for this conference. This is to me a little
difficult to understand.
In the report that the Federal Government has made
-------
26
available to you, you will find that some of the data pre-
sented in that was secured during the month of January, a
month or a month and a half after this conference had already
been called. The Ohio Department of Health, in the last
several years, had no complaint from the State of Pennsylvania
protesting that the Mahoning River was endangering the health
or welfare of the people of Pennsylvania.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: I believe the facts
might come out and Mr. Poston may have a comment on this and,
of course, we will call on all the conferees. But again,
at this- point, I want to say that assuming what I have said
is entirely valid, I don*t see how this adds up to any
criticism expresaedor implied of Ohio. And this was the only
thing that I address myself to. Nor is it any criticism of
Pennsylvania or ORSANCO and I think nowhere have we indicated
that. Mr. Poston, do you want to comment on this or not?
MR. POSTON: I might comment to the
effect that it is true that this report, the blue report
that we have out on the table here today, and we will present
a summation of it later, was prepared after the first of the
year. We are attempting to make this the most fruitful and
the best possible conference that we can, and for this purpose
we would like to have the latest known data and for this
purpose we went to the State Health Department whom we ordi-
narily work with and asked for the latest data; and this is
-------
27
the purpose behind our request. We further went to industry
and, in some two or three cases, we had difficulties obtaining
information on effluents - effluents which we consider is a
so.urce of information to completely evaluate the conditions
in the Mahoning River. I think that's all I have to comment
on.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Do you want to comment
again?
DR. ARNOLD: No, I have no further
comments.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Do you wish to go on
with your presentation, Dr. Arnold?
DR. ARNOLD: Yes. I would like to
now present Mr. George Eagle, Chief Engineer of the Ohio
Department of Health.
MR. EAGLE: Mr. Chairman, conferees,
ladies and gentlemen, my name is George H. Eagle. I am the
Chief Engineer of the Ohio Department of Health. I wish
to supplement Dr. Arnold's statement with engineering data
and facts obtained by the Ohio Department of Health and
others over the past 12 years. But, first, before I do
this, I want to assure the participants invited here by
the State of Ohio that despite the comments of some, this
is not an enforcement conference.
Obviously, the Secretary of Health, Education, and
-------
28
Welfare has been given advice by someone that the health or
welfare of persons in Pennsylvania is endangered. This con-
ference is to determine whether this is so. The conference
also is to determine whether there is interstate pollution,
whether there is an adequate program to abate pollution and
what the delays are, if any, in abating pollution.
It should be understood by all those reporting
today that their programs are not on trial. The Federal
agency report states there is evidence of interstate pollu-
tion which brings it under the Federal Control Act. Granted
there is pollution. If there were no pollution in the
Mahoning, there would be no construction of waste .control
facilities now under way. However, the holding of this
conference does not remove any of the authority .of the states
or ORSANCO. Nor does it give the Federal Government any
enforcement authority. This should be well understood.
When this conference was called by the Secretary,
he described it as a conference, not an enforcement conference.;
It is true that the calling of the conference is in the sectior
of the Act which includes enforcement, but the law does not
describe this as an enforcement action. This is stressed not
only to remove any concerns of those providing reports for
the consideration of the conference, but also to remove any
ideas that this Federally-called conference automatically
means that the states and ORSANCO are inadequate or ineffective,
-------
or have not been alert to the health or welfare of the citizens
The national emphasis on pollution abatement is
recognition that better water quality benefits the general
welfare, providing water adequate in quality for the best
interests of the people is the objective of pollution control.
Towards that end, our pollution control program is now in full
swing in approaching accomplishment.
The matter of health is specific. Health has
concerned state and Federal agencies long before there was
emphasis on pollution control. Attention to water quality
in the United States has been so effective that water can be
drunk safely in almost all of our communities. There may
be problems in taste, odor or color, but safety is seldom
1he question. At no time has there been any intimation
from either state or Federal authorities of any threat to
health of citizens in Pennsylvania. The Federal report on
the Mahoning has been construed by some citizens and
legislators to say that the condition of Beaver Falls water
can at times be a threat to health. A closer review of
the report shows this would occur only if the water treatment
facilities were out of operation. This conclusion can be
drawn for nearly every water treatment plant in the Nation.
Such obvious statements when offered by a Federal agency
may sound profound, but neither the State of Pennsylvania
nor the Beaver Falls Water Company would, I am sure, permit
-------
30
untreated water to be delivered to the citizens of Beaver
Falls.
Now, I wish to report the facts on the Mahoning
River and the status of .treatment facilities in the basin.
First, the water quality data.
STREAM WATER QUALITY
The proof of successful pollution abatement is
improved river water quality. The objective of Ohio's
water pollution control program is the upgrading and
maintaining of stream water quality for necessary and
legitimate water uses. Until two years ago the U. S.
Geological Survey monitoring station at Lowellville was
sufficient to record changes in quality. By that time
many of the municipalities and industries had completed
construction of their treatment plants. With this milestone
there was a need to measure improvement and to determine the
effect and sources of the remaining problems. To do this,
Ohio started a monitoring program at key points along the
river. This program is in addition to the U.S.G.S. control
station at Lowellville near the Pennsylvania-Ohio state line.
The monitoring is particularly directed towards
determining the success of the.program to abate these sources
of pollution:
1. Inadequately treated sewage.
2. Slug discharges of organic wastes which
-------
31
cause objectionable tastes and odors ,at Beaver Falls.
3. Discharges of cyanides and. heavy metals from
metal finishing which would be toxic to aquatic life and
interrupt stream purification.
4. Slug discharges of acid.
5. Discharge of solids.
6. Discharge of oils.
The two years of data from this monitoring -- 1963
and 1964 -- are most encouraging. Not only is there evidence
that objectives are approaching accomplishment, there is
evidence that the treatment plants are adequate for the job.
The years 1963-1964 were dry years, among the lowest on record.
These drought flows were lower than those used to compute
treatment needs.
All recognize the Mahoning River is a low-flow
river. During the 1963-64 years the yearly average flow was
40 percent below that of the average for the past 22 years.
This meant that, -pollution conditions were measured at their
worst. , It has also provided the opportunity to anticipate
the benefits..which will result-with the construction program
under way this year and scheduled for 1965-66. The outlook
is good.
I would like to briefly review with you the
progress to date in accomplishing the control of the wastes
just mentioned. In doing this I will describe the treatment
-------
32
facilities provided and the resultant water quality as measured
by several critical criteria of quality. The point in the
river used as the gauge is Lowellville. This station' is
just upstream from the Pennsylvania-Ohio state line. It
is also just downstream from the Youngstown complex.
Inadequately Treated Sewage.
Sewage includes solids which settle in the river
to form putrescible sludge banks. Sewage also uses the
oxygen in the river and carries heavy bacterial loads.
The objectives are to remove the solids and
reduce the oxygen requirements so that there will be
sufficient oxygen in the river to support aquatic life and
to maintain the self-purification of the river. Another
objective is to keep the bacterial quality below any
harmful levels.
In 1952 only three communities in the basin had
sewage treatment plants. By the end of 1964 every community
with a recognized system of sanitary sewers had sewage treat-
ment facilities. The largest city, Youngstown, after over-
coming many obstacles has completed its treatment plant.
The interceptor sewers are completed but three river
crossings are needed to get all the sewage to the plant.
These are under construction now and will be completed
early this summer.
-Until this sewage is connected to the. treatment
-------
33
plant there will obviously be adverse effects in and below
Youngstown. The monitoring data agree with this. However,
these data also show the improvement resulting from the
operation of the other treatment plants, namely, Warren,
Niles, Girard, Campbell, and Struthers, and the surrounding
communities.
As will be reported later, most of the industries
discharged their untreated sewage to the river in 195>ij..
Now, all industries have connected their sewage to the
municipal systems or are in the process of completing the
construction for connection.
In 1951). the river frequently approached zero
dissolved oxygen below Warren and below Youngstown. In
1961j. there was dissolved oxygen below Warren at all times
and ?8 per cent of the time it was above our minimum require-
ment of 3.6 p.p.m. At Lowellville, very low dissolved oxygen
was measured at times but 75 per cent of the time the level
was at or above the minimum even at the low flows.
In our opinion, the treatment of all of Youngstown's
sewage this summer will assure the attainment of the dis-
solved oxygen objective of 3.0 p.p.m. It will also remove
the sewage sludge banks and it will reduce the bacteria
counts.
Discharge of Cyanides and Heavy Metals from
Metal Finishing.
-------
34
In 1954 the only treatment facilities for cyanides
and heavy metals were in the plants in the upper river above
Warren.
In 1964 all discharges of these materials are
adequately treated. Many discharges have been completely
eliminated.
The monitor data shows the concentration of heavy
metals and cyanides in the river to be well below the limit
established by the Public Health Service Drinking Water
Standards.
Slug Discharges of Acid.
In 1954 there were no adequate controls on spent
acid discharges. The practice was.to pull a plug and dump
a tank. The river below Warren and below Youngstown was
frequently acid for hours at a time.
The Aquatic-Life Committee of ORSANGO indicates
that the hydrogen-ion concentration probably does not effect
fish adversely between pH 5.0 and pH 9.0. To maintain
productivity of water for aquatic life, a pH range, of 6.5-
8.5 is recommended. In 1954 pH values as low as 2.5 were
observed.
Several control measures have been instituted to
improve this condition, these include neutralization, haulage
of strong pickle liquors and controlled discharge.
During 1954, the lowest pH value observed was 3.5
-------
35
In the most critical section of the stream, pH values of 5.0
or greater was observed 88 percent of the time. At
Lowellville, pH values of 5i'0 or greater were observed 97
percent of the time and values of 6.5 or greater were
observed 85 percent of the time.
Further improvement is required by the Ohio Water
Pollution Control Board. The report ;by the representative
of the Steel Industry will further describe proposals.
Discharge of Solids.
Part of the solids problem was sewage; I have
reported that this program will be completed this summer.
Then there fwere solids from coal washing, sand and gravel
pits and clay mining. All of these are now treated.
The largest industrial source of solids on the
river is the steel industry. A detailed report on this
program will follow but it should be noted here that the
provision for controls to prevent pollution from this
source will be virtually completed by 1966. Until then,
there will be high concentrations at times at the state line,
Discharge of Oils.
Oils are now discharged to the river from some
municipal and industrial sewers.
Connection of municipal sewers to treatment plants
will control the municipal problem.
How oil losses from the steel industry are being
-------
36
controlled is part of the industry story. The program is
related to the solids treatment and will be virtually com-
plete by 1966.
Siilfates.
Sulfates originate from geological deposits, strip
mine operations, industrial chemicals and fertilizers.
There are a number of strip mine operations and some
abandoned deep mines in the basin which contribute significant
sulfates. This is evidenced by concentrations above 100 p.p.m.
over 50 percent of the time at Pricetown above Warren. This
is the situation upstream above the steel mills.
Later, a representative of the coal industry will
present a detailed report describing accomplishments and
proposed controls.
At Lowellville, sulfate concentrations in the
river exceeded 250 p.p.m., the PHS Drinking Water Standard,
48 percent of the time. Elimination of acid iron discharges
from the steel plants will, we believe, reduce the sulfate
concentrations to acceptable limits.
Alkalinity.
The presence of some alkalinity is considered
beneficial to most water uses. The Mahoning River has a
very low natural alkalinity. In 1952, oftentimes, there
was no alkalinity in critical stretches of the river below
Warren. In 1964, the alkalinity in the river at Lowellville
-------
37
was above 25 p.p.m., 70 percent of tile time. At.no time
in 1964 was the alkalinity zero.
Tastes and Odors.
Studies conducted on the Mahoning River showed
there is little correlation between phenol concentration
and chemical and medicinal tastes at the Beaver Falls water
plant. There was, however, a correlation between such tastes
and the occurrence of cleanout of sumps, cleanout of tank
bottoms and pipe line breaks. This information explained
why there were problems at the Beaver Falls waterworks even
after the coke plants, the primary source of phenols,
installed closed systems to prevent waste discharges. The
companies have maintained these .closed systems.
As sources of difficulties were determined,
controls were instituted to prevent such discharges to the
river. Improvement in quality at Beaver Falls water intake
as evidenced by the decrease in number of occurrences of
chemical odors is proof that the approach is effective.
From 1954 to 1960, Beaver Falls had chemical tastes from 22
to 47 days a year. In 1963, there were four days and only
five days in 1964. A surveillance program has been insti-
tuted to locate residual causes.
While phenol determinations do not tell the whole
taste and odor story, I wish tq_point out that there has been
a significant reduction in phenol concentrations in the
-------
38
the Mahoning River at the state line. What the limit should
be in view of recent observations, or in fact, if there
should be any limit at all, is not known at this time.
Further observations and studies are being made in this regard,
Summary.
As a brief summary of meeting water quality
objectives at the state line in 1954, I offer the following
data;
Dissolved oxygen. -- not less than 3 p.p.m. -- 75
percent of the time pH between 5 and 9 -- 97 percent of
the time.
Alkalinity -- not less than 25 p.p.m. -- 70 percent
of the time.
Sulfates -- not more than 250 p.p.m. -- 52 percent
of the time.
Total Iron not more than 5 p.p.m. 54 percent
of the time.
Temperature -- not greater than 93 degrees F.--
87 percent of the time.
With two possible exceptions, the program now
under way is expected to meet these objectives, 100 percent
of the time, by the end of 1966. These exceptions are
possible:
(1) Temperature.
This river is used primarily for cooling. A new
-------
39
reservoir the West Branch' will be in operation in 1966.
This will reduce the high temperatures but the final results
depend on the production in the Valley.
(2) Color.
There is a residual color problem from some of
the waste treatment. The very large volumes of water
involved prevent any specific requirement. When the present
program is completed, the importance of color will be deter-
mined.
Details of the results of the monitoring programs
are presented in charts and tables in the appendix.
TREATMENT FACILITIES
I have discussed the quality of the water in the
Mahoning River. Now, I am going to give you a general
picture cf the treatment facilities that have been constructed
over the past 12 years. These have contributed to the
improvement of the ;stream quality. A detailed listing of
the facilities are included in the appendices of tITis Tept>rt.
First, I would like to tell you what the munici-
palities and communities have done.
Municipal and Community Wastes.
With the completion of construction of the sewage
treatment plant for the City of Youngstown this summer, 100
percent of the sewered population of the basin will be pro-
vided with sewage treatment facilities. Also this summer,
-------
40
optimum treatment with disinfection will be provided for
the first time. The tremendous progress which has been made
in this basin can be seen from the charts. In 1952, only
58,000 persons or about 14 percent of the population of the
basin were provided with sewage treatment facilities. In
contrast, as shown by the overlay, all of the incorporated
areas, plus additional built-up areas, of the basin are now
served by sewage treatment facilities. This has been
accomplished in spite of actual and threatened litigation.
This program has cost the citizens of the Mahoning
Valley over $22,000,000. This means it has cost each person,
each man, woman and child, over $100,000 apiece, to clean
up the domestic sewage in the streams in the basin. Federal
funds totaling about $2,500,000 assisted in the financing of
the various projects.
The water quality data are showing that these
sewage treatment plants are adequate -- they are protecting
the uses of the river and they are cleaning up the river.
The municipal systems, in addition to collecting
and treating the domestic sewage, are serving a number of
industries. Four of these which were problems -- -a tannery,
two meat packing plants and a tar plant are connected or
are in the process of being connected to the public s-ewage
systems.
What the Industries Have. Done, -
-------
41
There are seven organic industrial waste dis-
charges which have their own treatment programs. These
include two dairy plants, four meat packing plants and a
tar plant. One of these, a dairy plant, is under board
action to enlarge facilities.
There are three coke plants on the Mahoning River,
all of which had organic waste discharges in 1954. By 1964,
the installation of closed systems had eliminated the normal
discharge. In addition, all known possibilities of cleanouts
had been eliminated and changes were made in the plants to
minimize losses from breaks or leaks.
Five companies with fly ash, several coal washing
operations and a number of gravel and sand and clay plants
were sources of discharges of solids in 1954. All have
adequate settling basins now to keep the solids out of the
river.
There are eight plants in the valley which do
metal finishing. All of these plants now have treatment
facilities to destroy cyanides and prevent metals from going
to the river.
There are 22 plants along the Mahoning which use
acid solutions for cleaning steel. In 1954, all discharged
the spent acid to the river by dumping tanks. That practice
has ceased except for two companies where control facilities
are now under construction.
-------
42
Of the 22 plants, 13 now provide neutralization
or haul the acid away. Other than the two plants Just
mentioned, the rest provide controls on the discharge which
have resulted in improving river quality. There is still a
problem of iron salts to be resolved. The recent changes
in pickling practice, however, offer promise of an answer
to this.
There are several programs under way for dredging
of iron deposits mill scale and flue dust from the
river bottom. This accumulation has developed over many
years and represents the loss of iron oxide from blast
furnaces and rolling mills. Since 1954 this operating loss
has been changing. Large settling basins have been con-
structed on a continuing schedule for all new mills and
where modification of existing facilities was not feasible.
The details of this program of progress will be provided
by a representative of the steel industry.
However, it should be noted that the Ohio policy
has been to require construction of adequate facilities for
all new mills and a continuing program for constructing
adequate facilities for existing operations.
With the construction to date and now under way
or scheduled for completion in 1966, this problem ,of solids
and the oils now lost from these mills will be virtually
completed.
-------
43
There are 16 blast furnaces in the area. By 1966
all will have adequate treatment.
In summary, and as you will note from the chart,
the industrial wastes score in the Mahoning Valley is as
follows:
Industries with facilities meeting current water
quality objectives, total of 32 or 70 percent.
Industries having additional facilities under
construction, total of 6 or 13 percent.
Industries where additional facilities are needed,
total of 8 or 17 percent.
In view of the many problems we think this score
is excellent.
CONCLUSIONS
In conclusion, I wish to re-emphasize the following
facts:
1. With the completion of the Youngstown sewage
treatment program this summer, all of the domestic sewage in
the Mahoning River basin will be treated, and by the end of
1966 the industrial waste treatment program will be in
compliance with Ohio's requirements, except for acid. The
steel industry is now evaluating new pickling processes
and will present a plan and schedule to the Ohio Water Pollu-
tion Control Board in the near future, for eliminating the acid
problem in the river.
-------
44
2. By the end of 1966, the water quality
objective in the Mahoning River at the state line will be
met 100 percent of the time. The objectives established by
Ohio concurred in by Pennsylvania and ORSANCO are based on
meeting the Public Health Service Drinking Water Standards
at the Beaver Falls waterworks intake.
3. Ohio's pollution abatement program has the
active support and cooperation of the public officials and
industries in the basin. Ohio and Pennsylvania agreed
several years ago on the priority of water uses to be pro-
tected in the various reaches of the Mahoning River, and the
Ohio Water Pollution Control Board focused attention on those
increments of waste treatment of major importance to such
water uses,
4. Ohio, in cooperation with the U^S. Geological
Survey, ORSANCO and the municipalities and industries, has
established an extensive stream monitoring program on the
Mahoning River for continuous surveillance and review of the
treatment programs. Changes and improvements are and will
continue to be required as river conditions dictate, and
finally;
5. Ohio recognizes a responsibility to the Federal
Government, to ORSANCO, to the State of Pennsylvania, and to
ourselves, and we take considerable pride in our accomplish-
ments. True, conditions in the Mahoning River have been bad
-------
45
and some pollution still exists. However, great progress
has been made, is being made, and will continue to be made
in cleaning up the river. No, Ohio has not been lax in
enforcement of the water pollution control laws.
Thank you.
... Applause ...
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Do you want the charts
and records to appear in the record?
MR. EAGLE: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: With no objection, that
will be done.
-------
TABLt NO. l(a)
STREAM WATER QUALITY - 1963
MAHONING RIVER BASIN
MAHONING RIVER AT PRICETOVIN
(Ohltown Road Bridge)
Date Flow*
Sampled c.f.s.
1/6/63
1/8
1/12
1/15
1/17
1/31
2/3
2/10
2/19
2/25
2/26
3/11
3/19
3/25
3/30
4/4
4/16
4/22
4/29
5/5
5/9
5/17
- /
5/23
5/24
54
52
52
39
37
94
76
31
76
64
57
24
31
788
578
77
98
55
55
57
142
160
162
162
Tempi
°F.
36
33
38
32
36
37
36
36
35
32
32
35
40
40
46
48
52
52
56
58
65
60
59
60
, D.O.
mg/1
11.3
10.7
11.0
13.4
9.5
8.0
11.3
11.0
11.0
11.0
11.3
12.8
10.7
10.7
10.4
10.4
11.0
9.5
9.2
9.5
9.2
10.1
9.2
9.8
Phenol
p«p*b«
0.0
1.0
0.0
9.3
0.40
1.60
2.70
0.13
4.9
9.30
3.67
11.9
2.87
5.17
12.62
10.33
8.04
Total Totel
pH Alkalinity Acidity
mg/1 mg/1
7.2
7.3
8.0
7.7
7.4
7.4
7.6
7.7
7.4
7.2
7.5
6.9
6.6
6.8
7.0
7.6
7.2
7.4
8.3
7.3
7.3
7.4
6.8
7.1
%
101
96
88
103
101
105
107
116
110
103
30
67
56
43
46
43
45
53
45
38
42
46
48
Con- Total**
ductivity Iron
^mhos/cm mg/1
538
640
530
500
500
600
660
680
680
620
670
230
480
390
330
300
260
310
330
350
310
320
320
320
0.13
0.14
0.2
0.39
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.4
0.8
1.3
0.6
0.7
0.82
0.5
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.2
Ferrous**
Iron
mg/1
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.8
0.9
0.51
0.4
0.73
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
Chlorides Sulfates
mg/1 mg/1
20
20
23
23
28
34
31
34
34
40
39
16
20
22
17
15
15
15
15
15
16
14
14
16
180
200
36
83
75
60.0
60.0
56.7
60.0
64.4
58.4
63.4
66*7
70.0
73.4
-------
.TA3LS .,0. l(a-
MAHONING RIVER AT PRICETOVW
(Ohltovm Road Bridge) Cont'd
Date
Sampled
6/6
6/10
6/22
6/29
7/5
7/16
7/22
7/28
7/31
8/13
8/16
8/26
9/2
9/9
9/22
9/30
10/6
10/14
10/27
10/29
11/H
11/19
11/21
11/22
11/29
12/16
12/29
12/30
Flow*
c.f.s.
184
199
197
215
215
246
244
241
236
227
227
227
222
208
184
171
162
148
111
111
78
92
92
92
90
64
67
64
Temp
°F.
69
72
69
73
73
74
78
68
75
73
72
72
71
66
65
59
63
65
60
51
48
47
50
49
33
34
35
. D.O.
mg/1
8.6
8.2
8.3
7.2
8.3
7;8
7.8
7.6
8.0
8.3
8.3
8.0
8.3
9.2
8.1
8.9
8.6
8.9
8.3
9.2
10.1
10.4
10.7
10.1
11.9
11.0
11.3
Phenol Total Total Con- Total** Ferrous** Chlorides Sulfates
p.p.b. pH Alkalinity Acitity ductivity Iron Iron mg/1 mg/1
rag/1 mg/1 ^mhos/cm mg/1 mg/1
7.78
7.43
2.3
10.35
8.7
5.51
0.0
13.78
10.33
4.82
1.26
1.15
12.63
6.89
0.00
8.04
4.48
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0
0.0
4.8
0.0
4.8
0.0
7.2
7.1
.7.8
7.4
7.1
7.0
7.4
7./»
6.7
7.1
7.3
7.5
7.4
7.5
7.5
8.0
7.8
7.6
7.7
7.3
7.1
7.6
7.4
8.0
7.3
7.8
7.2
6.3
45
75
48
49
48
49
46
49
54
56
55
51
5c
5?
62
59
65
66
73
70
72
70
67
73
71
67
80
83
350
360
350
340
350
380
390
380
380
380
380
390
400
390
430
450
450
460
460
450
480
480
490
490
470
470
550
560
0.6
0.3
0.2
0.4
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.9
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.9
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.3
0.2
0.1
20
20
16
19
20
18
19
19
17
17
17
18
19
20
19
19
23
24
22
23
28
24
23
22
24
25
30
29
66.7
63.3
78.4
67.4
83.4
78.4
83.4
78.3
90.0
71.7
90.0
83.4
83.4
86.7
93.4
86.7
90.0
83.4
100.0
93.4
100.0
113.4
in. 7
103.4
125.0
156.7
116.7
125.0 *
s,
-------
TABLE NO. l(b)
STREAM WATER QUALITY - 1964
MAHONING RIVER BASIN
MAHONING RIVER AT PRICETOWN
(Bridge at Ohltbwn Rd.)
Date
Sampled
1/5/64
1/8
1/18
1/26
2/2/64
2/12/64
2/18/64
2/24
2/29
3/3/64
3/14
3/20
3/30
3/28
4/18/64
4/21
4/26
4/30
5/7/64
5/17
»
5/31
Flow*
c.f .s.
63
51
50
35
35
64
64
70
85
42
840
693
78
201
154
166
L540
510
136
56
175
Temp.
oF.
39
36
39
3?
34
37
39
38
39
47
40
42
42
43
50
56
57
58
70
67
66
D.O.
mg/1
11.3
14.0
10.7
12.0
., 13.0
11.6
11.0
11.9
11.6
11.9
10.?
10.4
10.7
10.1
9.8
7.4
9.8
9.8
9.5
8.0
7.8
Phenol
p.p.b.
0.0
7.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
o.o
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Total Con-
Alkalinity Acidity ductivity
pH mg/1 mg/1 ^-mhos/era
8.5
7.0
7.0
7.8
7.5
7.3
7.4
7.0
7.3
7.6
f
7.4
1
7.4
6.5
7.4
7.6
7.4
7.8
7.2
8.2
7.9
7.7
86
87
95
94
93
88
85
89
87
82
45
53
44
52
66
42
40
38
42
47
46
_
M
_
-
_
_
w
-
8
6
2
30
2
8
13 /
4
3
0.5
1
4
580
590
670
620
630
570
620
650
650
640
390
380
330
305
350
290
290
290
310
325
315
Total**
Iron
rag/1
1.5
0.4
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.6
0.6
0.4
1.2
1.0
1.4
1.1
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.3
0.6
0.8
Ferrous**
Iron
mg/1
0.3
0.3
0.4
0.4
Q.3
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.1
0.2
0.4
0.0
0.4
0.6
Chlorides
mg/1
33
33
42
39
40
41
38
38
41
30
40
23
19
20
23
21
19
17
19
18
20
Sulfates
mg/1
120
177
160
180
187
190
217
227
200
177
77
90
93
75
79
48
68
90
80
78
75
-------
TABL.T ;h l(b)
MAHONTNG RIVER AT PRICETOWN
(Bridge at Ohltown Rd. Cont'd.)
Date
Sampled
6/6/64
6/11
6/24
6/27
7/8/64
7/16
7/26
7/28
7/31
8/4/64
8/14
8/22
8/30
9/10/64
i
9/15
*
9/25
9/29
10/2/64
10/6
10/23
10/27
10/30
11/6
'.
11/12
11/20
11/24
5/11
12/4
12/11
12/14
12/23
'.X
12/29
Flow*
c.f .s.
184
184
184
171
206
188
206
201
206
195
208
217
201
201
199
162
160
Data
Not
Available
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
Temp.
69
69
75
75
73
69
76
78
76
75
73
72
75
79
61
64
63
65
51
54
52
52
59
47
42
69
39
37
37
36
38
D.O.
mg/1
8.3
7.4
7.2
7.2
7.8
8.3
7.0
7.0
7.6
9.0
7.8
8.9
8.6
7.6
7.8
8.3
8.6
8.3
8.6
8.6
8.9
8.9
9.8
8.6
9.2
10.7
8.9
10.7
10.7
11.0
11.3
11.3
Phenol
p.p.b.
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
_
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
pH
7.4
7.5
7.6
7.8
7.4
7.6
7.7
7.7
7.6
7.0
7.4
8.0
7.5
7.9
7.8
7.6
7.7
7.9
7.Z
7.8
8.2
7.7
7.7
7.6
7.6
7.6
7.9
7.5
7.7
7.8
7.9
7.2
Total Total
Alkalinity Acidity
mg/1 mg/1
45
51
50
50
55
56
60
62
56
65
68
83
68
80
72
76
88
75
80
70
85
84
86
86
85
71
43
95
84
103
89
86
2.5
5
6
2
5.5
8
8
6
6
14
7
6
7
11
5
7
7
4
3
4
2
8
6
10
6
10
0.5
8
4
5
5
9
Con-
ductivity
# mhos/cm
305
305
340
330
300
360
330
360
360
350
320
370
350
400
410
408
400
430
410
425
420
430
420
430
430
420
295
435
440
390
435
430
Total**
Iron
mg/1
0.6
0.3
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.0
0.4
0.1
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.4
0.1
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
1.0
0.4
0.2
0.8
.2
0.4
Ferrous**
Iron
mg/1
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.4
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.0
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1.
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.7
.3
.1
0.2
-
0.2
Chlorides
mg/1
21
18
18
18
21
21
21
21
20
21
23
20
21
20
22
21
20
19
20
20
20
29
21
24
22
21
20
24
25
25
35
24
Sulfates
mg/1
82
83
82
80
73
72
75
75
123
107
107
117
127
120
120
140
.117
88
107
133
117
130
143
130
123
127
80
130
-
-
- £
-------
TABLE NO. 2(a)
MAHONING RIVER SURVEY - 1963
MAHONINO RIVER AT LEAVITTSBURG
(U.S. Rt. 422)
Date
Sampled
1/6/63
1/8/63
1/12/63
1/15/63
1/17/63
1/31/63
2/3/63
2/10/63
2/19/63
2/25/63
2/26/63
3/11/63
3/19/63
3/25/63
3/30/63
4/4/63
4/16/63
4/22/63
4/29/63
5/5/63
5/9/63
5/17/63
5/23/63
5/24/63
Flow*
c.f .s.
108
112
300
200
119
120
110
95
140
110
110
990
1650
1260
1060
506
180
582
199
206
232
235
245
235
Temp,
°F.
33
32
34
31
34
33
31
33
34
32
31
39
39
44
47
52
53
56
56
59
67
62
58
58
. D.O.
mg/1
11.6
10.7
11-3
11.6
9.8
8.6
10.7
11.0
10.7
11.0
11.0
12.6
10.7
11.0
9.8
9.8
10.1
10.4
9.8
8.9
8.3
9.8
9.2
10.1
Phenol
p.p.b.
0.0
10.14
0.0
1.4
0.33
1.00
2.90
0.00
5-3
1.03
0.0
35.6
2.87
8.04
13.20
1.72
14.92
Total
Alkalinity
pH mg/1
7.6
7.3
8.0
7.7
7.4
7.6
7.7
7.7
7.6
7.5
7.8
7.1
6.6
7.3
7.2
7.6
7.5
7.4
8.2
7.6
7.8
7.6
7.5
7.8
118
127
113
8
68
125
121
124
131
120
120
56
25
49
45
53
75
43
75
66
66
72
80
82
Total Con- Total**
Acidity ductivity Iron
mg/1 ^mhos/cm mg/1
584
600
550
430
470
620
620
560
650
550
610
540
185
350
310
310
300
225
360
370
350
- 380
400
390
0.17
0.17
0.41
0.66
0.6
0.6
0.3
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.4
1.2
1.2
1.0
0.6
1.0
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.9
0.5
0.6
0.6
0.4
Ferrous**
Iron
mg/1
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.4
1.0
1.1
0.7
0.6
0.86
0.4
0.6
0.5
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.3
0.3
Chlorides
mg/1
23
22
26
26
35
33
28
35
38
38
40
25
8
19
19
18
17
13
18
20
17
18
21
17
Sulfates
mg/1
130
150
128
22
67
60.0
61.68
66.7
35.0
56.7
50.0
73-^
83.4
81.7
81.7
VJl
o
-------
TAMLE Mi/, ^(a)
MAHONING RIViJI AT LEAVITTSBURG
(U.S. St. 422 Cont'd.)
Date
Sampled
6/6/63
6/10/63
6/22/63
6/29/63
7/5/63
7/16/63
7/22/63
7/28/63
7/31/63
8/13/63
8/16/63
8/26/63
9/2/63
9/9/63
9/22/63
9/30.63
10/6
10/14
10/2?
10/29
11/11
11/19
11/21
11/22
ll/?'/
12/16
12/29
12/30
Flow*
C.f .8.
256
454
235
245
235
273
284
262
284
252
248
248
238
219
199
180
174
165
131
128
102
10?
107
105
136
95
110
95
Temp.
°F.
74
75
70
76
73
75
79
67
74
71
73
69
72
64
63
58
60
63
58
49
4f;
48
50
43
33
32
32
D.O.
rag/1
8.6
8.0
7.8
6.8
7.6
3.6
7.6
7.4
8.3
8.0
8.3
8.0
7.8
8.0
8.3
8.3
9.2
8.9
8.6
7.6
10.1
10.5
9.8
9.5
10.7
11.9
11.0
11.6
Phenol
p.p.b.
10.34
6.66
23.0
11.85
6.9
4.59
0.57
4.59
4.82
8.72
2.30
2.30
13.2
111.4
2.53
5.85
2.87
3-67
0.00
0.46
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
PH
7.3
7.5
7.7
7.4
7.3
6.9
7.8
7.6
7.4
7.2
7.5
7.8
7.7
7.8
7.6
7.9
7.6
7.7
7.6
7.6
7.2
7.6
7.6
7.9
7.7
8.0
8.6
6.9
Total
Alkalinity
mg/1
45
47
61
65
56
61
59
56
~&
61
63
59
64
67
69
64
74
72
88
89
98
90
90
89
97
96
103
109
Total Con-
Acidity ductivity
mg/1 ^mhos/cm
350
400
390
370
370
400
400
400
390
390
410
400
420
430
450
4?0
470
480
520
450
530
. - 540
560
550
540
590
580
600
Total**
Iron
mg/1
0.6
0.5
0.3
0.4
0.4
0.6
0.3
0.6
0.3
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.6
0.1
0.6
0.3
0.3
0.09
0.3
0.3
0.09
0.2
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.1
Ferrous**
Iron
mg/1
0.4
0.5
0.3
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.3
0.6
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.1
0.6
0.3
0.3
0.09
0.3
0.2
0.09
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.2
0.0
Chlorides
mg/1
20
15
20
20
20
18
18
18
19
18
19
20
18
19
20
21
25
24
24
23
22
25
26
27
27
32
30
32
Sulfates
mg/1
70.0
61.7
80.0
71.7
81.7
73.**
81.7
81.3
. 86.7
76. 7 <
93-^
78.4
93.^
83.4
96.7
91.7
96.7
95.0
103.4
106.7
106.7
113.4
116.7
120.0
125.0
190.0
118.4
130.0
-------
TABLE NO. 2(b)
STREAM V/ATSR QUALITY - 1964
MAHONIHG RIVER BASIN
IIAHONDJG RIVER AT LEAVITTSBURG
(U.S. Rt. 422)
Total
Date
Sampled
1/5/64
1/8
1/18
1/26
2/2/64
2/12
2/18
2/24
2/29
3/3/64
3/14
3/20
3/30
3/28
4/18/64
4/21
4/26
4/30
5/7
5/11
5/17
5/31
Flow*
c.f .s.
110
no
98
1220
130
140
no
112
131
235
1610
1360
245
490
288
2750
2520
I960
280
245
332
222
Temp.
8F.
35
33
35
33
33
34
35
33
35
38
40
40
39
42
54
56
56
57
69
68
64
62
D.O.
rag/1
11.3
12.0
11.9
12.4
12.4
11.9
10.7
11.3
11.3
11.0
11.0
10.7
10.7
10.3
8.9
8.0
8.9
8.9
7.8
7.6
7.4
8.0
Phenol
p.p.b.
0.0
7.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.76
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Alkalinity
pH ng/1
8.4
7.3
7-1
7.6
7-4
7.5
7.6
7.2
7-5
7.6
7.1
7.5
7.3
7.5
7.7
7.8
8.0
7.3
7.7
7.9
8.0
7.8
108
113
103
38
67
81
99
105
99
82
46
53
44
52
45
40
43
45
69
83
62
72
Total
Con-
Acidity ductivity
rag/1 /f mhos/cm
8
6
2
30
4
6
8
3
8
4
3
1
4
600
650
740
360
470
460
580
650
660
540
370
370
360
340
300
230
300
245
300
350
280
350
Total*** Ferrous**
Iron
mg/1
1.0
0.4
0.6
3.5
0.6
0.5
0.3
0.5
0.6
0.6
0.4
1.2
1.1
0.5
0.7
0.5
1.2
0.5
0.4
0.5
0.8
0.6
Iron
rag/1
0.2
0.3
0.5
2.2
0.4
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.4
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.3
0.1
0.8
0.2
0.1
0.3
0.7
0.4
Chlorides
mg/1
34
39
48
30
33
41
42
41
43
26
41
24
24
24
20
21
21
18
19
19
23
22
Sulfates
mg/1
118
167
177
77
133
140
180
233
213
133
100
80
73
80
70
47
75
65
78
77
65
82
to
-------
TABL" !IO.
MAHONING RIVER AT LEAVITTSBURG
(U.S. Rt. 422 Cont'd.)
Date
Sampled
6/6/64
6/11
6/24
6/27
7/8/64
7/16
7/26
7/28
7/31
8/4/64
8/14
8/22
8/30
9/10/64
9/15
9/25
9/29
10/2/64
10/6
10/23
10/27
10/30
11/6/64
11/12
li/20
H/24
12/4/64
12/11
**"/*-
12/1A
fc/ -^f
13/23
-/2V
Flo;/*
C.f .3.
228
222
288
225
235
340
276
232
238
238
252
292
235
203
206
165
167
Data
NA
ii
ii
it
n
n
ii
n
ti
n
1!
i;
n
Temp.
F.
67
74
77
76
74
70
77
76
78
73
70
69
76
77
64
66
64
61
50
53
54
51
55
54
39
36
36
36
40
D.O.
mg/1
8.0
7-6
6.6
7.4
10.4
7.8
6.8
7-8
8.0
9.6
8.0
7.8
8.0
7.8
7.8
8.3
7.6
8.6
8.9
8.9
8.3
8.9
8.9
8.9
9.5
10.7
n.o
n.o
n.o
12.8
9-5
Phenol
p.p.b.
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
PH
7.3
7.8
8.0
7.9
7.9
7.9
8.1
8.1
7.7
7.7
8.0
8.2
7.9
8.3
7.8
7-9
7.9
7.9
8.1
7.7
8.0
8.0
8.1
7.9
7-9
8.3
8.2
7rt
.8
7.9
7.9
7.7
Total
Alkalinity
mg/1
71
58
73
88
70
78
85
75
57
75
95
91
87
95
84
85
- 83
91
98
85
104
103
112
113
n?
107
146
148
ns
105
73
Total
Acidity
mg/1
3-5
4
3
3
4.5
6
2
3
0.5
9
7
6
8
3
5
7
10
4
3
20
5
7
5
7
6
3
2
7
6
6
6
Con-
ductivity
^mhos/cm
360
355
400
390
320
390
370
370
375
330
380
400
420
420
420
425
400
400
400
460
455
450
480
. 475
495
480
495
550
530
500
435
Total** Ferrous**
Iron
mg/1
0.9
0.3
0.1
0.2
0.5
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.6
0.3
0.4
0.7
1.1
0.1
0.5
0.1
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.4
0.2
.4
2.2
Iron
mg/1
0.7
0.0
. 0.0
0.0
0.3
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.3
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.3
0.0
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.2
.1
0.2
176
Chlorides
mg/1
23
19
24
13
23
21
25
20
23
20
24
24
20
22
23
22
19
17
21
21
21
n
31
28
27
29
32
35
47
24
38
Sulfates
mg/1
100
93
85
83
68
75
78
85
107
93
103
ne
123
113
120
120
88
n?
U7
137
123
133
127
150
137
137
133-2
to
-------
TABLE NO. 3(a)
STREAM WATER QUALITY - 1963
MAHONING RIVER BASIN
MAHONING RIVER AT NILES
(P&rk Avenue BridgeJ
Date
Sampled
1/6/63
1/8
1/12
1/15
1/17
1/31
2/3/63
2/10
2/19
2/25
2/26
3/H/63
3/19
3/25
3/30
4/4/63
4/16
4/22
4/29
5/5/63
5/9
si i*
5/17
57/23
5/2£
Flow*
c.f .s.
Data
NA
ii
11
n
it
n
M
it
n
n
M
M
n
it
M
n
n
n
n
ti
n
n
n
Temp.
°F.
50
52
44
38
40
46
42
47
52
46
41
37
39
46
49
56
66
59
64
.69
79
73
69
68
D.O.
mg/1
4.4
0.08
8.9
10.7
5.7
7.2
8.3
5.1
3.8
4.1
5.0
12.0
5.1
9.5
4.2
2.40
2.82
7.2
5.6
4.5
2.9
2.82
3-8
6.6
Phenol
p.p.b.
79.7
454
494
60.2
3.0
2.6
21.34
5.54
13.7
117.33
41.21
12.1
379
25.26
29.85
43.62
57.40
PH
8.9
6.6
7.2
7.4
7.2
7.0
7.0
7.0
6.7
6.7
7.0
6.6
6.5
7.0
6.8
6.7
6.4
7.0
6.9
6.5
6.4
6.6
6.5
6.3
Total Total
Alkalinity Acidity
mg/1 mg/1
32
6
31
62
43
77
44
71
32
35
68
13
21
41
25
u
23
22
29
7
20
15
25
26
Con-
ductivity
*/ mhos /cm
720
820
590
555
570
660
730
670
750
770
780
290
225
390
390
420
490
320
560
520
500
640
560
520
Total**
Iron
mg/1
10.84
10.89
15.0
17.0
32.15
8.0
14.0
L4.0
L4.0
20.0
18.0
10.0
5.0
5.0
6.4
u.i
13.2
7.3
16.8
11.4
6.4
21.8
11.8
14.2
Ferrous**
Iron
mg/1
14.0
12.0
14.0
L4.0
6.0
4.1
4.6
4.6
10.0
12.3
1.8
16.8
2.3
5.0
17.3
8.6
10.8
Chlorides
mg/1
34
38
39
35
44
53
51
41
55
61
54
20
10
26
19
27
29
16
25
26
28
34
28
22
Sulfates
mg/1
250
350
46
37
73
93.4
150
216.7
66.7
243-4
200,0
226.7
290.1
260.1
213.4
VJ1
4=-
-------
TA.3L" :iC. 3(a)
MAHONING RIVER AT WILES
(Park Avenue Bridge)
Date
Sampled
6/6/63
6/10
6/22
6/29
7/5/63
7/16
7/22
7/28
7/31
8/13/63
8/16
8/26
9/2/63
9/9
9/22
9/30
10/6/63
10/14
10/27
* i
10/29
n/n/63
9 t ~
11/19
* . '
11/21
11/22
11/29
12/16/63
12/29
12/30
Flow*
c.f .s.
Data
NA
ii
n
n
ii
M
n
n
n
M
n
n
ii
n
M
n
M
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
Temp.
82
83
78
83
83
81
80
85
85
80
79
76
74
75
69
68
66
68
74
68
58
65
64
65
52
50
48
45
D.O.
mg/1
2. k
4. 2
0.08
6. k
1.50
5.0
2.17
1.16
3.40
2.65
3.60
2.17 .
0.96
4-4
2.57
5.1
4-2
1.64
1.7
4.7
4.0
3.20
3.9
2.31
4.7
3.9
8.0
3-4
Phenol
p.p.b.
9.18
6.89
16.1
12.2
8.7
6.89
3.9
9.18
19.75
16.53
21.24
7.46
13.2
12.05
1.84
9.87
94.71
26.40
48.8
4.6
47.6
76.2
42.8
66.6
1084.8
114.2
1561.3
pH
5.5
6.9
6.9
6.0
5.3
7.0
6.6
6.8
5.8
5.6
5.4
6.6
7.0
6.7
6.8
7.6
6.7
6.7
6.5
6.6
7.4
6.8
6.4
6.3
6.4
7-4
7.3
6.6
Total Total ,
Alkalinity Acidity
rag/1 rag/1 ^
? ?
59 ---
41
13
0.0 47
12.0
11.0
30.0
15-0
5.0
9.0
20.0
30
50
34
26
14
48
41
94
38
12
27
21
1
40.0
19
Con- Total**
ductivity Iron
/ nhos/cm mg/1
750
530
550
520
770
610
530
500
530
560
750
480
540
510
600
590
610
650
670
670
770
770
770
610
920
820
820
30.0
2.7
5.0
8.2
8.2
9.1
8.2
1.4
7.6
12.7
16.4
11.8
0.5
2.7
5.0
1.8
1.4
4.6
1.8
2.7
0.0
4.1
4.1
1.8
8.2
8.2
13.2
9.1
Ferrous**
Iron Chlorides
mg/1 mg/1
23.6
1.4
2.7
8.2
5.5
6.8
5.0
1.4
1.4
2.7
15-5
8.2
0.5
C.9
1.4
0.9
1.4
1.4
1.8
1.8
0.0
4.1
0.5
0.9
4.6
1.8
3.6
4.1
28
24
26
32
28
27
23
22
26
27
26
28
30
25
28
34
36
32
40
30
43
42
34
33
66
49
55
Sulfates
mg/1
313-4
140.0
206.7
166.1
313.4
266.7
V220.0
190.0
210.0
233.4
283.4
150.0
233.4
186.7
176.7
213.4
226.8
240.1
293-4
. 206.7
280.1
'313-4
346.7
333.4
433.4
326.7
333.4
VJl
VJ1
-------
TABLE NO. 3(b)
STREAM WATER QUALITY - 1964
MAHONING RIVER BASIN
KAHONING RIVER AT MILES
(Park Avenue Bridge)
Date Flow*
Sampled c.f.s.
1/5/64 Data
1/8/64 Not
1/18 Available
1/26
2/2/64
2/12
2/18
2/24
2/29
3/3/64
3/14
3/20
3/28
3/30
4/18/64
4/21
4/26
4/30
5/7/64
5/11
5/17
5/31
Temp.
50
52
50
35
48
50
54
51
41
49
43
44
47
48
67
56
58
58
77
77
68
70
D.O.
mg/1
7.6
7.6
I "
5-4
x ^
30.4
9.8
6.4
7.4
6.8
5.7
8.0
9.8
11.9
4.7
3.7
3.9
6.8
6.6
6.2
7.2
5.0
1.8
4.2
Phenol
p.p.b.
66.6
95.2
80.9
23.8
61.9
619.
390.
1656.
119.
162.
9.5
9.5
19.0
47.6
38.1
4.8
4.8
14.3
38.1
28.6
28.6
9.5
Total Total Con- Total**
Alkalinity Acidity ductivity Iron
pH mg/1 mg/1 ^mhos/cm mgA
6.9
6.4
6.3
7.4
3.5
5.9
6.3
6.9
6.6
6.8
7.2
6.9
6.6
7.3
5.0
7.5
7.8
7.0
4.3
6.5
6.9
6.8
50
15
34
43
0
9
16
68
19
71
38
50
35
43
4
48
37
39
0
43
21
42
w
_
-
205
-
-
-
55
13
20
48
28
130
13
5
10
75,
25
5
20
820
860
940
380
860
690
820
840
820
660
400
400
400
550
540
290
320
285
590
520
340 x
480
30.4
24.1
33-7
14.6
33.7
77.4
25.0
6.8
25.0
5.9
12.7
12.3
6.4
10.5
25.0
- 24.1
3.2
4.5
3.6
13.2
7.7
10.9
Ferrous**
Iron
mg/1
4.6
3.2
25.9
11.4
30.5
41.9
16.4
2.3
21.8
1.4
2.3
5.5
1.4
0.5
11.8
23.2
2.3
3.1
0.4
4.5
6.3
9.5
Chlorides Sulfates
mg/1 mg/1
56
54
60
32
42
48
62
60
52
27
53
24
25
53
45
26
20
19-
29
29
23
27
427
453
420
77
333
327
427
333
433
273
100
97
107
160
217
90
77
67
300
227
71
^187 ...
-------
TABLE A/Q. 3(b)
MAHONING RIVER AT MILES
(Park Avenue Bridge, Cont'd)
Date Flow*-
Sampled c.f.s.
6/6/64
6/11-
6/24
6/27
7/8/64
7/16
7/26
7/28
7/31
B/4/64
8/14
8/28
8/30
9/10/64
9A5
9/25
9/29
10/2/64
10/6
10/23
10/27
10/30
11/6/64
n/12
11/20
11/24
12/4/64
12A1
12/14
12/23
12/29
Data
Not
Available
ii
u
it
u
11
it
i.
u
u
1!
11
II
ll
II
11
II
II
II
II
I?
II
II
II
II
11
II
11
It
Temp.
°F.
75
80
84
84
82
81
86
85
84
83
78
77
84
86
75
75
74
75
_
65
69
67
69
71
59
57
50
53
46
54
50
D.O.
mgA
4.2
4.6
1.7
3.7
2.8
4.4
.2
2.2
2.2
2.8
4.4
3.6
2.4
1.1
2.6
4.9
4.5
3-3
7.8
9.2
1.2
3.9
4.1
1.4
6.6
5.9
6.2
6.6
7.4
6.8
5.6
Phenol
p.p.b.
23.8
52.4
33-2
28.6
28.6
28.6
19.0
956.8
647.4
23.8
42.8
33.3
28.6 ;
23.8
34.1
_
309.0
57.1
95.2
76.1
85.6
509.2
120.0
768.0
71.4
178.0
85.7
109.5
109.5
233.2
71.4
PH
4.6
6.0
7.2
4.4
6.9
6.8
7.3
6.9
6.6
5.5
-
6.8
, 4.2
6.8
7.1
5.8
6.9
5.9
6.3
6.3
6.2
6.6
6.2
6.5
5.8
7.0
7.0
6.6
7.4
6.4
6.9
Voxaj. Tot-ajL
Alkalinity Acidity
mg/1 mgA
1
15
35
0
36
32
13
21
19
6
- .
17
-
27
67
7
65
23
32
30
25
47 .
28
46
18
53
35
70
101
50
59
32
43
5
50
11
12
12
11
11
50
48
16
55
28
15
102
26
64
61
53
121
25
106
84
158
47
20
46
14
59
23
uon ro'caj.'1'
ductivity Iron
mhos/cm mgA
490
570
660
500
500
500
450
490
530
540
620
480
690
520
560
820
580
650
670
820
830
680
840
710
760
720
635
725
650
720
555
16.4
6.8
5.5
11.4
2.7
3.6
8.6
3.6
4.6
10.9
19.1
9.1
14.6
17.3
3.6
38.2
36.4
9.6
16.8
34.6
15.0
12.7
12.7
25.9
68.3
11.9
10.9
12.7
3.2
4.6
5.6
t errous'*"*'
Iron
mg/1
15.9
0.9
5.5
0.0
1.1
2.2
7.7
2.2
3.7
9.6
18.9
5-5
11.8
6.4
0.0
25.9
1.4
9.6
9.1
20.9
13.7
12.3
11.4
22.3
34.1
8.2
1.4
10.5
1.4
_
4.6
uruoriaes Sulfates
mg/1 mg/1
29
32
28
29
34
35
29
36
35
28
29
26
25
32
35
31
40
37
31
35
33
34
40
45
39
42
49
55
54
52
45
267
314
273
249
180
.186
157 -
210
203
227
300
200
333
257
193 ,
360
206
326
253
346
320
353
413
44P
400
333
253.2
VJl
-j
-------
TABLE NO. 4(a)
STREAM WATER QUALITY - 1963
MAHONING RIVER BASIN
MAHONING RIVER AT YOUNGSTOWN
(Bridge Street)
Date
Sampled
1/6/63
1/8
1/12
1/15
1/17
1/31
2/3/63
2/10
2/19
2/25
2/26
3/H/63
3A9
3/15
3/30
4/4/63
4/16
4/22
4/29
5/5/63
5/9
5/17
5/23
5/24
Flow*'
c.f .s.
194
194
389
371
223
223
204
185
264
204
204
1410
3110
1670
1480
822
313
1140
371
389
365
347
359
341
Temp.
55
58
56
39
38
54
44
43
56
47
50
39
44
49
54
60
75
60
66
76
89
89
74
83
D.O.
mg/1
7.2
6.4
4.2
10.7
8.3
7.8
6.4
4.7
5.4
5.1
6.8
11.6
9.2
9.8
8.3
6.8
4.1
6.2
4.9
5.7
5.9
6.0
5.7
6.6
Phenol
p.p.b.
-
7.0
192.
243.
210.
0.0
1.93
8.80
4.67
24. 7
24.22
14.92
18.37
166.
22.20
27.55
18.37
51.66
Total
Alkalinity
PH mg/1
7.1
6.9
6.8
7.2
7.3
7.3
7.3
7.1
6.9
6.7
7.0
6.7
6.6
7.1
6.9
6.9
6.6
7.2
7.1
5.8
6.5
6.9
6.8
6.6
31
25
22
71
81
92
46
43
48
40
44
19
24
24
25
21
9
39
33
9
8
31
46
36
Total Con- Total**
Acidity ductivity Iron
mg/1 ^mhos/cm mg/1
686
670
670
590
550
690
- 760
790
780
730
820
300
240
410
390
440
670
320
530
620
540
690
610
-
2.89
0.44
21.0
4.0
28.0
10.0
6.0
6.0
8.0
12.0
10.0
10.0
4.6
3.6
5.0
9.1
10.0
5.9
5.5
6.4
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.2
Ferrous**
Iron
mg/1
-
_
6.0
6.0
6.0
8.0
4.0
3.6
2.3
3.2
4.1
6.4
3.6
2.7
4.1
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.3
Chlorides Sulfates
mg/1 mg/1
39
39
48
40
53
52
67
50
69
59
62
22
11
24
22
27
57
21
28
45
38
40
41
41
-
-
300
230
40
22
73
86.7
146.7
250.1
46.7
206.7
233.4
253.4
266.7
213.4
VJI
Cc
-------
TABLE NO. 4-*.)
MAHONING RIVER AT YOUNGSTOWN
(Bridge Street)
Date
Sampled
6/6/63
6/10
6/22
6/29
7/5/63
7/16
7/22
7/2S
7/31
8A3/63
8/16
8/26
9/2/63
9/9
9/22
9/30
10/6/63
10M
10/27
10/29
11/11/63
11/19
11/21
11/22
11/29
12/16/63
12/29
12/30
Flow*
C.f .3.
428
656
374
398
398
431
480
424
459
438
362
350
298
298
243
228
238
228
217
221
230
217
221
212
346
153
170
164
Temp.
°F.
97
89
83
92
83
85
84
90
87
85
86
80
79
79
73
76
78
73
82
70
66
64
70
70
56
44
50
45
D.O.
mg/1
5.3
4.8
5.7
4.7
4.6
1.5
5.7
4.0
5.0
4.9
5.0
6.0
5.4
5.0
4.9
4.6
3.48
4.4
3.7
3.4
4.4
5.7
5.1
3.60
4.6
3.40
3.20
5.6
Phenol
p.p.b.
6.20
7.46
19.6
16.3
2.75
4.13
4.25
5.17
10.10
6.89
9.18
5.74
10.33
9.53
0.0
4.59
5.74
6.54
3.56
-
5.7
0.0
4.8
4.8
4.8
28.6
9.5
9.5
Total Total Con-
Alkalinity Acidity ductivity
pH mg A nig A /^Tnho3/on
4.6
6.9
7.1
6.8
5.5
7.2
7.0
6.2
6.6
6.4
.6.3
7.1
6.3
6.7
6.7
7.2
6.6
6.3
6.6
6.5
6.2
6.6
6.7
6.7
6.6
7.1
7.3
6.6
0
8
28
38
9
20
14
7
34
29
26
31
6
15
36
21
6
7
39
25
9
15
19
25
21
_
68
46
? 700
610
560
470
470
490
460
500
450
460
480
450
540
550
570
630
670
650
700
650
650
650
700
730
620
44 940
720
780
Total**
Iron
mgA
8.2
0.9
1.8
0.9
5.5
1.4
0.5
1.8
1.8
0.9
0.9
3.2
0.5
0.0
0.5
0.9
0.9
0.5
1.8
2.3
0.0
1.8
1.4
1.8
1.4
7.8
2.3
1.8
Ferrous**
Iron
mgA
4.6
0.9
1.4
0.9
2.8
1.4
0.0
1.4
0.9
0.5
0.5
1.4
0.5
0.0
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
1.8
1.4
0.0
0.5
0.5
0.5 -
0.0
1.8
0.5
1.4
Chlorides
mgA
37
31
32.
39
24
26
25
24
24
23
25
30
34
30
39
35
46
41
45
43
39
45
45
.44
37
67
49
59
Sulfates
mgA
300.1
150.0
150.0
137.4
166.7
140.0
136.7
208.7
123.4
116.7
186.7
126.7
250.1
250.1
233.4
206.7
246.7
283.4
260.1
306.7
226.7
260.1
266.7
266.7
266.7
466.8
220.0
266.7
VJI
VQ
-------
TABLE MO. 4(b)
STREAM WATER QUALITY - 196*
MAHONING RIVER BASIN
MAHONING RIVSR AT YOUNGSTOWN
(Bridge St.)
Date
Sampled
1/5/6*
1/8
1/18/6*
1/26/6*
2/2/6*
2/12/6*
2/18/6*
2/2*/6*
2/29/6*
,3/3/6*
3/l*/6*
5/20/6*
3/28/6*
3/30/6*
*/!8/6*
4/21/6*
*/26/6*
*/30/6*
5/7/6*
5/11/6*
5/17/6*
5/31/6*
6/6/6*
6/11/6*
6/2*/6*
6/27/6*
Flow*
c.f.s.
192
185
167
1620
20*
221
189
181
189
**2
2160
1650
772
*60
*22
5000
3000
6080
588
*91
668
289
328
310
353
33*
Temp.
°F.
55
52
56
36
5*
*8
50
51
62
60
**
*5
52
*6
71
55
59
58
80
7*
71
76
8*
88
90
82
D.O.
mg/1
*.6
6.*
7.*
7.8
*.2
7.0
3.2
6.0
3-9
5.9
7.2
8.9
7.2
*.5
3-5
7.0
6.8
*.6
3.*
5.6
2.9
-
*.*
*.o
3.*
3-3
Phenol
p.p.b.
1*7.6
261.8
*7.6
1*.3
228.*
133-3
366.5
161.8
17.9
*7.6
9.5
1*.3
9.5
19.0
*.8
0.0
*.8
*.8
0.0
*.8
*.8
2.*
*.8
0.0
1*.3
*.8
Total
Alkalinity
pH rag/1
6.9
6.5
6.*
7.3
6.0
6.9
6.6
6.5
6.6
6.7
7.0
7.0
6.9
7.1
6.9
8.1
7.3
7.9
7.1
7.2
7.6
7.*
3.9
7.2
7.7
6.6
33
22
56
51
69
30
15
26
28
*9
*2
**
30
69
38
60
37
*7
39
63
0
22
5*
20
Total
Acidity
mg/1
62
*3
11
16
22
2*
26
2
6
2
8
6
*
5
23
6
5
13
Con- Total**
ductivity Iron
//mhos/cm mg/1
750
820
9*0
*20
700
690
800
900
920
760
3*0
*30
*00
*?0
510
360
300
330
*80
3*0
350
580
600
520
5*0
580
13.6
13.2
9.6
8.2
6.*
27.8
10.9
22.3
8.7
5.9
6.8
7.3
5.9
7.3
5.0
8.2
2.7
3.2
6.*
1.8
0.9
5-0
7.7
1.8
0.9
0.9
Ferrous**
Iron
rag/1
2.3
1.*
*.6
*.6
2.7
20.0
7.3
16.8
*.6
1.*
3.2
2.3
0.9
0.5
*.5
8.2
1.3
1.8
3.7
0.9
0.9
3-6
7.2
.9
0.9
0.9
Chlorides Sulfates
mg/1 mg/1
58
67
68
37
52
60
73
65
79
2*
60
29
27
3*
**
22
21
17
36
3*
21
38
3*
2*
39.
33
313.*
380.1
373.*
120.0
3*6.7
233.*
*00.0
*66.8
*20.1
266.7
81.7
100.0
103.*
1*0.0
1*1.7
88.*
76.7
?3«*
186.8
93.*
60.0
200
320
250
250
25*
-rrv
-------
TABLE'NO.
MAHONING RIVER AT YOUNGSTOWN
(Bridge St. Cont»d.)
Date
Sampled
7/8/64
7/16/6*
7/26/64
7/31/64
8/4/64
8/14/64
8/22/64
8/30/64
9/10/64
9/15/64
9/25/64
9/29/64
10/2/64
10/6/64
10/23/64
10/27/64
10/30/64
11/6/64
11/12/64
11/20/64
11/24/64
12/4
'.
12/11
12/14
12/23
12/29
Flow*
c.f.s.
428
542
505
422
463
396
644
340
322
300
344
253
Data
Not
Available
n
n
n
n
ii
n
n
n
n
n
n
Temp.
°F.
86
82
88
86
84
82
85
90
98
93
79
76
79
Broke
71
73
75
76
77
63
58
68
64
47
59
49
D.O.
mg/1
3.5
4.1
2.9
3.9
3-3
3.1
3-0
3.2
3.*
3.9
8.3
7.4
6.0
4.7
7.6
4.2
3-5
2.6
2.8
4.9
6.2
5-9
5-3
7.2
6.2
6.2
Phenol
p.p.b.
4.8
4.8
4.8
4.8
4.8
14.3
9.5
0.0
0.0
9.5
_
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
18.0
10.0
19.0
38.0
33-3
276.1
19.0
52.4
42.8
Total
Alkalinity
pH mg/1
7.2
7.3
7.1
6.7
7.0
4.8
7.4
7.2
7.6
5.9
5.*
3-9
5.7
4.2
5.1
6.6
6.4
4.7
6.5
5.9
6.5
7.2
6.9
7.2
6.5
7.3
41
32
33
21
55
3
42
12
38.
7
5
3.9
6.0
4.2,
4.0
24.0
24.0
2
20
9
V*
38
40
83
22
66
Total Con- Total**
Acidity ductivity Iron
mg/1 # mhos/cm mg/1
8
3.5
6
4
15
18
6
11
9
17
25
43
23
40
22
65
50
32
14
100
76
20
28
10
42
14
390
460
430
500
450
480
490
530
570
550
490
655
600
740
870
840
665
660
620
650
640
675
800
610
800
470
0.9
0.9
0.5
0.9
2.7
4.1
1.6
1.4
10.0
0.5
1.4
18.2
11.4
9.1
11.8
12.7
7.3
1.4
1.8
24.1
37.3
5.6
6.4
4.6
5.5
5.6
Ferrous**
Iron
mg/1
0.4
0.9
0.0
0.4
.5
2.7
1.4
.5
1.4
0.0
.9
.9
.5
5.0
9.6
8.6
4.1
1.4
.9
7.3
26.8
1.4
6.4
4.1
-
1.8
Chlorides Sulfates
mg/1 mg/1
30
31
28
32
25
33
31
30
36
35
32
39
32
42
44
38
37
47
49
48
51
56
X A
62
49
59
l»/\
40
137
160
137
193
130
250
150
257
240
253
176
354
266
306
373
333
333
360
280
346
407
207
-------
TABLE NO. 5(a)
STREAM WATER QUALITY - 1963
MAHONING RIVER BASIN
MAHONING RIVER AT STRUTHERS
(Ohio Route 616)
Date Flow*
Sampled c.f.s.
1/6/63 NO
1/8/63 Data
1/12 "
1/15
1/17
1/31
2/3
2/10 "
2/19
2/25 "
2/26 "
3/11 "
3/19 "
3/25
.3/30
4/4 "
4/16 "
4/22 "
4/29
5/5 "
5/9 "
5/17 "
5/23 "
5/24
Temp
F.
61
66
59
46
46
60
53
60
65
59
60
40
44
53
59
63
85
67
79
66
101
94
87
93
D.O.
mg/1
5.6
3.6
5.9
8.0
4.6
3.6
7.4
5.7
3.6
5.3
4.9
11.0
6.6
8.6
7.6
5.9
2.17
4.1
3.9
4.2
2.72
3.09
2.40
1.42
Phenol
p.p.b.
191.
261
326
339
n.
7.
80.
103.
79.
445.
97.
a
a?
210
40
294.
2a.
Total Total Con- Total**
pH Alkalinity Acidity ducitvity Iron
mg/1 mg/1 ^mhos/cm mgA
7.3
6.7
7.1
7.3
6.8
6.9
7.5
7.1
6.7
6.8
6.9
6.9
6.9
7.1
6.9
6.9
5.8
7.1
7.3
6.6
6.5
6.5
6.4
6.5
28
7
34
a
52
48
46
67
14
51
33
27
43
33
32
a
7
35
55
11
10
7
29
28
790
820
765
685
790
860
900
880
920
940
1000
360
330
440
440
480
.880
390
.600
680
750
770
670
780
4.51
0.11
16.0
24.0
62.0
6.0
4.0
18.0
16.0
14.0
22.0
8.0
7.7
6.4
5.0
10.0
35.9
10.5
5.9
6.8
7.7
9.6
11.8
7.4
Ferrous**
Iron
mg/1
18.0
14.0
10.0
12.0
6.0
5.0
4.1
3.2
5.0
35.5
8.2
2.7
3.6
0.9
5.0
7.7
3.6
Chlorides Sulfatea
mg/1 mg/1
43
50
50
45
66
68
108
83
76
82
84
26
19
29
27
33
47
29
42
42
54
50
51
53
330
320
63
42
83
107.
160.
A53. ,
72.
200.
220.
303.
317.
313.
M i n f
347. <
-------
. TABLE: NO. 5(a)
MAHONING RIVER AT STRUTHERS
(Ohio Route 616, Cont'd.)
pate
Sampled
6/6
6/10
6/22
6/29
7/5
7/16
7/22
7/28
7/31
8/13
8/16
8/26
9/2
9/9
9/22
9/30
10/6
10/14
10/27
10/29
11/11
11/19
' '
11/21
11/22
11/29
12/16
12/29
12/30
Flow*
c.f.s.
n
it
n
it
it
it
ti
n
n
n
n
it
it
n
n
n
it
»
n
it
n
it
n
it
n
ti
n
Temp.
°F.
104
97
92
103
94
92
89
96
91
89
92
90
88
91
82
90
82
86
90
86
80
81
80
84
64
64
59
65
D.O.
mg/1
2.57
4.0
2.65
2.46
2.57
7.8
2.82
4.5
3.28
4.9
4.1
3.48
3.8
3.48
5.1
2.9
4.6
3.60
4.9
2.22
4.5
4.6
4.9
3.20
4.0
3.40
6.0
4.2
Phenol
p.p.b.
182.
138.
62.
18.
14.
62
67
25.
87
102.
171.
50.
142.0
4.59
80.36
121.0
94.14
63.70
63.0
80.4
138.0
100.0
38.1
109.5
28.6
233.2
571.2
Total Total Con-
Alkalinity Acidity ductivity
pH mg/1 mg/1 # mhos/cm
6.0
7.0
6.8
6.2
6.2
7.5
7.6
7.6
6.6
6.4
6.8
6.6
6.4
6.5
7.1
6.8
7.0
6.6
7.3
6.7
6.3
6.3
6.5
7.1
6.9
7.0
7.4
7.9
13
22
8
14
10
12
21
42
32
29
57
52
6
7
57
10
12
26
76
44
10
8
10
75
62
98
99
760
680
710
620
600
640
590
620
560
460
580
600
670
730
700
800
810
800
820
I 790
740
940
840
820
620
56 940
880
900
Total**
Iron
mg/1
8.2
1.4
4.6
5.5
1.8
1.8
-2.3
0.9
2.3
6.8
1.4
10.5
1.8
1.8
0.9
1.8
1.4
1.8
21.8
1.8
0.9
20.0
2.7
1.8
3.6
7.8
3.2
5.0
Ferrous**
Iron
mg/1
4.1
1.4
2.3
2.8
0.9
1.8
0.9
0.9
1.4
1.4
0.9
5.5
0.5
0.9
0.5
0.5
0.9
0.9
18.2
0.9
0.5
15.5
1.8
0.5
2.5
1.8
2.7
2.7
Chlorides Sulfates
mg/1 mg/1
49
37
39
40
40
43
37
32
34
23
a
43
38
41
48
48
59
59
57
54
55
59
68
49
40
67
73
70
307.
203.
287.
190.
213.
153.
127.
149'.
153.
117.
173<
193.
258.4
300.1
193.4
300.0
280.1
333.4
253.4
320.1
286o7
453 o7
. 300ol
26607
.213 »4
466.7
246,7
333.4 0
-------
TABLE NO. 5(b)
STREAM WATER QUALITY - 1964
MAHONING RIVER BASIN
MAHONING RIVER AT STRDTHERS
(Ohio Route 616)
'Date
Sampled
1/5/64
1/8
1/18
1/26
2/2/64
2/12
2/18
2/24
2/29
3/3/64
3/14
3/20
3/28
3/30
4/18/64
4/21/64
4/26
4/30
5/7/64
'* '
5/11
5/1?
5/31
6/6/64
6/11
6/24
6/27
Flow*
C.f.3.
No
Data
n
n
N
n
N
H
n
n
n
n
M
N
n
n
n
n
n
n
M
N
n
N
n
n
Temp.
OF.
67
67
68
42
62
63
75
69
69
63
49
49
56
58
78
58
62
61
88
80
77
88
93
98
99
102
D.O.
mg/1
5.9
4.6
6.3
7.4
4.6
5.0
4.6
4.9
5.0
5.7
8.9
6.8
6.2
3.2
2.3
6.6
7.0
4.5
2.3
4.6
6.0
4.4
2.5
2.4
2.3
1.5
Phenol
p.p.b.
219.0
476.0
523.6
76.2
76.2
333-2
447.4
371.3
154.7
126.9
557.1
57.1
185.6
133.3
52.4
76.2
52.4
23.8
47.6
100 .-0
85.7
52.4
42.8
62.4
14.3
47.6
Total
Alkalinity
pH mg/1
7.1
6.4
6.7
7.5
6.9
6.8
6.4
6.7
7.0
6.8
7.1
7.0
7.1
6.8
6.0
8.0
7.5
7.8
7.3
7.0
8.0
7.5
6.6
7.5
7.5
7.1
75
20
91
65
48
50
6
43
80
51
27
51
51
34
5
76
42
65
56
3.6
67
60
30
50
38
46
Total Con- Total**
Acidity ductivity Iron
mg/1 Armhos/cm mg/1
50
11
34
16
42
57
4
5
3
8
11.5
3
7
14
8.5
5
10
900
980
1040
530
760
780
980
1060
990
860
360
465
480
750
640
390
330
360
560
480
430
690
630
700
730
700
5.5
20.0
9.6
19.1
12.3
10.5
25-9
15.0
8.2
5.0
20.5
7.7
11.8
12.7
17.3
28.2
3.2
6.4
3-2
7.7
2.7
5.9
6.4
3.6
4.6
2.3
Ferrous**
Iron
mg/1
1.8
2.7
6.4
12.1
10.5
6.4
12.7
6.4
5.5
0.9
4.6
1.8
1.4
0.5
10.0
26.8
1.8
5.5
2.1
6.3
2.2
5.4
5.9
1.8
^.5
1.8
Chlorides
»g/l
79
91
91
41
71
73
84
100
91
28
80
33
34
96
46
28
24
18
39
38
28
50
47
56
52
45! .
Sulfates
mg/1
300
407
320
160
267
273
467
453
360
24?
77
117
100
227
250
93
88
87
180
150
107
247
280 0\
^^
300 ^
227
263
-------
TABLE NO. 5(b)
MAHONING RIVER AT STRUTHERS
(Ohio Route 616)
Date
Sampled
7/8/64
7/16
7/26
7/28
7/31
8/4/64
8/14
8/22
8/30
9/10
9/15
9/25
9/29
10/2
10/6
10/23
10/27
10/30
11/6
**
11/12
11/20
11/24
12/4
'.
12/11
12/14
12/23
12/29
Flow*
c.f.s.
No
Data
n
M
n
n
n
n
n
M
n
n
n
N
n
N
n
n
n
H
n
n
n
M
n
N
n
Temp.
°F.
94
85
99
101
98
92
94
92
104
108
93
90
98
100
_
87
99
91
94
92
81
87
69
72
66
82
62
D.O.
mg/1
1.9
3.5
3.3
3.8
3.1
2.8
2.2
3-5
2.5
1.7
2.7
1.7
3.6
2.1
5-3
5.1
3.2
2.4
3.1
2.7
4.0
3-9
3.4
3-5
6.0
4.2
6.4
Phenol
p.p.b.
23.8
71.4
23.8
238.0
71.4
95.2
71.4
57.1
19.0
47.6
71.4'
90.4
142.8
295.8
95.2
76.1
57.1
60.0
138.0
52.4
95.0
147.5
261.8
85.7
166.6
261.8
Total
Alkalinity
pH mg/1
7.2
7.0
7.6
7.4
7.0
6.6
7.6
7.9
7.5
7.5
6.9
6.7
6.2
6.3
6.7
6.3
6.9
6.8
7.1
6.4
7.1
6.4
8.3
6.9
7.1
6.5
6.8
50
37
50
10
37
37
48
35
58.0
:34.0
35
33
4
25
25
18
23
23
35
20
46
19
80
78
76
22
51
Total
Acidity
rag/1
8.5
11
6.5
7.5
12
22
1
8
12
21
26
22
45
21
30
25
40
32
24
49
32
78
6
30
20
38
25
Con- Total**
ductivity Iron
/j mhos/cm mg/1
500
530
620
560
630
570
600
590
670
660
660
650
880
770
830
900
880
840
.770
790
760
770
650
800
710
900
620
1.4
3.6
3.6
4.1
5.9
8.2
3.6
2.3
2.7
5.5
1.4
3.6
90.5
37.8
2.7
8.2
4.6
6.4
2.3
7.3
3.2
20.9
1.8
1.4
1.4
2.3
5.9
Ferrous**
Iron
mg/1
0.0
3.6
3.1
2.7
5.0-
0.9
0.5
0.9
0.9
1.4
1.4
1.8
11.4
0.5
0.5
1.4
3.6
1.4
1.8
5.9
1.8
14.6-
0.9
1.4
1.4
3~6
Chlorides
rag/1
42
41
45
39
47
43
50
40
47
71
58
57
69
67
62
68
63
64
68
70
63
65
72
^^x
96
75
_ *
94
54
Sulfates
rag/1
150
167
170
367
230
163
193
167
240
307
320
253
386
260
266
453
360
346
393
A/X
360
380
440
206.4
Ov
Ul
-------
TABLE NO. 6(a)
STREAM WATER QUALITY - 1963
MAHONDJG RIVER BASIN
MAHONBJG RIVER AT LOWELLVILLE
(Lowellville Bridge)
Date
Sampled
1/6/63
1/8
1/12
1/15
1/17
1/31
2/3/63
2/io
2/19
2/25
2/26
3/11/63
3/19
3/25
3/30
4/4A3
4/i6
'4/22 -
-4/29 "
5/5/63
5/9
5/17
TU.*-1.
5/23
5/24
Flow*
c.f.a.
234
240
503
483
308
290
304
277
353
270
270
1920
3440
1900
1750
1080
330
1490
484
484
400
394
394
364
Temp. D.O.
, °F. mg/1
57
64
58
54
44
58
48
55
63
54
58
40
45
51
60
62
80
64
7,4
82
95
89
79
83
4.2
2.7
5.9
7.6
5.1
3.1
6.4
5.3
3.9 .
5.1
3.4
11.4
9.2
8.3
7.2
5.3
2.46
5.0
3.7
4-4
3.28
1.85
2.40
3.00
Phenol
p.p.b.
148
157
208
240
10
3
70
85
35
20
58
23
19
7
242
21
18
pH
7.3
6.7
7.1
7.1
6.9
6.9
7-4
7.2
6.9
7.0
6.8
7.0
6.8
7.1
6.9
7.0
6.2
7.1
7.2
6.5
6.6
6.4
6.5
6.5
Total
Alkalinity
mg/1
30
5
28
45
23
M
37
- 75
37
68
23
31
32
41
41
27
7
44
24
7
10
6
37
36
Total Con- Total**
Acidity ductivity Iron
mg/1 /$/mhos/cm mg/1
760
858
745
690
745
780
990
870
790
940
990
380
300
440
440
500
780
380
730
680
680
800
760
800
0.28
18.15
13.0
14.0
25.0
3.0
5.0
4.0
7.0
5.0
17.0
8.0
5.7
8.0
6.1
8.0
6.8
6.6
6.1
3,7
3.4
9.3
7.3
7.6
Ferrous**
Iron
mg/1
4.0
7.0
2.0
11.0
5.0
5.2
5.6 .
2.4 .
2.5
5..5
4.6
3.2
1.8
0.7
2.7
2.5
2.2
Chlorides
mg/1
48
54
50
48
60
65
HI
73
73
85
81
25
16
27
27
35
49
23
73
44
56
55
53
54
Sulfates
mg/1
320
250
86
45
83
110.0
166.7
373.4
58.3
246.7
236.7
. 293-4
333.4
306.7
346.7
-------
TABLE NO. 6(a)
MAHONING RIVER AT LOWELLVILLE
(Lowellville Bridge Cont'd.)
Date
Sampled
6/6/63
6/10
6/22
6/29
7/5/63
7/16
7/22
7/28
7/31
8/13/63
8/16
8/26
9/2/63
9/9
9/22
9/30
10/6/63
10/14
ID/27
10/29
n/n/63
11/19
11/21
11/22
11/29
12/16/63
12/29
12/30
Flow*
C.f .3.
484 -
760
458
498
484
539
590
546
575
539
445
426
364
376
309
309
314
294
281
289
340
285
289
281
590
227
252
242
Temp.
99
93
90
99
95
93
90
94
92,
87 :
92
89
87
90
79
83
78
86,
86
78
70
76
75
74
63
59
53
58
D.O.
mg/1
2.82
4.2
3.7
3.09
4.0
7.6
2.82
4.5
3.7
4.5
4.9
4.5
4.9
3.9
4.4
4-9
4.2
3-48
4.0
2.2
4.1
5.0
4.5
3.28
2.40
3.9
4.4
5.4
Phenol
p.p.b.
17
20
14
14.
12.
9
7
9
13
11
10
8
19
18
1
9
10
5
9
54
14
14
14
162
38
86
29
Total
Alkalinity
pH mg/1
6.0
6.9
6.8
6.1
6.3
7.5
7.8
7.8
6.8
6.6
6.8
6.7
6.6
7.0
6.8
7.3
7.1
6.7
6.8
6.8
6.4
6.1
6.7
6.5
7.1
8.0
7.2
8.0
4
22
5
15
10
8
21
42
29
31
45
48
4
8
45
24
9
7
51
41
6
13
8
27
83
5
51
19
Total Con- Total**
Acidity ductivity Iron
mg/1 ^mhos/cm mg/1
790
650
750
640
580
650
600
620
' 570
600
580
620
710
730
770
780
800
860
850
820
760
920
820
860
600
1040
900
900
7.5
0.2
1.8
2.0
0.9
1.4
4.8
0.7
2.3
3.2
1.6
5.0
2.0
1.1
1.8
1.1
1.1
. 0.6
5.7
9.0
1.1
14.3
1.1
2.3
10.0
4.6
2.0
1.4
Ferrous**
Iron
mg/1
0.2
0.2
1,5
0.1
0.4
0.7
2.7
0.5
1.4
1.3
0.5
2.5
0.0
0.0
0.5
0.7
0.9
0.0
0.7
0.0
0.5
13.0
0.5
0.7
9.8
0.9
0.5
0.7
Chlorides
mg/1
50
34
46
49
43
43
38
37
37
38
40
39
42
42
47
43
56
61
60
57
53
56
55
49
41
82
73
75
SuLfates
mg/1
333.4
200.0
300.1
201.3
226.7
153.4
166.7
150.0
163.4
166.7
. ieo.o
220.0
240.1
266.7
273.4
213.4
233-4
353.4
320.1
340.1
286.7
440.1
3X3.4
360.1
173-4
426.8
266.7
273.45
-------
TABLE NO. 6(b)
STREAM WATER QUALITY - 1964
MAHQNING RIVER BASIN
MAHONING RIVER.AT LOWELLVILLE
(Lowellville Bridge)
Date
Sampled
1/5/64
1/8
I/IB
1/26
2/2/64
2/12
2/18
2/24
2/29
3/3/64
3/14
3/20
3/28
3/30
4/18/64
4/21
4/26
4/30
5/7/64
5/H
5/17
5/31
Flow*
C.f .8.
285
281
264
1830
336
336
295
276
304
810
2300
1760
1020
754
674
5040
2810
5450
786
746
1020
413
Temp.
58
62
60
40
57
57
64
61
66
62
49
49
56
54
76
57
63
59
85
80
75
84
D.O.
mg/1
5-7
3-9
3.6
5.9
6.6
6.6
4.4
3.6
5.1
5-4
9.2
8.9
7.6
5.9
2.7
6.6
6.2
4.5
4.4
4.7
5.7
4.1
Phenol
p.p.b.
38.1
114.2
352.2
61.9
485.5
540.1
47.6
104.7
39.7
166.7
71.8
61.9
99.6
104.7
14.3
47.6
52.4
1A.3
9.5
9.5
4.3
7.1
Total
Alkalinity
pH mg/1
7.2
6.5
6.7
7.8
7.5
6.7
6.5
6.9
7.2
6.6
7.2
7.1
7.0
7.0
6.1
9-0
7.4
7.8
7.5
7.0
7.7
7.7
78
31
76
82
67
40
24
74
91
45
28
44
44
28
10
87
46
73 '
58
42
54
56
Total Con- Total**
Acidity ductivity Iron
mg/1 ^mhos/cm mg/1
_.
-
__
48
11
25
26
38
48
0
10
3
8
9
4
5
950
980
960
^510
LO
760
750
980
1050
1020
790
380
465
440
630
610
380
340
360
570
460
410
720
2.9
10.5
,6.8
-.-'40.1
_4
l97i
2V3
H.6
4.1
1.4
5.5
38.4
12.5
7.5
13.7
7.3
9.1
9.1
6.9
2.1
3.2
0.5
1.4
Ferrous**
Iron
mg/1
0.9
1.6
2.0
25.0
5.2
1.4
4.3
2.0
1.4
0.9
1.8
1.6
0.7
1.6
6.2
7.1
4.8"
5.9
0.7
2.1
0.3
0.3
Chlorides Sulfates
mg/l mg/L
85
95
97
49
63
68
102
102
90
31
76
33
35
62
45
30
22
39
41
28
57
313
400
340
173
247
283
427
413
373
200
87
103
93
250
233
92
92
87
173
140
103
287 &
-------
TABLE NO. 6(b)
MAHONING RIVEE AT LOWELLVILLE
(Lovrellville Bridge Cont'd.T
Date
Sampled
6/6/64
6/11
6/24
6/27
7/8/64
7/16
7/26
7/28
7/31
8/4/64
8/14
8/22
8/30
9/10/64
9/15
9/25
i~
9/29
10/2/64
10/6
10/23
10/27
10/30
11/6/64
/
11/12
11/20
11/24
12/4/64
12/11
1^/14
12/23
12/29
Flow*
C.f .8.
486
401
560
426
598
778
605
1100
545
674
538
898
466
395
364
40?
314
Data
MA
n
»
n
n
ii
M
n
ii
n
n
n
n
Temp.
ef.
91
96
92
97
92
86
97
97
84
89
89
89
98
104
90
89
88
93
__
83
87
86
86
87
73
77
70
75
&
r
D.O.
mg/1
2.6
3-4
3.5
2.8
3.0
3.5
4.9
4.2
2.7
4.4
3-9
2.6
0.1
2.6
4.0
5.0
4-4
3.0
3.7
4.5
4.0
2.2
3.5
3.2
3.7
3.6
2.3
2.1
5-4
ft
Phenol
p.p.b.
9-5
4.8
19.0
14.3
4.8
4.8
9-5
14.3
9.5
14.3
14.3
4.8
4.8
9.5
19.0
0
4.7
23.8
28.5
9-5
28.5
18.0
14.0
4.8
24.0
19.0
28.6
2$!4
Total Total
Alkalinity Acidity
pH mg/1 mg/1
7.0
7.1
7.7
7-3
7.2
6.7
7.6
7.3
6.8
7.2
7.9
7.9
6.8
7.5
6.8
6.1
5.2
6.4
6.6
6.6
4.4
6.7
6.5
5.9
6.7
6.2
7.7
6.9
7.2
f:l
29
38
47
37
59
20
42
25
26
68
55
35
20
44
25
12
5.0
16.0
24.0
25.0
0
42
6
8
22
15
84
51
58
22
59
12
9
5
9
10
10.5
6
7
7.5
12:
8.0
8.0
22
16';0
26.0
64.0
25
26
28
50
119
27
112
44
35
43
12
28
20
26
33
Con- Total**
ductivity Iron
^mhos/cm mg/1
670
660
750
680
510
580
630
600
600
590
590
570
710
680
740
840
820
800
820
890
1040
810
980
725
840
910
720
880
730
865
635
1.4
3.9
1.1
1.1
0.7
2.5
3.0
1.8
3.9
2.7
2.3
3.0
9.6
5.7
1.6
22.5
33.9
10.4
3.0
8.0
6.8
0.9
6.8
6.1
3.6
10.2
0.9
1.1
1.1
4. '3
Ferrous** Chlorides Sulfates
Iron mg/1 mg/1
mg/1
0.8
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
2.3
2.8
1.6
3-0
0.5
0.5
0.7
0.7
0.7
1.6
9.1
1.1
0.9
2.0
0.9
2.7
0.5
6.1
3.8
2.5
3.6
0.7
0.9
0.9
275
53
50
54
44
44
41
44
43
43
44
55
35
51
66
64
60
65
62
72
70
73
62
73
68
68
70
80
69
91
54
28?
280
240
26?
153
233
173
213
233
157
213
157
341
300
313
333
360
320
340
386
366
353
500
386
373
407
240 ^>
-------
NOTES: * Provisional Records, U.S. Geological Survey Data.
** Iron analyses conducted on unfiltered samples.
-------
TABLE NO. 7
.SUMMARY OF ORGANIC POLLUTION LOADS - MUNICIPAL
Municipality or
Political Sub.Div.
Lowellville
Struthers
Campbell
Youngstown
Girard
McDonald
Niles
Warren
Newton Falls
Milton SD #11
Alliance
-Trib.
Sebring
Beloit
Canfield
Colurabiana
Poland
Cortland
Windham
Garrettsville
Hiram
Mahoning Co.
Poland SD #4
Linsenbigler Subdiv.
I960
Pop.
2055
15631
13406
166,689
12,997
2,727
19,5^5
59,648
5,038
1,139+
28,362
4,439
877
3252
4164
2766
1957
3777
1662
1011
Date Placed in
Operation
1959
1961
1958
1965
1963
1959
1961
1962
I960
1960-1963
1929-1960
1935-1946
_
1957-1962
1932-1964
_
1940-1956
1943-1953
1961
195**
I960
Design Basis
Flow Pop.
MOD.
.35
2.5
2.5
50.0
1.8
.61
3.0
13.5
1.0
.47
4.7
.5
.
.50
.80
_
.22
.45
.15
.10
.031
3500
31,200
25,000
218,000
18,000
5,230
27,000
90,000
7,000
3*200
36,400
5,000
_
5,000
8,000
_
2,200
4,500
2,000
1,000
310
Current Operating Data
Flow
MOD
.167
1.305
2.348
.898
.198
2.07
7.52
.119
.075
3.29
.203
_
.317
.339
.203
.184
.089
.062
1964
ToTS
Population Equiv.
After
Treatment
645
5270
9150
3180
782
9100
47,300
1,160
62
8,890
140
350
322
173
335
236
E.-100
4
Type of
Treatment
Facilities*
I. + C12
I. + Clg
I. + Gig
I. + Cl2
I. + Cl2
I. + Gig
I. + C12
I. + CT2
P. + Gig
Aerobic
T.F.
T.F.
None-Preparing plans
A.S. + Gig
A.S.
Trib. to Struthers
A.S.
T.F. + Cl^
T.F.
T.F.
Aerobic
West Austintown SD #13
College Park. Est.
Burgess Run SD #23
S. Poland Hts.
Burgess Run Hts.
1960-1962 .120 1200
1957
1958
.080
.040
800
400
.064
.024
.021
70
3
3
Aerobic
Aerobic
-------
.TABLE NO. 7
SUMMARY OF ORGANIC POLLUTION LOADS - MUNICIPAL Cont'd.
Municipality or I960
Political Sub.Div. Pop.
Park, San. Dist #29
Boardraan S.T.P.
Park Site Estates
Sherwood Forest Sub.
Trumbull Co.
Warren-Champion S.D.
Subdist. 1A (Durst)
" IB (Kuszmaul)
" 1C (Lyndhurst)
" ID (Snethkamp)
Howland S.D. #3
Subdist A
" B (Victoria Terr)
" C (Fairlawn Hts.)
Howland S.D. #6
6A (Woodmere Allot)
6B (Venice Allot)
Howland S.D. #8
Hoffman Allot.
Hubbard-Liberty S.D.
Subdist. 3C-(N. Park Est.)
Design Basis Current Operating Data ;
Date Placed in
Operation
1964
1958-60
1960-63
1961
1958-61
I960
1963
1924
1924
58-63
56-61
I960
1958
1962
Flow
MGD
5.00
.036
.039
.040
.090
.024
.015
.120
0.16 E
.120
.080
.050
.0256
.104
Pop. Flow
MGD
50,000 .44?
360
390 .032
400
900
240
150
1200 E. .044
160 E.
1200
800
500
256
1040 .057
Pop. Equiv.
After
Treatment
105
21
100
36
21
10
/ 160
270
50
45
Type of
Treatment
Facilities *
Aerobic
n
n
Aerobic + Cl-
Aerobic
n
n
P
«
Aerobic
Aerobic
n
S.F.
Aerobic + CL^
-------
TABLE NO. 7
SUMMARY OF ORGANIC POLLUTION LOADS - MUNICIPAL Cont'd.
Municipality or
Political Sub.Div.
Weathersfield Two. SD
(Oakview Manor)
Mineral Ridge S.D.
I960 Date Place in
Pop. Operation
1958
1962
Design Basis
Flow
MOD
.120
.200
Pop.
1200
2000
Current Operating Data
Flow Pop.Equlv.
MOD After
Treatment
.061
25
300
Type of
Treatment
Facilities*
Aerobic
it
Vienna S.D.
Subdist. #1 (Brunswick Sub.)
1962
.020
200
Aerobic +
Notes:
* I.
P.
A.S.
S.F.
T.F.
Clg
E.
= Intermittent
= Primary
= Activated Sludge
= Sand Filter
= Trickling Filter
= Chlorination
= Estimated
U)
-------
TABLE NO. 8
SUMMARY OF ORGANIC POLLUTION LOADS - INDUSTRIAL
Location
Alliance
Girard
Girard
Youngstown
Youngstown
TRIB.
Mahonirig Co.
: Smith Twp.
.Alliance
Trumbull Co.
Champion Twp.
Mahoning Co.
Name of
Industry
John Liber Co.
Ohio Leather
Co.
Unger Bros.
Inc.
Zimmerman Pack
ing Co.
D & B Products
Co.
Purity Dairy Co.
Barnes Provision
Go.
McAllister
Dairy
"Lloyd Pack Co.
Type of
Waste
Slaughtering &
Pack.
Tannery
Slaughtering &
Pack
Meat Packing
Rendering
Dairy
Slaughtering &
Pack.
Dairy
Meat Packing
Population
Before
Treatment
200
5,000
2,000
200
200
1,400
500
1,250
200
Equivalent
After
Treatment
10
2,800
1,800
15
200
25
12
130
5
Type of
Treatment
Sand Filters
Settling
Settling
Sand Filters
Screens
Aerobic Dig.
Sand Filters
Lagoons
Sand Filters
Remarks
Eff. to city
sewers.
Eff. to Cit
sewers. ' X .'.
To city sewe
(U.C.)
Under Board
Action
Austintbwn Twp.
-------
TABLE NO. 9(a)
STEEL MILL ACID. ALKALI AND IRON WASTES
1. Babcock and Wilcox, Tubular Products Division, Alliance.
Waste acid iron pickle liquors hauled away. Neutralization
and clarification of first rinse waters.
2. Copper-weld Steel Company, Trumbull County.
Neutralization and 'clarification of waste acid iron pickle
liquors and rinse waters.
3. Pittsburg Steel Company, Thomas Strip Division, Trurabull County.
Neutralization and clarification in a lagoon of waste acid iron
pickle liquors. Company has been studying possibility of joint
treatment of residual rinse waters with the city of Warren.
4. Sharon Steel Corporation, Brainard Steel Division, Trumbull County.
Waste acid iron pickle liquors hauled away.
5. Republic Steel Corporation, Warren District, Warren.
Waste acid iron pickle liquors and rinse waters partially
neutralized with slaked lime before discharge.
6. Republic Steel Corporation, Warren District, Niles.
Waste acid iron pickle liqubrs hauled to Republic Steel
Corporation, Warren District, Warren.
?. Republic Steel Corporation, Youngstown District, Youngstown.
Controlled discharge of waste acid iron pickling liquors.
8. United States Steel Corporation, McDonald Works, McDonald.
Neutralization and clarification of waste acid iron pickle
liquors and rinse waters with Open Hearth slag.
9. United States Steel Corporation, Ohio Works, Youngstown.
Waste acid iron pickle liquors hauled to United States Steel
Corporation, McDonald Works, McDonald for neutralization and clarification.
10. Youngstown Sheet and Tube Company, Brier Hill Plant, Youngstown.
Neutralization and clarification of waste acid iron pickle liquors.
-------
76
11. Youngstown Sheet and Tube Company, Campbell Plant, Campbell.
Controlled discharge of waste acid iron pickle liquors from all
units except for one Mesta pickler.
12. Youngstown Sheet and Tube Company, Struthers Plant, Struthers.
Controlled discharge of waste acid iron pickle liquors.
-------
77
TABLE NO. 9(b)
OTHER SOURCES OF ACID AND ALKALI WASTES.
1. Alliance Ware, Inc., Alliance.
Neutralization and clarification of waste acid iron pickle
liquors.
2. Transue & Williams Steel Forging Company, Alliance.
Neutralization and clarification of waste acid iron pickle
liquors.
3. Reactive Metals, Inc., Niles.
Controlled discharge of waste acid pickling liquors. Detail plans
for treatment, reuse, and disposal of acid wastes being prepared.
k. General Electric Company, Mahoning Glass Plant, Niles.
Neutralization and clarification of acids. Precipitation of fluorides.
5« General Electric Company, Niles Glass Plant, Niles.
\
Neutralization of acids, precipitation of fluorides, and vacuum
filtration of sludges.
6. Raymond Concrete Pile Company, Youngstown.
Controlled discharge of acids.
7. Union Carbide Corporation, Linde Company, Division, Acetylene Plant, Youngstown.
Clarification of wastes and offsite disposal of acetylene sludges.
8. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corporation, Stainless Strip Division, Youngstown.
Waste acids hauled away.
9. Fitzsimmons Steel Company, Inc., Youngstown.
Controlled discharge of waste acid iron pickling liquors. Eighty percent
of pickling operations eliminated by installation of dry cleaning methods.
10. The Wilkoff Company, Youngstown.
Controlled discharge of waste acid iron pickle liquors.
11. Aluminum Color Industries, Lowellville.
Anodizing acids hauled away. Controlled discharge of rinse waters.
-------
78
TABLE NO. 9(c)
STEEL HILL SOLIDS - FLUE DUST.
1. Republic Steel Corporation, Warren District, Warren.
Venturi-type gas washer installed on blast furnace, gas cooling water
diverted, clarifier modified in 1963.
2. Republic Steel Corporation, Youngstown District, Youngstown.
Clarifier designed to serve four blast furnaces washers. Only two
blast furnaces are expected to be operated at one time in the future.
3. United States Steel Corporation, Ohio Works, Youngstown.
Venturi-type gas washers installed on all blast furnaces which are
expected to be used in the future. Cooling water diverted from settling
basins. Regular settling basin cleaning schedule adhered to.
k. Youngstown Sheet and Tube Company, Brier Hill Plant, Youngstown.
Cooling water diverted, settling basins baffled. Regular settling
basin cleaning schedule adhered to. (Both blast furnaces at Brier Hill
now out of service. Probably will not be returned to service.)
5. Youngstown Sheet and Tube Company, Campbell Plant, Campbell,
Venturi-type gas washers installed on two blast furnaces. Installation
of venturi-type gas washer to be made on the third furnace during 1965«
Venturi-type gas washer to be installed on fourth blast furnace when the
furnace is next relined. Cooling water diverted and dirty water discharged
to existing settling basins. Regular settling basin cleaning schedule ad-
hered to. Facilities for clarification and recycling of clarified wastewaters
now under construction to be completed in 1965 - will replace existing
settling basins.
-------
TABLE NO. 9(d) 79
STEEL MILL SOLIDS - MILL SCALE
1. American Steel Foundries, Transportation Equipment Division, Alliance.
Chemical coagulation and clarification provided. Offsite disposal
of sludge. Major portion of wastewater recirculated.
2. Copper-weld Steel Company, Trumbull County.
Clarification provided. Scale recovery.
3. Republic Steel Corporation, Warren District, Warren.
Dry drags, settling pond, and partial reuse of wastewater provided at
new strip mill. Settling pond provided for another mill operation. Present
blooming mill has inadequate facilities. Disposition of blooming mill being
determined. Oil recovery provided on all new facilities.
^4-. Republic Steel Corporation, Youngstown District,. Youngstown.
New scale recovery facilities installed at three mills. All other
mills have adequate treatment except the tube mill. Tube mill being re-
placed by a new continuous butt weld mill. Adequate facilities will be
provided. Oil recovery on all new facilities.
5. United States Steel Corporation, McDonald Works, McDonald.
Clarification and oil recovery for entire plant provided.
6. United States Steel Corporation, Ohio Works, Youngstown.
Present recovery is by existing pits. Regular pit cleaning schedules
adhered to. The two primary mills' rolling facilities will require moderni-
zation if the mill is to remain competitive. Scale and oil recovery facilities
will be included in any modernization program.
7. Youngstown Sheet and Tube Company, Brier Hill Plant, Youngstown.
Three scale pits provided. One scale pit on a recycle system. Regular
scale pit cleaning schedules adhered to.
8. Youngstown Sheet and Tube Company, Campbell Plant, Campbell.
New mills have new scale recovery facilities. All other existing scale
pits modified for effective removal of scale and oil except the seamless tube
mill. Detail plans of scale and oil recovery facilities for seamless tube
mill approved and facilities scheduled for construction in 1966.
9. Youngstown Sheet and Tube Company, Struthers Plant, Struthers.
All scale pits modified for recovery of scale and oil.
-------
80
"" TABLE NO. 9(e)
\
QTfflSajSOUflCES OF SOLIDS
1. Fly Ash.
Ohio Edison Company, Niles.
Clarification in lagoons provided.
2. Coal '/flashings.
Peterson Coal Company, Portage County.
Clarification ponds provided.
3. Sand and Gravel.
a. Harbison-Walker Refactories, Inc., Portage County.
Clarification in lagoons provided.
b. Penna. Glass Sand Company, Industrial Silica Division,
Portage County.
Clarification in lagoons provided.
^. Clay.
American Fire Clay Company, Mahoning County.
Clarification lagoon provided.
-------
81
TABLE NO. 9(f)
METAL/FINISHING .
1. Rockwell-Standard Corporation, Bumper Division, Newton Falls.
Reduction of chromium with strong waste acid iron pickle liquors or
ferrous sulfate; neutralization of reduced chromium wastes along with
nickel and acid copper wastes; and clarification of all wastes in a lagoon.
2. Pittsburgh Steel Company, Thomas Strip Division, Trumbull County.
Oxidation of cyanide bearing rinse waters. A program of installing
counter-current rinse tanks on brass,.copper, nickel, and galvanize plating
lines is complete. Company has been studying possibility of joint treatment
of residual rinse waters with the city of Warren.
3. General Motors Corporation, Packard Electric Division, Plant No. 10,
Trumbull County.
Copper reclaimed and chemical treatment provided for residual
wastes and soap lubricants.
4. General Motors Corporation, Packard Electric Division, Plant No. 11, Trumbull
County.
Chromium, cyanides, copper wastes and acid wastes treated. Wastewater
reused. (This plant has the operations formerly located in the Warren Plant).
5. Jones & Laughlin Corporation, Conduit Products Division, Miles.
Oxidation of cyanides and precipitation of zinc provided. Acids from
plating operations to be blended with previously treated cyanide wastes.
6. Jones & Laughlin Corporation, Stainless Strip Division, Youngstown.
Counter-current rinsing, oxidation of cyanides and precipitation of
metals provided.
?. Republic Steel Corporation, Warren District, Niles.
No cyanides. Drag out of zinc and tin minimized with verticle take-up
of strips.
8. Youngstown Sheet and Tube Company, Struthers Works, Struthers.
Oxidation of cyanides and precipitation of zinc.
-------
82
TABLE NO. 9(g)
COKE PLANTS AND TAR PLANTS
1. Coke Plants
a. Republic Steel Corporation, Warren District, Warren.
Closed coke quench system. All strong wastes tied into
quench system. All light oil hauled to Republic Steel Corpora-
tion, Youngstown District, Youngstown for processing.
b. Republic Steel Corporation, Youngstown District, Youngstown.
Closed coke quench system. Still wastes and benzol plant
wastes connected to quench system.
c. Youngstown Sheet and Tube Company, Campbell plant, Campbell.
Closed coke quench system.
2. Tar Plants
a. Allied Chemical Corporation, Plastics Division, Youngstown Plant,
Youngstown.
Oil separator, flow equalization provided.
b. Koppers Company, Inc., Tar Products Division, Youngstown Plant,
Youngstown.
Tar and oil separator and controlled discharge for effluent
provided. To be connected to City of Youngstown sanitary sewerage
system to remove effluent from small tributary.
-------
99.99
99.9 99.8
99 98 95 90 80 70 50 50 40 30 20
10
2 1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.05 0 01
LJ
X
o
Q
LU
3
O
CO
CO
Q
0.05 0.1 0.2 C.5 1
5 !" 2C 30 40 50 60 70 8: 90 95 ?B 9?
PERCENT TlfeSE VALUE EQUALED OR EXCEEDED, %
99.99
00
U)
-------
99.99
99.9 99.8
1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.05 0.01
ao
80 70 60 50 40 30 20
0.01 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1
2 5 10
PERCENT
20 30 40 50 60 70 8U 90 95 98 99
TIME VALUE EQUALED OR EXCEEDED, %
99.8 99.9
99.99
-------
99.99
99.9 99.8
99 98
1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.05
0.01
70 60 50 40 30
00
0.01
0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5
12 5 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 95
PERCENT TIME VALUE EQUALED OR EXCEEDED,
98 99
99.8 99.9
99.99V
-------
99.99
99.9 99.8
1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.05
0.01
70 60 50 40 30
tf.Ol
0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1
10
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 95
PERCENT TIME VALUE EQUALED OR EXCEEDED, %
98 9?
99.8 99.9
99.99
-------
99.99
99.9 99.8
99 98
1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.05 0.01
400
X
0>
300
LU
Q.
80 70 60 50 40 30 20
200
100
0.01
0.05 0.1 0.2
99
go c co o
oo
99.99-^
PERCENT TIME VALUE EQUALED OR EXCEEDED, %
-------
>99 OBJEGSGINAE 99
98
95 90
80 70 60 50 40 30 20
10
1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.05
0.01
0.01 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1
2 5 10
PERCENT TIME
20 30 40 50 60
VALUE ^QUALED
70 80
90 95
98 99
99.3 99.9
99.99
OR EXCEEDED, %
-------
99.99
99.9 99.8
99 98
95 90
80 70 60 50 40 30 20
1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.05 0.01
98 99
99.8 999
99.99
PERCENT TIME VALUE EQUALED OR EXCEEDED, %
-------
99.99
99.9 99.8
1 0.05 0.01
1 0.05 0.1 0.2 O.S
99.8 99.9
99.99
PERCENT TIME V ')E EQUALED OR EXCEEDED, %
-------
99.99
99.9 99.8
99 98
95
90
0.5 0.2 0.1 0.05
0.01
70 60 50 40 30
0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5
5 10 20
PERCENT TIME
30 40 50 60 70
VALUE EQUALED
BO 90 95 98 99
OR EXCEEDED, %
99.8 99.9
99.99
-------
99.99
99.9 99.8
99
95 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20
10
2 1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.05 0.01
0.01 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2
5 10 20 30 40
PERCENT TIME VAI "<
50 60 70 80
90 95 98 99
99.8 99.9
99.99
EQUALED OR EXCEEDED, %
-------
99.99
99.9 99.8
99 98
95 90
80 70 60 50 40 30 20
10
1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.05 0.01
II
o.oi
0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1
10
2 5
PERCENT TIME
95
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
VALUE EQUALED OR EXCEEDED, %
98 99
99.8 99.9
99.99
-------
99.99
99.9 99.8
99
80 70 60 50 40 30 20
1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.05 0.01
0.01 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1
10
80 90 95 98 99
20 30 40 50 60 70
PERCENT TIME VALUE ^QUALED OR EXCEEDED, %
99 8 99.9
99.99
-------
99.99
2 1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.05 0.01
0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 5 10
PERCENT
20 30
TIME
40 50 60 70 80
VALUE EQUALED
90 95 98 99
OR EXCEEDED, %
99.8 ?9.9
99.99
-------
99.99
99.9 99.8
1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.05
0.01
70 60 50 40 30
9.
0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1
30 40 SO 60 70 80
90
95
2 5 10 20
PERCENT TIME VALUE EQUALED OR EXCEEDED, %
98 99
99.8 99.9
99.99
-------
99.99
99.9 99.8
99 98
1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.05
0.01
70 60 50 40 30
0
0.01
0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5
98 99
998 99.9
99.99
PERCENT TIME VALUE EQUALED OR EXCEEDED, %
-------
25<3lr^
0BJEGWS
80 70 60 50 40 30 20
10
\ 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.05 0.01
0.01
0.05 0.1 0.2
2 5 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 95 98
PERCENT TIME VALUE EQUALED OR EXCEEDED, %
99
99.8 99.9
99.99
-------
99.99
99.9 99.8
99 98
1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.05 0.01
60 50 40 30 20
tl.Ol 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 5 10 20 30
PERCENT TIME VALUE
40 50 60 70 80 90 95 98 99
EQUALED OR EXCEEDED, %
99.8 99.9
99.99
-------
99.99
99.9 99.8
99 98 95
80 70 60 50 40 30 20
2 1 0.5 0.2 0.) 0.05 0.01
o»
O
oc
or
».01 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2
5 10
PERCENT
20 30 40 50 60 70 80
90 95 98 99
99.3 99.9
I-"
O
99.99 O
TIME VALUE EQUALED OR EXCEEDED, %
-------
99.99
99.9 99.8
99
1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.05 0.01
0.01 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 5 10
PERCENT
20
TIME
30 40
VALUE
50 60 70 80 90 95 98 99
EQUALED OR EXCEEDED, %
99.8 99.9
99.99
-------
99.99
99.9 99.8
99 98
95 90
1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.05 0.01
400
80 70 60 50 40 30 20
O
ro
J.Ol
0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1
2 5 10 20 30 40
PERCENT TIME VALUE
50 60 70 80 90 95 98 99
EQUALED OR EXCEEDED, %
99.8 99.9
99.99
-------
99.99
99.9 99.8
99 98
1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.05
0.01
100
UJ
or
or
UJ
a.
S
UJ
29.
0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1
2 5 10 20 30 40 50 60 7C 80 90 95 98
PERCENT TIME VALUE EQUALED OR EXCEEDED, %
99
99.3 99.9
99.99
(JO
-------
104
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Are there any comments
or questions?
MR. POSTON: I have a question. I
was going to ask Mr0 Eagle a question relative to the indus-
trial waste data. In development of our report, we felt
that it was essential that we have industrial waste informa- .
tion and I wanted to ask him if it wasn't true that we had
requested a matter of three times or four times information
relative to the effluent data on the major industrial in-
stallations?
MR. EAGLE: Yes, sir, that's true,
Mr. Poston. You not only requested, you more or less demanded*
MR. POSTON: I think that it's essen-
tial to do a good evaluation and I do appreciate receiving
in this report summaries, although I haven't had time to
digest all of the some 50 or 75 pages you have here. I
do appreciate receiving this information and I am sure this
is going to give us a better opportunity to evaluate
some of these things.
Industry has instructed you not to give us this
information?
MR. EAGLE: Well, Ohio's law prohibits
us from giving out this type of information which is considered
confidential without the express authority in writing of the
owner of the plants and we had no such permission from these
-------
105
plants.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Mr. Cleary?
MR. CLEARY: Mr. Chairman, may I
makf a comment? May I ask Mr. Poston is it necessary to
have this detailed information on effluents from individual
places in order to evaluate conditions of the stream? Isn't
reallyvhat you are interested in what is in the stream, and
where it is coming from is another matter, but the particular
issue here is, is the stream polluted; to what degree?
That's the way I understand the evaluation of the review
board,
MR. POSTON: I think this is the
ultimate, that is true, Mr. Cleary. But to evaluate a stream,
for example, yesterday I was down looking at the river in a
number of places and I noticed oil on the surface of
the water and I looked for findings in the table here for
where this oil comes from so that efforts can be made
toward control of this; and this is impossible to do without
knowing what is coming out of the individual effluents.
MR. CLEARY: Excuse me, but whose
efforts are going to control it, Ohio or the Federal Govern-
ment? What I am trying to establish here is the fact that
observations were made at Beaver Falls with respect to the
quality of the water that may endanger public health or
welfare.
-------
106
Now, the quality of the water of Beaver Falls is
a pertinent matter, rot what is coming out of the mill or
municipality. Isn't that an appraisal?
MRo POSTONj As I said, I think it is
the ultimate but to finally determine what needs to be done
in the development of the schedule, there are three items to
determine at this conference as directed in the law. First,
the occurrence of pollution, that there is pollution and,
secondly, what are causing the delays in the abatement pro-
ceedings and, lastly, a schedule for abatement. I think it
is essential that you know where abatement procedures
might be required.
CHAIRMAN STEIN; Are there any further
comments or questions? Let me mention something here, and
I am trying to do this in the sense of getting together. I
appreciate the views that you have here on a conference. As
you have expressed it, it is evidently shared by a considerable
amount of the audience. You know, when you are playing in
a visiting ball park, if they applaud the visiting team, you
feel you are ahead. But I think, as far as I know, and I
think you people do know we have been attempting to have
summaries of dockets on all interstate treatments for many
years. Mr. Poston in our regional office has been responsible
for attempts to get that on the Mahoning. This isn't from thei
time the conference was called but considerably before that.
-------
107
The reports that have come in to me, at least,'I wouldn't
say to me, into Washington, have been wholly incomplete.
The information that we got was that this was impossible to
obtain from state sources, although there were repeated
requests of ORSANCO which may or may not have had the infor-
mation and that the reports were therefore incomplete.
I don't think this would be giving too much away,
but as much as two years ago, when Mr. Cleary was in the
office, I showed him a copy of one of these incomplete reports
where the regional and technical people had marked up and
read all the places that were incomplete.
I think this is a fine report. Although you
people don't like conferences. Someone back in Washington
might think if the conference is the way to get a fine and
complete report like this, perhaps the conference technique
is the way to accomplish it.
Now I would suggest if a report as fine as this
can come out in a conference, and if information were to be
forthcoming, it should be forthcoming as a full exchange of
information and this would facilitate the Federal Government,
the state and all concerned in getting together.
I want to thank you, Mr0 Eagle, that you recognize
your responsibilities to the Federal Government, ORSANCO, and
Pennsylvania. We recognize our responsibilities to the State
of Ohio and ORSANCO and Pennsylvania but we also have a
-------
108
responsibility. I would suggest that, I think if the record
I hope the record doesn*t have to show that the way to get a
fine report like this from the State of Ohio or the only way
to get it --
MR. EAGLE: May I make a statement?
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Yes.
MR. EAGLE: This same report, except
it is up to date at the present time, was presented to the
Public Health Service in 1963 and this simply is an updating
of this report. This information has been available and we
never even got the courtesy of an acknowledgement of this
report from the Public Health Service.
MR. POSTON: This is the report that
was requested in *62.
MR. EAGLE: We gave it to you in
March of 1963, this same report, except this is updated to
the present date.
MR. POSTON: And with the exception
of the narrative --
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Are there any other
further questions or comments, Mr. Poston?
Does ORSANCO have any?
MR. POSTON: I reserve the right to
comment on this further at a little later time when I have
had a chance to look at the tabular material.
-------
109
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Any of the conferees can
make any appropriate comment they think, at any time, as long
as the conference is going on. By the way, Mr. Eagle, I
think we are very, very close together in the first part
of your statement here.
MR. EAGLE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: On what it does, but I
think, for the record, we should indicate in our abatement
we do consider this an enforcement conference. This is the
first part of enforcement action under the Act. I think
other than that conclusion, I thoroughly -- at least I,
speaking for myself thoroughly agree with your analysis,
although there may be a semantic difference, I don't think
there is a substantial difference in the way we analyze the
Act at all.
MR. CLEARY: May I ask one question to
clarify my thinking? The discussion developed on information
of industrial plants. Now, do I understand, Mr. Poston,
that what you are looking for in this report, that you didn't
get it before, is that statement the statement you are making?
MR. POSTON: I don't think I have had
a full opportunity to look it over and having just received
this- when Mr. Eagle started to give his talk here, but it
appears to me that this is the type of information that we
need, but I would reserve my comment until I have had a little
-------
110
more chance to look.
MR. CLEARY: Well, what I am getting
at is that this information, according to the HEW report
given to the conferees, said they couldn't get certain
information. Now, I learned that virtually the same in-
formation, except being updated as of today, was provided
in 1963. You said that, did you not, Mr. Eagle?
MR. EAGLE: Yes, he has a copy of
it there, March 1963.
MR. CLEARY: So that what you got in
1963 did not suffice but what you have heard today, which I
understand is virtually the same thing but brought up to
date, does suffice?
MR. POSTON: We received in 1963 an
earlier version of today's reports without the tabular
information.
MR. EAGLE: Oh, no, you got all the
tabular information with the exception of the graph and the
narrative which are simply supplemented.
MR. CLEARY: In other words, Mr. Eagle,
you are saying they got all the essential information?
MR. EAGLE: They got all the stream
data and all the facilities data.
MR. CLEARY: I see. The record should
have that clear.
-------
Ill
CHAIRMAN STEIN: I think this would be
clarified if the investigators for the Public Health Service
had indicated that they have not gotten data or they made
the requests and have not gotten it. I think they will have
an opportunity to make a statement and I think this will be
clarified. I hope it will be clarified as this progresses.
But I think one of our major functions here is to frame an
issue. And if there is a question or a statement that all
the data was provided and someone says they didn»t get it,
I think before the conference is concluded I would hope the
conferees would be able to make a judgment on that one way
or another.
MR. POSTON: I might clarify one
point here, that there is certain effluent data that is
characteristic of the individual industrial waste sources.
We do not have that and I do not believe that it is in this
report. The report we received in 1963 was approximately
12 pages and I see -- you can see the report that we received
here today is some 50 to 75 pages.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: If there are no further
comments, Dr. Arnold, I wonder if we could get up and stretch
for 10 minutes and then reconvene because I know we can't
hold you all morning.
[
(Recess had.)
CHAIRMAN STEIN: May we reconvene.
-------
112
I understand that Mr. Poston and possibly others may have
some comments or statements to make on the basis of the report
we heard this morning from Dr. Arnold and Mr. Eagle, but.
there are some people here from Ohio who wish to make state-
ments and leave because they have other commitments. So we
are asking these conferees to defer these comments.
We will call on them, no one will be cut off, but
I would like, at this point, to call on Dr0 Arnold to call
other people.
DR. ARNOLD: At this time, I would
like to call the Honorable Mayor Schryver, Mayor of the City
of Warren.
MAYOR SCHRYVERs Dr. Arnold, Mr. president,
members of the conference and ladies and gentlemen; I, first
of all, want to apologize to Mayor Flask for pre-empting his
time but I would remind him now that we are upstream from
him.
... Laughter ...
MAYOR SCHRYVER: My name is Raymond E.
Schryver, Mayor of the City of Warren, Ohio. The location
of the City of Warren in the heart of the Mahoning Valley
steel district, its waterways, rail and highway facilities,
have been contributing factors in making our city highly
industrialized. The present population of 62,000 reflects
an increase of more than 43 percent during the last two decades.
-------
113
If warren's suburban areas were included^ the figure would
exceed 80,000. It is an interesting fact that 65 percent
of the homes in the city are owner occupied. Its trading
area includes over 250,000 people and the city itself covers
a physical area of 10.9 square miles.
Early in 1947 first consideration was given and
action started to provide the Warren Metropolitan area with
water pollution control. It is a significant fact that at
this time all sanitary sewage was discharged directly into
the Mahoning River. On March 28, 1947, an engineering firm
was hired to prepare and report factual data pertaining to
the existing sanitary sewer system of the City of Warren.
Authorization was also given to explore the necessity for
future alterations, additions and extensions thereto and to
present recommendations relative to indicated expansion.
The study was completed in 1949 and presented to the city.
After the presentation of the report to the city, no further
action was taken.
In 1952 the State Legislature passed the Water
Pollution Control Act which regulated the discharge of
polluted waters into any water course. Each and every
municipality and other contributors to pollution of the water
courses throughout the state fell under the jurisdiction of
this law and had to obtain a permit to discharge into various
water courses.
-------
114
Warren came under this permit system and obtained
its first permit (No. 391) in August of 1952. The city was
granted permission to discharge sewage into Mosquito Creek
and the Mahoning River until July 31, 1953.
On July 20, 1953 a contract was entered into
with Havens & Emerson, consulting engineers, of Cleveland
and New York, to prepare a report on sewage and waste
treatment for the city. This report was submitted and
accepted by the city and the preparation of plans, specifica-
tions and estimates was authorized.
The city*s permit was extended twice to October
1954 in order to allow for the completion of the revised
report and general plan with estimates for necessary inter-
ceptor sewers and sewage treatment plant and to secure the
approval of this report by the State of Ohio. It also
provided for the submission of a time schedule for completion
of detailed plans of the proposed improvements and a con-
struction schedule.
The plans submitted called for a treatment plant
to be constructed on the east side of South Main Avenue,
south of the Republic Steel property. The plant, to meet
the Ohio Department of HealthIs standards for the first
phase, was to be a primary with chemical precipitation
plant, with vacuum filtration and incineration of raw sewage
solids.
-------
115
The interceptor sewer system generally follows tne
Mahoning River, crossing the river seven times in order to pick
up existing sewers and to stay out of the path of the proposed
Lake to River Canal.
In March 1959 the contract for the plant was awarded
and construction started. The plant was completed in December
1960. The contract for the interceptor sewers was awarded in
July 1961, which included the Mahoning River Interceptor and
the Diversion Conduit. On June 8, 1962 the interceptors had
arrived at such a stage that the treatment plant could be
placed in partial operation. The last connection was made to
the interceptor under this contract in October 1962.
An extension to the Mahoning Interceptor Contract
D-l was awarded in November 1962 and completed in May 1963»
Phase D-2, or Northwest interceptor, is presently
under contract and should be placed in operation tomorrow.
Upon completion of this work, all of the sewers in the city
which previously have emptied into the Mahoning River will be
connected to the interceptor sewer system.
The contracts for this program will have been
carried on at the following costs:
Grant
.Contract A-Sewage Treatment plant $3,327,395.62 $125,000
Contract B & C-Interceptor & Diver-
sion Conduit 4,272,889.72
Contract D-l 123,511.87
APW
Contract D-2-Northwest Interceptor
(bid price) 975,431.40 $540,000
5,699,228.62 $665,000
-------
116
These figures are construction costs only and do
not include land, right of way, inspection or testing.
These interceptors as planned, designed and built
are to provide county areas immediately adjacent to the city
with pollution control. The interceptors will handle wastes
from the Leavittsburg and Champion drainage areas.
The matter of the sewers presently discharging
into Mosquito Creiek from the city area is now being considered
by the county, with the possibility of city participation.
In the years 1961, 1962 and 1963 a concentrated
effort was made to eliminate storm water from the sanitary
sewer system, mainly by eliminating down spouts and other
surface water drains, illegally connected to the sanitary
sewers. This entailed checking approximately 12,000
properties.
Since August of 1961 the Waste Water Treatment
Department has undertaken a program to determine the degree
of pollution in the Mahoning River and is also attempting to
locate major sources of pollution. The treatment plant
sampling includes 24-hour composites twice weekly. Three
river stations located where the Mahoning comes into the city,
and above and below the plant outfall, are sampled with the
treatment plant samples. Any analysis and reports of the
river sampling are relayed to the Ohio Department of Health.
The Ohio State Board of Health was instrumental in this
-------
117
program with advice, training and help in numerous technical
consultations.
The plant»s first superintendent, Mr. William R.
Hill, believed that education was essential to the successful
operation of the plant, and therefore 14 of our present
personnel are now certified with Class I licenses, and the
present superintendent has a Class III license from the
State Board of Health.
The State of Ohio Board of Health*s short school
in Columbus and at various high schools throughout the state
has been one of the main training spots for these men.
We have no intention of letting the strides made
in past years lull us into complacency and we will always
strive to make our water pollution control as efficient as
possible.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Will you wait a moment
and see if we have some comments?
MR. POSTON: I might ask one question,
if he has his staff here. Mr. Mayor, does the City of Warren
use the chlorination equipment that *s indicated in that
plant?
CHAIRMAN STEW: Would you identify
yourself for the record, sir?
MR. BARKER: I am Robert Barker.
-------
118
I am the superintendent of the plant,
CHAIRMAN STEINg And I suggest possibly
for the clarification of the record if any other cities come
up, they might do this. Because in the statement of Mr,
Eagle, he said also this summer optimum treatment with dis-
infection will be provided for the first time. It would be
helpful for clarification if the cities specifically indicate
what their facilities and practices are in that area.
MR. BARKERS Yes. We have provided
chlorination during the summer months.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: You have done it in the
past?
MR0 BARKER? Yes, We have provided
chlorinatiorf during the summer months.
CHAIRMAN STEINI You have done it in the
past?
MRo BARKERS Yes. We will do it most
definitely in the coming future,
MR!. POSTON: The other thing I would
like to bring out is that the Federal Government is interested
in abatement of pollution in this Mahoning Valley, and Warren
was one of the earlier projects to obtain a $250,000 grant
for existence and construction for a three or four million
dollar project; is that right?
MR. BARKER; Yes.
-------
119
MR. POSTON: Are you satisfied with
the retention time and the results that you obtained from
your chlorination practice?
MR. BARKER: Yes, with the chemical
treatments that we have tried thus far, we have gotten
removals up to 75 percent and we feel that --
MR. POSTON: This is in operation
during the summertime only?
MR. BARKER: The chlorination process,
yes.
MR. POSTON: The rest of the chemical
treatment applies throughout the year?
MR. BARKER: Well, we have not put
it into full operation but we are ready and working on it
aad whenever we are told to do so. We know that we can go
about the 60 percent removal requirements.
MR. POSTON: You are ready to go, in
other words?
MR. BARKER: Yes.
MR. POSTON: Well, I am happy to see
that. I think this is a stream they have talked about --
this stream about being the life blood of this industrial
area and water is one of their resources. A resource that
makes it possible for them to exist; and the cleaner water
is the better way, I am sure.
-------
120
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Let me ask you: 60 percent?
removal of what?
MR. BARKER: Of suspended solids.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: What do you think you
can go up to?
MR. BARKER: Well, I would say that
we can go well up to 80 percent removal with the proper usage
of chemicals.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: This is again for clax-
ification. They talk about treatment for disinfection.
Is your chlorination done for disinfection plant control?
MR. BARKER: Well, we have pre-
chlorination and post-chlorination.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: But the post-chlorination
is done for disinfection. And you have done what kind of
treatment, primary?
MR. BARKER: Primary with well,
it's intermediate with the chemical treatment.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: How effective do you
think that chlorination is on your effluent?
MR. BARKER: I feel it is definitely
effective.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: You don't want to be more
specific than that?
MR. BARKER: Well, in what way?
-------
121
CHAIRMAN STEIN: In the kinds of reduction
you get in your bacterial load.
MR. BARKER: Well, the only measure
we have at the present time, of course, is over biochemical
oxygen demand, we have no facilities at the present time
for making --
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Do you care to say what
-- getting that 60 percent reduction -- no, that*s on
suspended" solids.
MR. BARKER: We have gone up as high
as 50 and 55 percent.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: What is your retention
time on the post-chlorination?
MR. BARKER: In the post-chlorination,
about 20 to 30 minutes.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Okay, thank you.
I don*t have anything further. Are there any
further comments or questions?
Thank you very much, sir, for a very enlightening
presentation.
DR. ARNOLD: It is my pleasure to call
on the City of Youngstown.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Without pre-empting the
Mayor again, sir, may I ask one question to help these people
get served?
-------
122
MAYOR FLASK: I will be through in 20
minutes.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Off the record;
(Discussion off the record.)
MAYOR FLASK: First of all, as being
the host of this City, may I welcome all of you here,
especially the out of town guests. I can assure you that we
will be most hospitable and most cooperative in our dealings
with you. I would also do a little ad-libbing here. On
February 9th this year, just a few days ago, I had the
privilege of being in Washington, B.C., and received an
honorable mention award as one of the cleanest cities between
100,000 and 200,000 population in America, and I think that
is quite a feat in our town.
... Applause ...
MAYOR FLASK: And with all due respect
to my colleague and good friend, Mayor Schryver, I want to
say that Youngstown happens to be downstream and you have
stream problems, but maybe our problem is because we are
downstream from the City of Warren.
... Laughter ...
MAYOR FLASK: My name is Anthony B.
Flask,, Mayor of the City of Youngstown. I have been a member
of City Council and president of Council and have served
continuously with the City since February of 1947 (18 consecutive
-------
123
years).
Therefore, stream pollution is hot a new subject
to me. What is new to me is the appearance of the U.S.
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare officials in
Youngstown.
Where have these officials been for the past 18
years? Why haven't they visited our City during this time,
when we had great need of advice and counsel in stream pollu-
tion?
It seems to me that they are quite late for such
a report as I have received on February 11, 1965. We wish
to inform all people present here today that the people of
Mahoning County and City of Youngstown have and are making
great sacrifices paying for the entire waste water treatment
plant, and the entire sewer system. Our cost will amount to
more than $12,000,000 plus interest charges. There are no
Federal or state funds involved in the entire system.
..... Applause ...
In addition to this cost of the complete sewage
system, may I remind you that the Mahoning Valley Sanitary
District is actually the City of Youngstown and the City of
Niles. Youngstown has paid for over 83 percent of the cost
of this plant and is paying for all water that we use from
the Berlin Reservoir, in addition to the construction of the
pipeline that connects Berlin with the Meander Reservoir,
-------
124
over five million dollars.
We wish also to call to everyone's attention that
the City of Youngstown owns, maintains and operates Lake
Milton, with all of this, we also contribute a great share
of the cost for the construction of the West Branch Reservoir,
by a bond issue that was passed by the people of Mahoning
County.
These are the facilities that we provide for
recreational purposes such as referred to in the report,
namely, boating, fishing,swimming and similar activities.
The Mahoning River, on the other hand, is an
important economic factor for the entire Mahoning Valley.
All of us are dependent upon its contribution to industry.
Its importance as a source of water supply for industrial
use has placed us in a strategic position and role as
regards national need for water. It can provide critical
service in times of national crisis.
Additional uses for the Mahoning River are
secondary and all political subdivisions should find other
sources of water supply for these uses. They, like Youngs-
town, should build reservoirs for drinking water, fishing,
boating or any other recreational activities.
Youngstown and certain other municipalities are
fulfilling their responsibility, and we believe if the U.S.
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare is concerned
-------
125
about areas that cannot fulfill their responsibilities in
this regard, the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare should aid them at someone else's expense and not
at ours.
Congressman Michael J. Kirwan, a member of Congress
for the past 30 years, is probably the leader in our Nation
in protecting natural resources such as water. He has always
advocated the preservation of our streams and forests. We
are in complete accord with his efforts to keep our Nation
concerned about this matter.
Our hopes have been inspired by his leadership
toward the building of the Lake Erie to Ohio River Canal.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will be issuing a report
on this proposal very soon.
This canal will make our people become more
dependent upon the Mahoning River because the establishment
of industries along the route of this canal will provide
additional jobs and economic sustenance to our area.
It will, in fact, provide economic stimulus to
this entire portion of the Nation.
As a result, the Mahoning River will be a river
dedicated to and serving National interests as well as local
interests, a river important to industry, commerce and
business.
Congressman Kirwan has been the canal's chief
-------
126
proponent and the people of the entire Mahoning-Trumbull
Valley have rallied to his support and will continue this
support when the Corps of Engineers submits its report to
Congress.
In summary, therefore, I say that we in this area
have undertaken every measure available to us to preserve
and protect our water and other natural resources.
This, we hope, will be done as well by others in
their turn. Thank you.
I have now another prepared statement which is
more engineering in aspect and technologically somewhat in
an engineer's viewpoint. If I may ask the Chairman and his
conferees, I believe that it would be best for the gentle-
man who prepared it, Mr. Richley, who is Director of Public
Works of the City of Youngstown, to continue on before
questions are asked, if I may, sir.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Certainly.
MAYOR FLASK: And I just want to add
one more thing, upon completion of our treatment plant,
which should be done within the next 90 days or so, we will
have an annual budget of over one-half million dollars for
operating and maintaining that plant, so that»s an additional
half million dollars each year the people of Youngstown and,
naturally, some parts of Mahoning County will have to con-
tribute to continue on with this project of ours, and we are
-------
127
very proud of our plans.
So may I, at this time, present to you Mr. J. P.
Richley, Commissioner of the Waterworks of the City of
Youngstown.
MR. RICHLEY: Mr. Chairman, ladies
and gentlemen: The single most important factor in the
availability of natural resources in the Mahoning valley
as far as the people of the valley have been concerned for
years is, of course, the river. Along its miles of length
are the Cities of Beloit, Sebring, Alliance, Newton palls,
Leavittsburg, Warren, Niles, McDonald, Girard, Youngstown,
Struthers, Campbell, Lowellville in Ohio, and many others
in Pennsylvania. This total population area served by the
river is, therefore, well in excess of one-half million
persons.
In addition, the Mahoning River supports 25 water-
using industries with nearly 105,000 employees. These
employees represent in one form or another every family unit
in the valley. Obviously, the quantity, quality, temperature
and other characteristics of the river are of the utmost
importance to all. For many years, the Mahoning River has
served admirably -- but not completely its highest and
best economic use that of providing industry along its
banks with their primary water needs and that of providing
a place of discharge for the liquid wastes of the valley.
-------
128
Without the availability of this natural resource, the
Mahoning Valley could not have reached the economic stature
which it presently enjoys.
II. Need for Anti-Pollution Controls.
The Department of Health of the State of Ohio
and the people of the valley, have long since recognized the
need for the preservation of this resource and the importance
of some type of anti-pollution control law. All industries
and municipalities discharging wastes into the river have
embarked on programs designed to control the qualities of
domestic and industrial effluents discharged into the river.
These programs were and are being carried out under the
strict control and surveillance of the Ohio Water Pollution
Control Board with required approvals on all phases of
planning and design. Minimum treatment requirements pre-
scribed by the Board are being used as the basis of design,
with degrees of treatment controlled by the nature, size
and the location of the receiving stream, lake, or river,
and dependent on temperature and flow of the receiving body.
Again, the degree of treatment to be provided for
by each municipality is a function of the nature, purpose,
and usage of the receiving body. These criteria have been
established for the protection of the general health, safety
and welfare of the public and are now in most cases being
satisfied. It is not the purpose of these criteria to return
-------
129
effluents to the river in such a condition that they are
suitable as domestic water supply, and/or recreational
areas. The question is, therefore, not one of a complete
disregard for anti-pollution measures but one of the nature
and degree of treatment facilities required.
III. Domestic Treatment Facilities Provided.
As a result of these regulations, domestic
sewage treatment facilities are now in operation or under
construction in nearly 20 cities and villages from warren
to the Ohio State line. In all cases where effluents are
discharged directly into the Mahoning River, provisions
have been or are being provided for primary treatment.
Where smaller plants discharge into tributaries of the
Mahoning River, secondary treatment is accomplished, cities
witti primary plants include Warren, Niles, Girard, McDonald,
Youngstown, Campbell, Struthers, and Lowellville, among
others. Specifically the City of Youngstown is nearing
operation of a primary treatment facility which serves the
needs of nearly 190,000 persons or approximately 40 percent
of the total population of this area. This facility con-
structed at a cost of $7,000,000 and in accordance with
the design criteria provided by the state, offers sedimenta-
tion, sludge incineration and post-chlorination as part of
the treatment processc It is designed to remove 90 percent
of all suspended solids and provide a reduction in biochemical
-------
130
oxygen demand of 65 percent. In addition, during periods
of low river flow and high water temperatures, chemical
dosing and chlorination is provided. In addition tb, this
treatment facility, pumping, sewer separation, overflow and
diversion facilities have been provided at a cost of some
$5*000,000. As a result, no dry weather flow will be dis-
charged into any stream, lake or creek in the City of
Youngstown. All dry weather flow is being diverted to the
treatment facility along with the initial flush of wet
weather flow. The people of Youngstown have, therefore,
made an investment of some $12,000,000 in separation and
treatment facilities with the full cooperation of the Ohio
Water Pollution Control Board without a single dollar of
state or Federal funds.
It is to my knowledge.and information that
industry along the Mahoning, in complete cooperation with
the Department of Health and ORSANCO, are similarly
expending large sums to increase the quality of their indus-
trial wastes as well as to cause a separation in their
domestic and industrial effluents. Much work has been done
by industry in the control of mill scale, gases, and coal
tars, oil separations, phenols and other harmful discharges.
IV. Domestic and Industrial Water Supplies.
The City of Youngstown, as early as 1917,recognized
the need for a domestic water supply o.ther than the Mahoning
-------
131
River, when it constructed Lake Milton with a storage capa-
city of 9.5 billion gallons. In 1926 Youngstown and Niles
joined in the construction of the Meander Reservoir which
covers some 2,000 acres with a storage capacity of 10.5
billion gallons. This was some 35 years before any Federal
and 26 years before any state anti-pollution control measures
were enacted. This domestic supply has since been enhanced
by the construction of pipelines from the Berlin Reservoir
to further supply Meander. The City of Warren is served by
Mosquito Reservoir, an independent water supply, and such
cities as Campbell, Struthers, and Lowellville are served
from private lakes owned by the Ohio Water Service Company.
The only major remaining users of the Mahoning, as a domestic
water source, are the communities of Beloit and Sebring, and
each of these are located on the headwaters of the river.
The importance of the Mahoning River as an economic
industrial base has been recognized for many years by the
Corps of Engineers, and the Congress, as evidenced by the
construction of Mosquito, Berlin, and West Branch Reservoirs
which not only provide low flow, temperature, and flood
regulation on the Mahoning, but serve the domestic and
recreational needs of large areas. It is evident, therefore,
that the need for the waters of the Mahoning are primarily
for industrial uses with domestic needs being supplied
elsewhere.
-------
132
V. Recreational and Wildlife Uses.
It is inconceivable to think of the Mahoning in
terms of recreation;.", such as fishing, boating, and swimming
uses. This concept has long been discarded as evidenced by
the many water facilities constructed over the years in the
valley. Available recreational facilities among others
include Berlin, Mosquito, McKelvey, Evans, and pine Lakes
which are adequate swimming, boating, and fishing facilities.
In addition, Youngstown has provided 10 parks, 39 playgrounds,
and six public swimming pools valued at nearly $4,000,000;.
These facilities are supplemented by those of other cities
in the area and, as a result, the valley has never suffered
a hardship because of the unavailability of the Mahoning
for these purposes.
VI. Summary and Conclusions.
The City of Youngstown readily joins the Department
of Health of the State of Ohio and the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare in their interests in cleaning up the
river. The only area of possible disagreement might be in
the degree of treatment required. Health, Education, and
Welfare has suggested a reduction of 85 percent in biochemical
oxygen demand while 65 percent has generally been provided
for by most communities along the river. The Department
of Health, Education, and Welfare suggests the use of the
Mahoning for recreational purposes where it is felt that
-------
133
many other facilities are available in the area. The Depart-
ment of Health, Education, and Welfare suggests secondary
treatment of domestic wastes where it is felt that the
criteria of the State of Ohio are adequate. If secondary
treatment was to be provided along the valley, an expendi-
ture of 15 to 20 million dollars would be required.
It is felt that much remains to be done in the
field of anti-pollution and all machinery is now geared
toward that end. Further improvements could be made in
the aesthetics of the river with the highest and best use
of the river as the final criteria and with the knowledge
that domestic water supplies and recreational facilities
such as swimming, fishing, and boating are being provided
for elsewhere and with the hope that the highest and best
use of the Mahoning might be in the field of water trans-
portation with the construction of the Lake Erie - Ohio
River Canal.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you, Mr. Richley.
We didn't hear from our report yet. When did the
Department, HEW, recommend secondary treatment?
MR. RICHLEY: I gather from the con-
cluded remarks of the report that it is approaching 8£ per
cent reduction of Biochemical Oxygen Demand. I believe that's
in the last paragraph of your report of your conclusion.
-------
134
CHAIRMAN STEIN: In other words, what
you are doing is discussing the report and you are just
doing this for clarification which hasn't come in yet;
hasn*t been discussed here yet.
MR. RICHLEY: Let me not call it the
report, let me call it some of the advanced information that
I have received.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: You understand we are
just doing this for the record. Because if anyone reads
the record and doesn*t have a prior preference, you can get
awfully confused. Any comments?
MR CLEARY: Mr. Richley, I think
earlier in your testimony you said something about Youngstowh
providing primary treatment only and then later on you said
you have a plant that provides 65 percent. I think that
would be intermediate treatment, or did I misunderstand you?
MR. RICHLEY: Yes, we have a primary
plant but we have pre-chlorination for intermediate treatment
and post-chlorination.
MR. CLEARY: It is required by the
Ohio program. You have to provide 65 percent disinfection.
MR. RICHLEY: This is correct. These
are provided during time of low river flow, especially during
the summer months.
MR. CLEARY: And you have the facilities
-------
135
to provide that?
MR. RICHLEY: Yes, sir.
MR. CLEARY: I just wanted to make
sure.
MR. POSTON: Does this mean, then,
that you, like Mayor Schryver of Warren, they are awaiting
the word to go ahead and provide additional treatment, does
this mean that you would be willing to provide this additional
treatment?
MR. RICHLEY: Provide which additional
treatment, sir?
MR. POSTON: When requested.
MR. .RIGHLEY: I don't understand your
question exactly. We feel, as we have felt for some time,
that the requirements of the Department of or the Health
Department of the State of Ohio are adequate. We feel that
we are providing 65 percent reduction B.O.D. removal of 90
percent of suspended solids and also making provisions for
intermedial treatment by pre- and post-chlorination during
periods of low river flow, higher temperatures, especially
during summer months.
Are you talking of further treatments such as
filtration?
MR. POSTON: I was wondering if you
would get this 65 percent removal, 90 percent removal.
-------
136
MR. RICHLEY: I think within 90 days
we will know if we will get it or not, and we certainly
hope we will get it because our plan is designed exactly
for that purpose.
MR. POSIDN: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Are there any other
comments or questions? If not, thank you very much, sir,
unless you have any further remarks you want to make.
I might say one thing before you go and this is--
I am ready to leave this on the record but if you want you
can have it off I would suggest, sir, that with your
Erie-Mahoning Canal that is being proposed, that as you well
know, we, in our Department, comment to the Corps of Engineers
and these comments are sent to the Congress on this. I
would suggest that it is always best in a project of this
kind if the Federal agencies, states and everyone is together
on it -- at least in all areas, but particularly the measure
of treatment that should be required so that there will be
no problem there.
I know of no project to my knowledge which has
gone forward in recent years where there wasn't pretty much
agreement among all parties concerned. That is, state,
Federal, interstate, and local on the degree of treatment
required before the project went forward. I think this is
an area that we may look forward to if this is a very
-------
137
worthwhile project.
Obviously, I can*t say very much more one way or
another on this.
MAYOR FLASK: Mr. Stein, the only
thing I can say is that we have fulfilled our agreement
with the State Pollution Board and they have already approved
our plan sometime ago, some years ago, to be exact, and we
have had a most difficult time in getting our people to pay
for this and they are paying. I think you ought to take a
visit and see the plant first.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Sir, I am not talking
about the plant or the river. This is what I want to make
clear on this. You mentioned your Erie-Mahoning Canal.
The water in that canal or the water quality in that canal
has to be protected. This is a Federal law, and this is
a Federal requirement. While this is a Corps of Engineers
project, our Department makes a recommendation as to the
.facilities that are going to protect that water quality.
I am just suggesting, sir, that it would be wise to get
Federal, state, .interstate, and local interests in line on
the type of water quality control that is going to protect
the waters in that canal, and this is aside from the river.
MAYOR FLASK: What do we care about
the river as long as it brings the barges down, the iron and
coal into 1he steel mills?
-------
138
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Sir, I recognize what
you want, but I --
MAYOR FLASK: And what you are going to
get.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Bless you. I Certainly
am not going to stand in your way. We have a statutory
obligation under our law to examine the project and see
that the water quality is protected.
MAYOR FLASK: You see what puzzles me,
in all these years I have been in city government, and 18
is a long time I presume, consecutively, you people never
came into the picture; never heard about you, honestly, and
we have tried to go along. Now seriously, I am not trying
to be facetious about this either, but we have attempted in
all instances -- well, we were compelled to, should I say,
go along with the State Pollution Board, and each year we had
to go forward and get a certificate and show our intent on
this elimination of the pollution of the Mahoning River.
And, oftentimes, we had the most difficult time with the
state authorities in getting the certificate to be able to
discharge our sewage into the river. And now we have gotten
to a point where I thought we could ignore the state Pollution
Board, to be exact. I mean, we have accomplished what they
have been asking for in all these years, and all of a sudden
now someone else comes into the picture.
-------
139
I hope they don't expect us to spend any more money
because we don't nave any. If somebody wants better treatment,
so somebody can drink water down in Pennsylvania, that's all
right with us as long as they bring us the cash and the money
and tell us how to do this and that. And I wouldn't dare, as
a politician or a mayor or as a private citizen, ask the
people of Youngstown and those parts of Mahoning County that
we are taking the sewage from for additional funds and for
additional purposes for better and cleaner water. As long
as the water is clean and cool enough for a canal and for
industry, business and commerce, I think that's the big
motive behind the Mahoning River. I think that's the only
thing we hope to look at, because no plants or no industries
are going to build in Youngstown or in any part of the
Mahoning and Trumbull Valley unless they have a water supply
for industry.
I have been here 59 years in Youngstown, and in
all my years -- yes, 45 years ago I swam in the Mahoning
River, up in the Girard area. Yes, I crawled over many a
boxcar and over many a track to get to the old swimming
-i
pool, swimming pond I called it. You didn't have bathing
suits or anything of that sort in those days, but, .at that
time, it might .have been all right but I don't know whether
you want your children or grandchildren to be swimming in
the Mahoning«,
-------
140
I don't care what kind of treatment they have.
They have got the rapids, they have got the stones, they
have all the dams, they have all the obstacles necessary
for industry, and when you see the barges come down there
and the smoke bellowing out of these stacks and thriving
business for economy s sake, and our people, I think, will
accomplish a great deal for the Mahoning-Trumbull Valley.
That is the important part and we have a most pleasant site
in this valley of ours today because it is thriving. Business
is here and people are working much more than ever before,
and I think that's the primary purpose.
If you make people happy, you have got good
citizens, you have got good Americans, and when they aren't
working, they aren't happy, and,oftentimes, we may be led
astray by other groups that we are not interested in and,
so help me, I believe all of us are here for that one aim
in life, good Americans, happy times, and thank you very
much.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you very much,
ma'am.
... Laughter ...
DR. ARNOLD: Mr, Bruce Graybill,
the oil superintendent of the water and sewage treatment of
Alliance, will speak for the Honorable Mayor of the City of
Alliance.
-------
141
MR. GRAYBILL: , Ladies and gentlemen,
conferees, I think my name has already been mentioned so
there is no sense in going into this. The City of Alliance
was truly one of the pioneers in sewage treatment, this
City being the second in Ohio and one of the earliest in
the Nation to construct a treatment plant. A chemical
precipitation plant with sludge presses was constructed in
1895 and operated until 1912 when a new plant consisting
of plain sedimentation tanks, contact beds and fine grain
filters was placed into operation.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: I hate to interrupt you,
but I wonder if you could go over to the map and point it
out on the map.
MR. GRAYBILL: Over there on the curtain?
We are up here (indicating).
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank ^tD.ui very rame&,, air.
MR. GRAYBILL: !». jggg; a< new treatment,
plant was coja&tarateted on a. 450;-ai<££e; ttrae.t; o£: land purchased
by the City, s.ome one and one-foalf miles; north of the City
limtt.su This plant was, of the Imhoff1 tank-trickling filter
type.
In 194i2 and again in 1952 construction was under-
taken to further improve and modernize this plant to meet
all requirements for adequate pollution control. In 1960
the plant was enlarged by the installation of a new diversion
and comminuter chamber, 24" to 42" piping, airlift units
-------
142
pre-aeration and grit removal tanks, trickling filter re-
circulation, a secondary digester and meters, pumps and
other appurtenances in order to provide the best possible
treatment of domestic and industrial waste for both the
Gity and surrounding areas. This plant is designed to provide
a maximum of 94 percent removal of suspended solids and
Biochemical Oxygen Demand. Capacity of the plant is 8 M.G.D,.
and is presently operating at 45 percent of that capacity.
Complete analytical results are submitted to the -
State of Ohio Health Department each month covering plant
operation and receiving stream to assure that the plant's
operation meets the requirements set up by the State Health
Department. Tests are carried out in a complete laboratory
at the plant and standard methods are followed by a qualified
man. The City is operating under a permit issued by the
Ohio Water Pollution Control Board which indicates that
satisfactory facilities and operation of same meet the
requirements of the State of Ohio.
The effluent from the Alliance plant contributes
to the Berlin Dam Reservoir which is a recreation area used
by the public for fishing, boating, water skiing and camping.
Downstream tests taken weekly assure that the plant is
operating correctly in that the effluent always contains
better than 4 p.p.m. dissolved oxygen and increases 1000
yards downstream to an average of 9,8 p.p.m.
-------
143
An over-all comprehensive plan for a sewer system
has been prepared by a firm of consulting engineers encom-
passing adjacent areas in three counties. These plans are
to be implemented in the most developed suburban areas
beginning this year.
Industries in this area have cooperated both
with the City and the State in that they have treatment
facilities within the plants for pollution abatement of
the effluents to the City's water pollution plant and the
receiving streams. These facilities have been recommended
by the Water Pollution Control Board of the State of Ohio
and operation is checked by staff members of that Board.
Permits are issued to the industries by the State, issuance
subject to the effluents meeting requirements set up by
the Water Pollution Control Board. These requirements are
dependent upon type of plant, waste expected, and removal
of material that would be harmful to receiving stream life.
The U.S. Public Health Service made a survey of an industry
located in Alliance and after studying the results issued
a statement to the effect that "for reuse of the water
within the plant the treatment of the waste by coagulation
with lime, alum and poly-electrolyte and sedimentation
provide excellent removal of suspended solids and provide
an effluent suitable for reuse at least 25 times." The
U.S. Public Health Service also makes this statement.
-------
144
"This Company operates a very unique and efficient waste
treatment system. They contribute substantially to the
control of water pollution and provide an excellent example
of water conservation."
The City of Alliance had used the Mahoning River
as its water supply. During dry years it was necessary to
pump the wells as the river could not contribute enough
water to satisfy the demand. As the supply from the wells
was limited, a study was made and it was decided that Deer
Creek Reservoir should be built for a more reliable source
of supply and also to assure that water would be available
for expansion domestically and industrially. This has
proved to be sound logic as the recent dry years have shown.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you, sir. Are
there any comments or questions? If not, thank you very
much.
MR. POSTON: Mr. Graybill, you
indicate you have 94 percent removal of suspended solids?
MR. GARYBILL: No, I said it was
designed for 94 percent.
MR. POSTON: And you have 45 percent?
MR. GRAYBILL: No, sir, I just had this
year's reports. We will have 80 percent B.O.D. removal
and 84.5 percent suspended solids.
MR. POSTON: And this trickling filter
-------
145
type plant?
MR. GRAYBILL: Yes, sir.
MR. POSTON: This effluent that you
have from this plant does not go to the Mahoning River?
MR. GRAYBILL: Well, it goes into the
Mahoning River to Berlin Reservoir.
MR. POSTON: I see. Then the effluent
from this plant does eventually go down, the Mahoning River?
MR. GRAYBILL: Yes.
MR. POSTON: I think that's all I
wanted to ask.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you.
DR. ARNOLD: We will proceed now with
Mr. Kenneth Lloyd, Executive Secretary of the Mahoning Valley
Industrial Council.
MR. LLOYD: Mr. Chairman, honorable
conferees, and ladies and gentlemen: My name is Kenneth M.
Lloyd. I am Executive Secretary of the Mahoning Valley
Industrial Council, 802 Union National Bank Building,
Youngstown, Ohio0 The Mahoning Valley Industrial Council
is a local trade association composed of 28 companies
employing 44,000 employees.
My involvement with the Mahoning River started on
February 15, 1935. For 30 years I have worked closely with
local, state and National leaders to improve the waste resources
-------
146
of the Mahoning Valley. I will try in this paper to outline
the progress made by the people of the valley in their
desire to be good water resource development citizens. I
believe they have proved their willingness to accept their
public responsibilities, that they are proud of past
accomplishments, and that they are looking forward to
further improvement in water resources planned for the
immediate future.
If any community in the United States is to make
progress in the field of water resource development that
community needs a dedicated and trusted leader with years
of public service in his background. The Mahoning Valley
has been fortunate to have such a public servant in Michael J,
Kirwan, Congressman from the 19th Ohio Congressional District
for the past 28 years. His efforts and leadership have con-
tributed more than that of any other single person to the
progress we have made and the progress we are making at
this very moment in developing all of our water resources.
I should also like to acknowledge at this point the sig-
nificant roles of the Ohio Department of Health and of
ORSANCO in helping to bring about this progress.
On January 22, 1965, in a speech before the Ohio
Forestry Association Brigadier General Walter P. Leber,
Ohio River Division Engineer, Corps of Engineers, U.S. Army,
told of the Ohio River Basin Comprehensive Survey being made
-------
147
by his office. General Leber said the plan would be completed
in 1967 and that its scope covered the next 50 years.
Years of work by the citizens of the Mahoning
Valley has placed our water resources development program
far ahead of other areas in its timetable of solid accom-
plishment .
To show our rate of progress in abating pollution
and in development our water resources I must tell you about
our history. Industrialization of the Mahoning River basin
can be said to have had its birth in 1804 with the building
of Hopewell Furnace on Yellow Creek southeast of Youngstown
on land now a part of Struthers, Ohio. Charcoal made from
nearby hillside trees furnished the fuel; kidney iron and
limestone mined locally furnished raw material for the new
iron industry. The opening of the Pennsylvania and Ohio
Canal in 1839-40 furnished a transportation route and the
new markets thus made available for iron resulted in a
tremendous growth in jobs for the people living in the
Mahoning Valley. From this small beginning the Youngstown
District has become a vital component of the nation*s
steel industry, now having a rated steel making capacity
of 9,160,000 annual tons of ingots. ,
As the iron and steel industry developed, the
demand for water greatly increased. Water is required in
huge quantities in modern steel operations. This water use
-------
148
can be designated briefly as follows:
1. Blast furnaces for making pig iron require
a cooling water jacket surrounding the furnace.
2. Gases produced in the blast furnaces are
"scrubbed" with water before the gas is used as fuel.
3. Open hearth steel making furnaces are
jacketed with circulating water.
4. Electric power plants to turn rolls and
to operate the cranes to lift the ladles containing hot
metal require large quantities of condensing water.
5. Steel rolls must be cooled, and the huge
tonnages of sheet steel made in the Mahoning Valley must
be sprayed with great quantities of water under high pressure
to remove scale.
Adequate water supply became a growing problem
as steel production increased. Every expansion in steel-
making and employment was weighed against the availability
of water to support the operation. The Youngstown Sheet &
Tube Company constructed the Coalburg Dam and reservoir
and use is made today of this raw water supply. The United
States Steel Corporation used the abandoned coal mines on
the Thomas Farm in Austintown Township as a source of water
for the McDonald mills. This supply proved inadequate and
it was abandoned in 1949. The Republic Rubber Division of
Aeroquip Corporation still uses an abandoned cpal mine for
-------
149
its principal industrial water supply right here in the City
of Youngstown. Over the years the Ohio Water Service Company
has operated with private funds to construct nine reservoirs
having a total capacity of 22,000 acre feet. These reservoirs
produce 30 million gallons of water daily of which 95 percent
is sold for industrial use.
In the period prior to World War I local indepen-
dent steel plants were being merged into huge nationwide
integrated steel corporations. Plants located in areas
enjoying an abundant water supply and low cost water trans-
portation were less costly to operate than those located in
the Mahoning Valley. Our leaders and our citizens realized
that a struggle lay ahead if the Mahoning Valley was to
avoid the fate of becoming a series of ghost towns. The
need to keep and to expand the number of jobs available in
our local steel plants caused our elected public officials
and community leaders to undertake the expansion of our
water resources. The cost was paid by local water users
and taxpayers, with the steel industry prominent in both
roles. Years of public discussion have gone into this
effort and I am happy to report to you gentlemen that the
voters of our area have supported the effort.
In 1914 during the period of the first World war
the Mahoning River was an unregulated open sewer, with an
inadequate volume of water. All sewage was dumped into the
-------
150
river without treatment of any kind. The fixed silt dams
in the river necessary to keep water high enough to cover
the intake pipes used for pumping water actually constituted
a series of septic tanks in the open river. When high water
came the flood water flushed out this series of open river
septic tanks and thus moved our pollution down river as a
burden to others. This condition, though hard to believe,
actually existed 50 years ago.
The demand for steel during World War I aggravated
the water problem in the Mahoning River. The integrated
National steel corporations did not have time to build
new steel-making facilities in other more favorably located
areas of the country as they had planned. The war had to
be fought with existing plants in existing locations.
Therefore, all Mahoning River plants were forced into full
operation. The river water was very bad and at this point
in our local history the City of Youngstown constructed the
Milton Dam and Reservoir. The project was started in 1916.
It has an impounding capacity of 29,000 acre feet. The
drainage area above the dam is 276 square acre feet. It
has served our people well over the years and today it
constitutes our best recreation lake because its water level
is maintained during the summer season.
The improved river quality resulting from the
construction of Milton Dam only increased the local desire
-------
151
to build more water impoundment dams. The consulting firm
of Alexander Potter lw.as employed in 1920 to prepare a
comprehensive water resource development plan for the basin.
This plan recommended additional reservoirs on the Upper
Mahoning River. Dams were to be located on Eagle Creek,
Mosquito Creek and Meander Creek, together with an intake
structure on the West Branch of the .Mahoning River.
Out of the public debate which followed the potter.
report it was determined that our domestic water supply
should be piped from a new reservoir to the city of use.
In February of 1926 the Mahoning Sanitary District
was formed in accordance with the Sanitary District Law of
Ohio. Money received from the sale of treated water is
used to retire the bonds. The Meander Creek Reservoir has
a storage capacity of 32,400 acre feet. The reservoir and
treatment plant was completed in 1932 and it furnishes
drinking water for Youngstown and Niles together with a
large area outside the two cities. The yield from the
reservoir is estimated at 30 million gallons daily based
on the dry cycle of years 1930 to 1935. This supply has
now been augmented by a contract between the Mahoning Valley
Sanitary District and the Corps of Engineers, U.S. Army,
providing for the purchase of part or all of an additional
34 million gallons daily from the Berlin Reservoir.
The City of Warren, Ohio, has arranged to purchase
-------
152
its domestic water from Mosquito Creek Reservoir. Thus,
so far as municipal water supply is concerned, it is my
pleasure to inform the conferees that in my opinion this
problem on the Mahoning River in Ohio has been completely
solved at local expense. The Mahoning River is neither
used nor needed for a public water supply until it reaches
Beaver Falls, Pennsylvania, some 30 miles below Youngstown.
Returning to the Mahoning River as a source for
industrial water, the acute drought of 1930 resulted in
daily river flows as low as 20 million gallons. During
this period river water temperatures were recorded as high
as l4o degrees Fahrenheit indicating the desperate need
for additional low flow control, if the steel industry in
this essentially steel community was to survive. Hydro-
graphers wading the river were forced to insulate their
wading boots with newspapers to withstand the heat.
The steel industry and the employment it provided
could not be sustained over the years unless an improved
river flow was developed. All of our state and local
leaders were aware of the problem. The Ohio State"Planning
Board selected the Mahoning; River basin for.-a comprehensive
water resource study which was completed in 1936. The study
recommended the construction of Berlin Reservoir and Mos-
quito Creek Reservoir and the construction of four primary
sewage treatment plants. In 1939 World War II brought a
-------
153
tremendous demand for steel production in the Mahoning Valley
with a resulting increased demand for industrial water. In
1936 and 1937 the valley was subjected to severe floods with
a resulting loss in steel production. Out local and state
leaders knew that multiple purpose reservoirs providing
flood control and low flow control had to be constructed
if the valley was to contribute its full share to the war
effort,
For the first time the Federal Government became
interested in flood control after the floods on the Ohio
River in 1936 and 1937. A comprehensive flood control act
was passed in 1938 which authorized flood control reservoirs
on the Mahoning and the Shenango Rivers. After years of
local effort our people were relieved and heartened to know
that the Federal Government was at last ready to take an
interest in our local water control problem.
Great obstacles were overcome in securing a
Federal appropriation for the construction of Berlin Reser-
voir. This reservoir was completed in 1943. It has a
storage capacity of 91,000 acre feet. Congressman Kirwan
was in the forefront of this movement to develop greater
water resource , He advocated the reservoirs in part for
flood control in part to provide recreational facilities,
and above all J. o satisfy the needs of the industry which
supports the economy of this valley. Mosquito Creek Reservoir
-------
was completed in 19i|.H« Mosquito Creek Reservoir has a
storage capacity of lOlj.,000 acre feet. These reservoirs
are to be used according to the Congressional authorization
of 1938 for low flow regulation, flood control and water
supply.
In 1938, public policy in the development of our
water resources was not clearly established or well defined.
Our public officials at all levels of government were search-
ing for criteria to be used in establishing benefits and
cost-sharing responsibilities. Pred Waring, retired chief
engineer for the Ohio Department of Health, was a pioneer
in problem solving. Maurice LeBosquet of the United States
Public Health Service, was a cooperative and able profes-
sional adviser in the field of sanitary and Industrial
Waste Treatment. The Corps of Engineers, U. S. Army, has
relied heavily on Mr. LeBosquetTs work over the years.
The U. S. Geological Survey has furnished a long and
indispensable record of data on stream flow, water tempera-
ture readings, and water quality data.
Over a period of more than 30 years, C. V.
Youngquist, Chief of the Division of Water, Ohio Department
of Natural Resources, has compiled, coordinated and evaluated
many plans for developing the water resources of the Mahohing
Valley. Significant contributions to progress also have
been made by other state leaders, among them are Dr. E. W.
-------
155
Arnold, Dr. Ralph Dwork,and George Eagle.
For 16 years Dr. Edward J. Cleary, Executive
Director and Chief Engineer for the Ohio River Valley Water
Sanitation Commission, has worked effectively in the
development of regional water quality management. The
dedication, understanding and knowledge of these men and
their associates and the active cooperation of industry
has been of immeasurable assistance.
Using a new yardstick to measure benefits the
West Branch Reservoir is; now under construction on the
Mahoning River. It will be completed in 1966 with a
benefit to cost ratio of 1.8 to 1. Its purpose is to
provide "flood .control, low flow augmentation and pollution
abatement." The reservoir has a storage capacity of 78,700
acre feet and according to the terms under which it was
authorized by Congress in 1960 Mahoning County and Trumbull
County were required to contribute $5,200,000 toward'its
costs and operation. The Federal cost for flood control is
$10,130,000 for a total cost of $15,330,000. I am pleased
to inform the conferees that the local voters have authorized
the payment of the local share of the cost, and this is
specifically for the benefits of low flow control. This
act is another manifestation of the desire of our local
people to be good and cooperative citizens in developing
our water resources, and making them available to serve the
-------
156
needs of the industry without which this highly industrialized
community could not exist. This new reservoir will augment
the minimum monthly average flow of the Mahoning River at
Lowellville, Ohio, a point immediately above the Pennsylvania
State line, from 275 cubic feet per second to 325 cubic feet
per second.
Others will tell you of the progress made and of
the plans under way to further eliminate industrial waste
from the Mahoning River. The Ohio Department of Health
maintains a close check on industrial pollution through
its waste discharge permit system. The Ohio Departments
program, in turn, is consistent with the policies estab-
lished by the Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation commission,
functioning actively under an eight-state compact. Steady
progress in this field is being made.
While I mentioned earlier that the first.:down,-
river point of use of the Mahoning River as a public iwater
supply is at Beaver Falls, Pennsylvania, it should be noted
that water also enters the Beaver River from the Shenango
River as well as from the Mahoning River. These two rivers
join to form the Beaver River. Construction of the Shenango
Reservoir in Pennsylvania, a new flood control reservoir,
will be completed in 1966 at a cost to the Federal Government
of $34,800,000. It has 192,400 acre feet of storage capacity
in it and it will augment the river flow at Beaver Falls,
-------
157
Pennsylvania, by 100 cubic feet per second on average.
Surely the conferees will recognize this new water resource
development as an event showing marked progress, and one that
will enhance water quality through the dilution it will make
available.
Congress has appropriated money to further develop
the recreational facilities at Berlin Reservoir. The State
of Ohio has extensive plans under way to further develop the
recreational facilities at Mosquito Creek Reservoir and at
the new West Branch Reservoir. Few people outside this area
realize that the State of Ohio maintains a wild life area of
approximately 5,000 acres immediately north and west of
Mosquito Creek Reservoir. Hundreds of acres of land are
planted in grain each year to feed geese as they migrate.
I am told that as many as 200,000 geese have been observed
at one time as they use this fly-way each year. I will not
take the time to tell the conferees of all our recreation
programs now under way in the Mahbning Valley, but I can
make the general statement that we are well pleased with our
developing facilities and the use made of them by the people.
Furthermore, I think I can say that with the
recreation resources available to this community, the swimming
pools, the reservoir areas, the extensive and wonderful Mill
Creek Park area, it is ridiculous even to suggest that the
shallow, highly-industrialized, workhorse of a stream called
-------
158
the Mahoning should be converted into a recreational area.
It is certainly too shallow for swimming, and
maintenance of fish in the reaches from Warren to the state
line would be wholly incompatible with the most efficient
utilization of the stream in the best interests of the
community -- that is, to maintain the industry which supplies
the jobs that keep this community alive.
Moreover, it would be absurd to force the imposi-
tion of heavy taxes on the already heavily taxed residents
of this valley, as would the expenditure of untold millions
by industry, merely to make this short industrial re'ach of
the stream suitable for fish life in the midst of this vast
industrial complex. And it would be equally absurd and
wasteful to incur the costs necessary to make the water in
this stretch of the Mahoning suitable as a source of drinking
water when the community gets its drinking water elsewhere.
We have our water resources under good control.
Progress in pollution abatement is proceeding at an accelerat^
ing pace. But the 20 miles of industrial river from Warren
to Lowellville, with its capacity for industrial cooling and
for self-purification of industrial wastes, constitutes the
industrial water life line on which the welfare of this
community depends. This reach of the river serves the
best interests of the area only if these capacities of the
riverare fully utilized.
-------
159
The people of the Mahoning Valley have always been
aware of the need to develop our water resources to serve them
as they seek to earn a living in the Mahoning Valley and as
they seek to enjoy leisure time. Ours is a restless people
but on the whole they have tempered progress with the cold
realities of every-day living. We trust that the conferees
will approve of progress made and that we shall be able to
get on with the job of pollution control under the guidance
of our long-established state and interstate compact
authorities. I thank you, Mr. Chairman, and gentlemen of the
conference.
... Applause...
CHAIRMAN STEIN: You know that was an
excellent paper, Mr. Lloyd, but by the diminished applause,
I think these fellows are weak and are going to have to go
out and eat pretty soon. Let's see if we have any comments
or questions. I don't want to hold anyone up from lunch
but I think -- and by the way, there is one little point I
don't get here.
What do you mean by self-purification of industrial
lakes or do you want to wait until after lunch? Do you mean
the acids get purified?
MR. LLOYD: Well, there are certain
chemical wastes that do not have a characteristic that per-
mits it to die away from the river water which, I grant you,
-------
160
as being a chemical fact. However, they are used up as
they do work on other materials, shall I say, or other
chemicals and they also are diluted. Not to my knowledge
has there been anyone who has been injured from a public
health standpoint as the result of the pollution that has
come out of this river recently, and certainly with the
number of facilities which are now coming into their full
bloom, shall we say, as pollution abatement facilities, I
think the quality of the Mahoning River and the Shenango
River and the Beaver River will be greatly increased. I
think we have made progress, sir, and I am very proud to
have been a part of it and I think the people of the
Mahoning Valley are also proud that they have done so well.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Well, thank you.
Are there any further comments or questions? Mr. LeBosquet,
whom you referred to several times, is here and I think we
are going to give him a chance to speak later.
MR. LLOYD: I am sure you should.
He is a very accomplished professional person.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Yes, I have known him
for years. As a matter of fact, he taught me the business,
maybe that's his one black mark.
... Laughter...
CHAIRMAN STEIN: I understand from shaggy
dogs we have had roaming through the audience, that the
-------
161
consensus in the audience is to have a reasonable lunchtime.
If this is the case, we will try to be back just about a littl^
after or a quarter after 2:00.
We stand recessed for lunch. Thank you very much.
(Whereupon, a luncheon recess was had to reconvene
at 2:15 p.m., the same day.)
AFTERNOON SESSION
2:25 p.m.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: May we reconvene.
As we see the schedule, now, we are sure we will complete or
there will be a completion of Ohio*s presentation today and
we will make certain that Pennsylvania*s presentation is
completed.
Now, in addition to that, time permitting, we
will call on ORSANCO and, if time permitting, again, such
of the other Federal agencies that may be available. We
will probably have to wait until tomorrow for the Department
of Health, Education, and Welfare*s presentation.
Now, again I have been through these many, many
times. The critical man here, I think, is the reporter.
We may get testy up here or you may in the audience sitting
around long enough but there is just so much that a single
reporter can do in one day; I know that. What I am going
to try to do is to look to depending on the way things go
-- to recess as close to 5;00 as is reasonably feasible.
-------
162
With this, we would like to call on Dr. Arnold again.
DR. ARNOLD: Mr. Chairman, with your
permission, sir, I would like to put in the record that Mr.
Kenneth Lloyd, who spoke here earlier this morning, is a
commissioner of the St. Lawrence Seaway and also a former
commissioner of ORSANCO.
Now, it is my privilege to introduce to you Mr.
R. F. Doolitle, Vice President and General Counsel for The
Youngstown Sheet and Tube Company, who will speak on behalf
of all the steel companies in the basin. Mr. Doolittle.
MR. DOOLITTLE: Mr. Chairman, my
presentation will involve the use of slides and I think this
may necessitate some rearrangement of the seating as the only
feasible place for putting the screen, it seems, is where
the counsel are. Mr. Stein said they wouldn»t mind relin-
quishing their places and sitting in the front area. I
think the row that is here is not a suitable one and I would
recommend that some space be cleared down further.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you very much,
Mr. Doolittle.
MR. DOOLITTLE: Well, Mr. Chairman and
honorable conferees and ladies and gentlemen, perhaps I
should repeat for the record that I am speaking for the
Youngstown Sheet and Tube Company.
The Ohio conferee, Dr. Arnold, and the other steel
-------
163
companies on the Mahoning, have asked me to tell you some-
thing of our pollution abatement programs. This means I'll
have to explain a little about the waste disposal problems
of the steel industry in this valley. As I do this, I want
to tell you particularly about two things: first, the
programs we have under way with the state for solving these
problems so as to eliminate or control the wastes in our
water discharges, and second, the very great progress we«ve
been making under these programs in the past few years, and
so upgrading the quality of the river.
The companies for which I am speaking are: Republic
Steel Corporation, Copperweld steel Company, Jones & Laughlin
Steel Corporation, Pittsburgh Steel Company, Sharon Steel
Corporation, United States Steel Corporation, and, of course,
my own company, The Youngs town Sheet and Tube Company.
Mahoning Valley primarily a Steel Producing Center.r
As you must know, the Mahoning Valley from Warren
down to the Pennsylvania State line, supporting a population
of some 509,000, is primarily a center of steel production
and steel fabricating. There are nine steel companies with
15 major plants, including 63 rolling mills, along the river.
Other industries exist, of course, but essentially this is
a steel community, dependent for its existence on the pro-
duction of steel, and on the prosperity of that industry in
'?
this valley. The giant mills that line the banks of this
-------
164
small stream for a number of miles account for nearly seven
percent of all the steel produced in the Nation, and nearly
every family in this community is vitally concerned, directly
or indirectly, with whether steel in this valley is doing
well or poorly.
We must also appreciate that the existence of the
steel industry in this valley, and the employment that goes
with it, is utterly dependent on the Mahoning River* The
industry relies on this river, first, for enormous quantities
of water needed for cooling purposes, and second, for dis-
charge of certain of its wastes, and this is why the steel
plants are all located right along the riverfs banks. Small
as this little stream is, without it, and without its use as
a workhorse, there would be no steel industry in either
Youngstown, Niles or Warren.
Ohio's Program,
Now in 1952, a stringent water pollution control
law became effective in Ohio. It established a Water Pollu-
tion Control Board in the Department of Health, with broad
powers for developing and enforcing pollution programs.
Some years earlier, in order to deal with interstate pollu-
tion, the State of Ohio had entered into a compact with seven
other states bordering on the Ohio River or its tributaries.
The Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission (it's a
long name, and we call it ORSANCO), was formed under this
-------
165
compact. Since then, for purposes of interstate control,
the state has been functioning under regulations adopted
by this Commission.
Immediately on its creation in 1952, the Water
Pollution Control Board in Ohio moved to a waste discharge
permit system, as contemplated by the Ohio law. Under this
permit system no discharges are made to the river by any
company or municipality without a permit. Separate permits
are issued to each company covering each of its different
types of discharge. The permits run for only a year at a
time, and annual renewals for a company are always condi-
tioned on its meetings requirements for scheduled improve-
ments. These are established as part of an over-all program.
In other words, the state has utilized the annual
permit system as a means of prescribing and enforcing
feasible programs for each company. In doing this it has
given separate consideration to the individual situation
of each company.
For example, in the sewer systems originally
constructed in some of the older plants, there was no
separation of sewage from industrial wastes. They were all
mixed together. For these companies, then, separation was
a mandatory first step -- and .a very expensive one -- in the
abatement program. Diversion of human sewage from the river
was a first priority, of course, and it had to be synchronized
-------
166
with the schedule for completion of the various municipal
treatment plants that have been built along this river in
the past few years. As you will see later, this important
part of the program is now almost complete.
But where companies already had sewers which col-
lected their sanitary sewage separately, it was appropriate
for them to give first attention to other matters, so the
state has set up entirely different orders of priority with
different companies, but they all look toward the same
ultimate objective, as part of the over-all program in this
valley which Dr. Arnold and Mr. Eagle have described to you.
Participation by Steel Companies.
Prom the very start of this program, the steel
companies have accepted responsibility for doing their part.
I think it's important that you understand the degree of
initiative and cooperation they've shown. First, they've
felt they could assist in solving some of the technical
problems encountered in developing truly effective, and
economically feasible, facilities and in-plant practices
for doing the job.
This has required both study and experimentation.
Toward this objective, all of the major steel companies,
and a large number of the smaller ones, have participated
actively in the work of ORSANCO, through an ORSANCO steel
industry committee formed nearly 15 years ago. With expert
-------
167
representation on it from each company, this committee set
up subcommittees concerned with coke plants, waste acid,
solids, and evaluation of toxicity.
So, also, a subcommittee on sampling and analysis
has done valuable work in developing standard procedures for
measuring and analyzing steel industry wastes, and for
developing methods of odor evaluation in water. Getting
agreement on means of measurement has taken time, but it«s
also brought about a better understanding of cause and effect,
and of what needed to be done. After all, a program for
improvement of the river can be no better than the data on
which it's based.
These subcommittees have been working committees.
A number of the representatives have devoted full time or
nearly full time to this work. Their findings have been
recognized and reported by ORSANCO.
On the strictly research side, the steel industry
has maintained a fellowship at the Mellon Institute in
Pittsburgh dedicated to the solution of many technical
problems, and the fellowship has worked closely with these
committees.
Some illustrations of the success of this coopera-
tive activity will be seen in the adoption and installation
of many of the committee findings in Mahoning Valley steel
mills. These include, for example, definition of waste
-------
168
loads, drastic improvement in scale pit design, detection of
organics, careful evaluation of over 50 pickle liquor treat-
ment processes, and controls on coagulation of wastes.
Throughout all this, the representatives of the
steel companies have worked closely with the staffs of ORSANCO
and the Ohio Department of Health. Let me say again, their
joint effort has been aimed at developing sound methods of
control, and at exchange of information and understanding.
The companies have felt it very important that treatment
not be required in excess of what is clearly needed in the
over-all public interest, also that any treatment facilities
required will in fact accomplish the intended protection, and
that they!ll do it in an economical way, in other words, not
provide "treatment for treatment's sake." We feel it
important that when requirements are set, the over-all
economic welfare of the communities they affect be kept in
mind.
Accomplishment under Permit System.
Study and research have been only a part of
the cooperation from the steel companies a necessary part
to be sure, for obtaining sound results. Equally important
has been their cooperation with the state in its administration
of the permit system, and this has resulted in a record of
marked progress and accomplishment in improving this river.
Within the past three years, particularly, the improvement
-------
169
has been proceeding at an accelerated rate.
As I will show you with slides in some detail,
the companies have developed programs for improvement of scale
pits through special baffling of old pits and scientific
design of new ones; they have located and closed up leaks
in pipes and sewers carrying organics; they have pioneered
improved techniques for separating blast furnace flue dust
from the wash water; they have introduced facilities and
procedures for dealing with acid wastes; they have constructed
equipment which eliminates clean-out discharges at the coke
plants; and they have segregated and diverted their sewage
to new municipal treatment plants.
Progress under the permit system has been steady.
It is significant that several years ago certain of the
companies worked out planned five-year programs with the
state covering their -annual permit renewals. Under these
.programs they scheduled .an Border ly sequence of improvements
with the heavy ao.st ibo the companies spread over a
.reasonable period of time, and with (completion
-------
170
are facilities right hereon the Mahoning.
Blast Furnace Flue Dust.
One of the waterborne waste problems in the
production of steel is blast furnace flue dust. Production
of steel starts with smelting the iron ore in a blast furnace.
(Slide 1) Coke is added for fuel and to reduce the ore, and
limestone is added to pick up the impurities in the ore and
permit a pour of molten iron.
To keep the process going, large volumes of hot
air are forced into a number of openings near the base of
the blast furnace. But as the air is piped away from the
furnace, it carries some of the smaller particles of iron
ore, and of coke and limestone, and this mixture, which must
be disposed of, is called flue dust.
To prevent flue dust from reaching the river,
different devices are employed. First, the gas is put through
a "dry dust catcher" where some of the solid particles are
forced out into a hopper. After the gas leaves this dry
dust catcher, it is next put through a scrubber, where it's
washed with a water spray that picks up more of the solids.
The dust-bearing water is sent to a settling tank, or to
a thickener, to permit "settling out" of as much of the
dust as possible, and the clarified water is then finally
discharged to the river.
However, until recent changes made by the steel
-------
171
companies, both the volume and the turbulence of water going
through these pits was so great that a considerable amount
of the flue dust failed to settle out. Consequently it went
to the river in the discharge water.
To prevent this has been a challenge to the steel
companies. But in the last few years their efforts have met
with real success through development of the following three
methods, all of which are now in use on the Mahoning:
(1) The first is by increasing the efficiency
of existing settling basins. (Slide 2) This slide shows
the dust-laden water flowing from the washer to the
settling basin. To eliminate the flue dust from this
dirty water was the objective. By diverting cooling water
which contains no dust, and by installing new, more efficient
methods of washing the gas, using less water, the companies
have been able to eliminate nearly three-quarters of the
volume of water that used to go to the settling basin.
This has made use of the simple principle of reducing
turbulence of the water in the basin, and at the same
time being able to hold it there for a longer time, to
let the solids settle out.
(Slide 3) Here is clarified water coming out of
the settling basin. If you compare the clarity of the
water in front of the white cardboard with the dirty
water you saw in the last slide going to the settling
-------
172
basin, you can tell that the water coming out from these
basins is now really clean.
(2) The second kind of facility is known as a
thickener (Slide 4). This is a circular tank some 70 to
100 feet in diameter, which accomplishes the same result.
It requires a good deal of space, and with its auxiliary
equipment may cost up to as much as a million dollars, not
to mention the cost of operating and maintaining it. It
can also be employed in a recirculation system and that's
the third method.
(3) Recirculation System, This has been made
possible by new modifications in the method of washing
the gas which now permit recirculation of the washer
water. (Slide 5) Here under construction are two thickeners
which are to be part of a closed recirculation system. The
gas wash water is recirculated continuously instead of being
discharged to the river. This particular unit will be
completed this year". You may be interested to know that
its cost is in the range of $2,000,000.
The water carrying the flue dust from the gas washer
is piped to the center of the thickener. There is a second
thickener in the rear. The solids settle out of the water
as it moves slowly to the outer rim of the circular tank.
There are rakes on the bottom which push the solids to the
center, and from there they are pumped to filters located
-------
173
in the building under construction between the two tanks.
In the basement of the new building there are pumps which
will return the clarified wash water to the gas washer
where it will be reused for washing the gas.
(Slide 6) An idea of the size of these units
is given by looking at the men shown between the forward
thickener and the tracks. As you can see, adequate space
is one of the essentials for waste treatment facilities
for many of the large operations in the steel industry,
These pictures (Slides 7 and 8) graphically illustrate
the lack of space available in many of the older steel
plants, and this is one of the major problems presented.
(Slide 9) There's a lot more of this dust
created in a blast furnace than you might think. Herels
a pile of it that»s been prevented from reaching the river.
It will later be converted to sinter and recharged to the
furnace, but any blast furnace man will tell you this is
a mighty expensive method of producing raw material. The
cost of running the process exceeds the value of any material
it recovers.
Progress. Now for a report on the progress that
has been made by the steel companies here in the valley to
keep flue dust out of the river. There are 16 blast furnaces
in the Mahoning steel complex. This bar graph (Slide 10)
shows what has been accomplished to date and what is scheduled
-------
to be done. You will notice that in 1954, although there
were some settling basins, none of the facilities were
adequate. By 1959 adequate treatment has been provided at
25 percent of the furnaces to keep substantially all their
flue dust from the river. By 1964 this percentage had risen
to 75 percent. With the completion this year of the con-
struction of facilities shown on the slides you have Just
seen, adequate treatment will have been provided for all
the furnaces in the valley. Flue dust on the Mahoning Biver
will then have been controlled.
Coke Plant.
Another source of wastes, this time organic wastes,
is the coke plant. (Slide 11) Here in this battery of coke
ovens coal is carbonized to remove the coal tars and gases,
and this produces coke for the blast furnaces. (Slide 12)
In this picture flaming coke is being pushed from an oven
into a car which will take it to a quench station for cooling
There are three active coke plants on the Mahoning, owned by
two of the steel companies.
The gases and coal tars produced in the hot coke
ovens are in turn processed through various units and re-
covered as by-products. If they escape to the river in
sufficient quantity, some of these organic chemicals may
create taste and odor problems in downstream water supplies.
Now herefs a very interesting thing. One of the
-------
175
miracles of streams is that nature has endowed them with a
remarkably high capacity for self-purification. They purify
themselves of organics in different degrees, not only through
dilution but also through oxidation and other chemical and
biological action, during their passage downstream. This is
one of the things that makes it possible to utilize streams
for waste discharge at all. It is an economic resource
which should be used, in the over-all interest of the com-
munity and the Nation.
Self-purification is particularly significant in
this river in the area from Warren to below Lowellville,
because of another circumstance peculiar to it. This is
that neither Warren, Niles, Youngstown, nor any of the other
municipalities in this section of the river use it for
drinking purposes or public water supply. This is a very
significant fact in any evaluation of proper utilization
of this stream. The first use of the water for public water
supply is at the Beaver Falls Water Company, nearly 50 miles
below Warren, and 30 miles downstream from Youngstown. This
is below the point where the waters of the Shenango join with
the Mahoning, adding their volume and dilution to form the
Beaver River.
For some years now the steel companies that have
coke plants on the Mahoning have had a continuing and success-
ful loss of coke organics to the river. They have all installed
-------
176
closed quench systems in which, instead of using water directly
from the river, they use the waste water from the by-product
recovery to quench the coke when it is removed from the ovens.
This destroys the organics in the waste water by oxidation.
Beaver Falls water has, nevertheless, on a few
days during the year had chemical taste, sometimes of a
medicinal nature, sometimes tarry, and sometimes other
chemical characteristics. Some of the steel companies on
the Mahoning, who were determined to learn more about the
causes of this, decided in 1953 to undertake a program of
studying the river. (Slide 13) With the support of the
Ohio Health Department and the complete cooperation of the
Beaver Falls water Company, they made extensive surveys over
a three-year period from 1953 to 1956. I want to tell you a
little something about this. The results were astonishing
and they gave new impetus and direction to the prevention
programs at the coke plants.
The purposes of the survey were first, to study the
self-purification potential of the river, second, to deter-
mine whether correlation existed between the coke plant
discharges and the taste and odor occurrences at the water
works, and third, to study the effect the treatment process
at the water works had on certain organics. The companies
did this on their own. And they used very exacting tech-
niques. Extensive sampling and analysis was made. Hourly
-------
177
samples were collected 24 hours a day every day at each of
numerous sampling points over extended periods of several
months in the wintertime in each different year. (Slide 14)
These were analyzed in the laboratory, arid so were frequent
grab samples as well. Time of passage in the river from
Youngstown to Beaver Falls was carefully measured at different
flows.
The results showed three main things: (1)
remarkable self-purification of the organics during passage,
(2) no correlation whatever between ordinary coke plant
discharges and taste and odor at the water works, and (3)
and most significant, very clear correlation between these
taste and odor occurrences and upstream clean-outs or other
slug discharges of organics, whether they came from coke
plants or any other source. What this demonstrated, then,
was the vital necessity to avoid discharges from clean-outs
of sumps and tank bottoms.
The companies have acted on this information and
taken steps to eliminate these sources. For example, at
one plant (Slide 15) napthalene, which used to be collected
in sumps such as these (Slide 16) and occasionally flushed
to the river, is now included with the tar by-products which
are sold. Other materials (Slide 17) which used to be
wasted, have now been absorbed or eliminated by changes in
process.
-------
178
The companies also turned their attention to the
possibility of leaks in the coke plant cooling operations
which might cause unintended discharge to the river, and
there is now constant surveillance to prevent leaks from
occurring.
Progress. (Slide 18) The effectiveness of this
program is demonstrated by this chart which shows from 1954
to 1964 the decrease in number of days in the year when the
Beaver Falls Water Works had a chemical odor. In 1954 there
were 43 such days; and in 1958, this had been reduced to 22;
and in 1961 and 1964, only six during the year.
During the years 1959, 1960 and,1962, modifications
were being made at various coke plants to eliminate trouble
spots. This of course caused unavoidable heavy discharges
to the river during the periods of construction. .That work
is now completed, and the coke plants have adequate controls
to prevent discharges from clean-outs.
As protection against the risk of leaks or breaks,
a report system has been set up to alert the Beaver Falls
Water Company, the Ohio Department of Health and ORSANCO if
a leak or other emergency does occur at any time, night or
day. This gives the water company .an opportunity to adjust
treatment practice temporarily, if it should be necessary.
Looking toward the future, and as a part of their
continuing program, the steel companies on the Mahoning now
-------
179
also have a survey under way employing techniques developed
at the Mellon Institute to trace organics. The purpose is
to determine possible sources of loss of organic material on
the Mahoning or the Shenango Rivers which might still be
cause for concern.
One more point about the quality of the water at
Beaver palls. While there have been occasional occurrences
of unpleasant taste, no one has ever before suggested that
the Beaver Falls water supply is in any way unsafe for
drinking. We have always understood, and the Beaver Falls
Water Company will confirm, that no question of health is
involved.
Rolling Mills.
We now move from the coke plants and blast furnaces
to the next step in steel making, (slide 19) The iron from
the blast furnace is processed in furnaces such as these
open hearths where the impurities are removed and elements are
added to give the steel its desired properties. There are
no waterborne wastes from the open hearths.
The molten steel is poured from the furnace into
molds, to form ingots. (Slide 20)
The ingots later are reheated and while at white
heat are.rolled to the desired shape through a succession
of rolling mills. (Slide 21) Here is a heated ingot headed
for the blooming mill.
-------
180
Now when heated, the hot steel oxidizes rapidly,
and scale is formed. This is removed by high pressure water
sprays and by the pressure of the rolls, and here we have
another one of steel*s major waste discharge problems.
(Slide 22) The problem arises on any rolling mill. Here's
a hot strip mill.
One of the newer developments to reduce the need
for water for removing this scale is a dry drag (Slide 23).
Here a drag on a long cable sweeps..or pulls .the .scale f.r.om:
under the mill to a belt which in turn carries it outside
the mill without the use of water. This picture (Slide 24)
shows what scale looks like that's already been removed
from under the mill by this means.
Most of the scale, however, is flushed by water
to a scale pit where it can settle out on the bottom of the
pit.
In the older mills these pits are small. (Slide 25)
Their purpose was simply to protect sewers from plugging.
Here for example is a pit about 10 feet wide and 15 feet
long. Others are even smaller.
In order to separate the mill scale and prevent
it from being flushed to the river, the scale-bearing water
has to be slowed down and held long enough for the scale to
settle out. One of the accomplishments of the companies
in their cooperative efforts under the state*s program has
-------
181
been the development of methods by which the efficiency of
existing pits has been enormously improved. Here for example
(Slide 26) is a pit in which baffles have been constructed
to slow down the water and eliminate turbulence, to give the
scale an opportunity to settle. Where baffling would be
effective, it has been installed in pits on the Mahoning.
This also permits collection of oil through separa-
tion as it rises to the surface in a quiet section of the pit.
In the foreground of this picture is the pump for removing
oil as it accumulates on the surface of the pit. (Slide 2?)
Here is an illustration of the manner in which the oil collects
behind these baffles near the far end of the pit. This pit
is actually located down underneath the operating floor of
the mill. Itfs an example of one of the older pits.
When pits are too small for modification, and there
is no room for a new pit, the discharge from one or more
existing pits has sometimes been carried to a new basin.
(Slide 28) In this instance the discharges from the inadequate
pits in some 12 mills were collected and handled through a
large settling basin. This pit is as long as a football
field and 30 feet deep. (Slide 29) Periodically, the scale
is cleaned out of it, and here is the amount of scale this
pit has kept out of the river over a two-month period,.
In newer mills the scale pits are adequately
sized (Slide 30). They have to be very deep to collect
-------
182
the scale-bearing water from the sewers located below some
mills. (Slide 31) In this instance, the pit is 41 feet
deep. It's 129 feet long, and 25 feet wide. To support the
weight of the adjacent mill equipment, special structural
designs were required. The baffling is below the water
level where you see two cross-beams. At the far end
there is a pump to lift the accumulated floating oil to
the tanks in the upper right, and the pit is so deep that
the clarified water has to be raised by pump to the sewer.
The cost of this pit was nearly a million dollars. And this
is only one pit for one rolling mill in one plant.
Recirculation of the water may sometimes be
feasible where space is available. (Slide 32) Here, in a
new mill, there is settling of scale in an adequately
designed scale pit, and then a recirculation of water
through a cooling tower (Slide 33), and then further
cooling in a lagoon (Slide 34). Pumps (Slide 35) return
the water from the lagoon to the mill. You can see the
amount of space all this requires, and yet it*s serving
only one of several rolling mills in a single steel plant.
Because of space limitations, this approach is obviously
not feasible for most of the mills in the Mahoning Valley.
Loss of lubricating oil in old mills is a con-
tinuing problem and is receiving prime consideration.
Newer mills don't lose much oil because advancements have
-------
183
been made in methods of lubricating bearings, and also because
today when new scale pits are constructed, adequate oil
facilities are built right in. (slide 36) The belt-type
unit shown here was developed by one of the companies on
the Mahoning. (Slide 37) And here is the conventional
oil skimmer, used where the water level in the pit can be
i
held constant.
There's a different oil problem in cold rolling
mills. There (Slide 38) the steel strip is not reheated
before stretching or rolling, so soluble or emulsified oil
is used for lubrication, and the resulting oil-water
solution is recycled on the mill. (Slide 39) Here the
solution comes in at the side, and the scale is removed by
a continuous scraper going up the incline you see in the
background.
Within the past few years, great progress has been
made in developing equipment such as shown here (Slides 40
and 41) to clean these solutions and thus prolong their
life.
You can see that the waste discharges from rolling
mills are both mill scale and oil. The prevention of either
one from reaching the river is intimately connected with the
other.
Progress. What progress have the companies in
this valley made in controlling the discharge of mill scale
-------
184
and oil? (Slide 42) If you*ll look at this bar chart, you*ll
see that in 1954, only 13 percent of the mills in the
Mahoning Valley had adequate facilities for this purpose.
By 1959, there were still only 33 percent of them that did.
By 1964, this figure had risen to 76 percent. An additional
five percent are scheduled to have adequate treatment by
the end of next year. This will make a total of 81 percent
of the mills of this valley. The remaining 19 percent are
old, marginal mills facing possible replacement or abandon-
ment.
Cleaning.
We come now to the cleaning processes in steel-
making. When steel is cleaned in acid solutions, it's
called pickling. (Slide 43) In this picture you see a
modern pickling line. The steel passes through a series
of acid tanks as it moves along the length of this line,
some 830 feet. This removes oxides and scale and prepares
the surface for coating or plating. During the process the
strength of the acid is reduced. When it becomes too weak
to clean effectively, the acid, called spent pickle liquor,
is discarded. Disposal of spent pickle liquor has been a
major challenge to the industry for many years. Extensive
study and experimentation have been lavished on the problem.
Where land is available (Slide 44), lime neutrali-
zation is employed by some plants on the Mahoning. The
-------
185
resultant slurry settles in a lagoon, or is hauled away.
(Slide 1^5) Another method used here, where space
is available, is neutralization on slag dumps. Again, a
lagoon holds the slurry. But see how much space this
requires.
Where space is unavailable, and this is true in
most of the older, crowded plants in this area, a system of
continuous discharge has been instituted in the last few
years as an interim control. By this method, batch dumping
is avoided, and the rate of discharge to the stream is
reduced to a trickle. This line (Slide 1^6) operates on this
principle. The natural alkalinity in the Mahoning reacts
with the dispersed acid, and by neutralization destroys it,
and in this way eliminates the corrosive effect.
Progress. By one of these methods or another, the
corrosive effect of acid has been eliminated at all opera-
i
tions on the Mahoning except two. In both of these, control
facilities are scheduled for completion this year.
There is still the problem of dissolved iron salts
which result from pickling, and the industry has carried on
a continuing effort to find a feasible answer to this problem.
A new process has recently been developed which
is the first major breakthrough in this problem. It's a
method of acid regeneration which utilizes hydrochloric
acid in a vertical tower. Interestingly enough,
-------
186
it*s ail outgrowth of a pilot plant experiment a few years ago
at Miles, Ohio. There eight steel companies joined in an
investment of over $800,000 to test a related method for acid
regeneration, but like so many others, that turned out not
to be practical. Yet the work done there has led to the
development of this new vertical process, and a new mill in
Alabama is successfully using it to convert the spent acid
to fresh acid and iron oxide.
Possibilities are now being evaluated for adapting
this process to the kind of pickling lines in use on the
Mahoning.
Representatives of the Ohio Department of Health
have been kept acquainted with these developments and have
visited the operation in Alabama. When the test work now
under way on the Mahoning is completed, a report on the
possibility of a program will be made to the state.
Plating.
Another steel-related activity that has waste
problems is plating. In addition to their major steelmaking,
a few of the steel companies on the Mahoning also have minor
plating activities. These include electroplating of brass,
copper or zinc on steel. In each instance on the Mahoning
there is adequate collection and treatment of the waste.
(Slide 47) Special intercepting sumps are used to eliminate
possibility of an accidental spill.
-------
187
Cooling.
Perhaps some mention should also be made of water
temperatures. When water is used for cooling -- and 90
percent of the water pumped into a steel mill is used solely
for that purpose -- it picks up heat. Mr. Lloyd has des-
cribed to you the history of development of upriver water
storage in the Mahoning basin. This history has demonstrated
the necessity for a large, continuous supply of water to be
available for cooling in the steel mills if this valley is
to prosper, and employment here is to flourish.
Two methods of obtaining cooler water have been
used on the Mahoning. The first is by cooling towers (Slides
48 and 49); the second is by increasing the flow in the
river. Neither method is inexpensive.
The minimum flow in the river in dry weather is
now about 125 million gallons per day. But the total water
pumped by all the steel plants on the Mahoning adds up to
some 800 million gallons per day. Of course, this becomes
possible only because each plant returns its cooling water
to the river, so the flow in the river isn't substantially
reduced. Itgs an interesting observation, though, that
this total steel company pumpage amounts to more than the
entire volume of water required for ordinary water supply
for the whole population of Ohio.
Now, apart from the problem of space, if cooling
-------
188
towers were used by all the steel companies on the Mahoning,
then up to 60 million gallons a day would be evaporated into
the air, and thus permanently lost from the stream. During
dry weather this would mean nearly half the flow in the river
would be lost, and as a result all the new municipal treat-
ment plants so recently built at taxpayers expense would then
become inadequate and have to be enlarged.
The steel companies in the Mahoning basin know
well the economic advantages of colder water for cooling.
But they also recognize that this is but one factor in
evaluating the economics of an area. This area is already
heavily handicapped by old facilities, lack of water trans-
portation, and distance from important markets. By supporting
local bond issues the people in this community have been
willing to join with industry in financing the cost of
reservoirs to provide low flow augmentation benefits on this
river. This is eloquent evidence of their interest in
preserving the river
-------
!
189
many of the sprawling plants along this river carried both
plant sewage and industrial waste combined. To prevent the
sewage reaching the river, it had to be separated and
diverted to the municipal disposal plants that have been
constructed over the past few years. Now if you've ever
seen a sewer being laid, and the streets and roads torn up,
you can imagine what all this digging inside a crowded mill
area would mean. Virtually every roadway in the plant, and
often the mill floors, had to be torn up. (Slide 50) Here
is a typical layout to show how extensive the disruption was.
The plant in this aerial photograph is about two and one-half
miles long. This company had to lay six miles of interceptor
sewers inside its crowded plants on the Mahoning. TO be sure,
it's a job that had to be done, but it's been a major effort,
running into many millions of dollars for the steel companies.
Under the Ohio permit renewal system, this sewer
construction has been geared to the timetables of the munici-
palities for completion of their sewage disposal plants.
At the start of this program 12 years ago, in addition to
the municipal sewage, sewage from 35,000 employees of the
steel companies was discharged to the Mahoning.
The progress in connecting this waste to municipal
treatment plants is shown here. (Slide 51) You'll see that
in 1954 all sewage went to the river. By 1959, 16 percent
of the sewage from the steel mills was connected to municipal
-------
190
treatment facilities. By 1964 this percentage had risen
to 85 percent, and by next year it will be 100 percent.
The job is thus now virtually finished, timed with the
completion later this year of the municipal disposal plants
themselves, and their connecting lines. This is a major
achievement in this valley, and it's been accomplished by
the state, the cities and industry all working together.
Program Time.
A program of the scope I've described could hardly
be accomplished overnight. Its cost, running into many
millions of dollars, had to be spread over a period of years
if the economy of the area were not to be adversely affected.
Then, too, lack of space in the crowded mills along
the Mahoning has made some control measures impossible.
Others are economically prohibitive for certain of the older.
near-obsolete facilities that are still supplying jobs in
this area. Whether to install a new, revolutionary facility
or process, or to prolong the life of a unit approaching
obsolescence, is a difficult decision to make -- one that
requires time as well as capital. So also, some of the
technical problems involved in controlling certain of the
steel industry wastes have required study and experimentation.
All the problems are not yet solved, but as a result of
persistent effort, solution seems well on the way.
Conclusions.
-------
191
To summarize, if ever there was an area in which
a vigorous pollution abatement program is in effect, and
remarkable progress is being made, it- is on the Mahoning
River. The annual permit system administered by the Water
Pollution Control Board of Ohio, and the policies established
by ORSANCO, have been highly effective. These authorities
seek to accomplish the objectives of pollution abatement
through well-conceived and adequate measures which give>
recognition to problems peculiar to this industrial area.
o
Far from being recalcitrant, the steel companies have taken
the initiative in working with the state and ORSANCO to make
this program possible.
Recognizing that effective area controls could not
be developed without sound data relating cause and effect,
they've put men to work to obtain that information.
The few problems not yet fully solved may require
major decisions on method of operation, and in some instances
the only alternative would be discontinuance of operation and
loss of jobs that go with it. Meanwhile, these problems
are not interrupting the progress of the abatement programs
under way in accordance with the state permit requirements.
. Here then is the Scoreboard 'of our progress and
accomplisment in brief:
Blast Furnace Flue Dust - in 1954, none adequately
treated, 75 percent treated now; 100 percent will be adequate-
ly treated by next year.
-------
192
Coke Plants - in 1954, inadequate controls; by 1964;
all known sources of waste under control; program now under
way for tracing other sources which occasionally cause chemical
taste or odor at the Beaver Falls Water Works. Completion
expected by next year.
Rolling Mill Scale and Oil - in 1954, only 13
percent adequately treated; 76 percent treated now; 81
percent will be treated by 1966; answers for the remaining
19 percent depend on disposition of the mills.
Acid - in 1954, little adequately treated; neutral-
ization with lime or slag now provided where space is available;
where it is not, removal of corrosive effect is now accomplished
by controlled rate of discharge at all rolling mills except
two; programs for these two now scheduled for this year;
evaluation of a new method of pickling which would eliminate
discharge is under way. Definition of final program expected
by next year.
Plating - in 1954, no treatment; all mills now have
adequate treatment.
Sewage - in 1954, almost all sewage from 35,000
plant employees went to the river; by 1964, 85 percent connected
to municipal treatment; by next year, 100 percent scheduled
for treatment. I would like the record to show that during
the entire three weeks of this discharge of the untreated
industrial waste running to as much as 14,000 ppb of phenol,
-------
193
there were no occurrences of taste and odor at the waterworks
at Beaver Falls.
Ladies and gentlemen, the steel companies along the
Mahoning believe they are neither immodest nor unrealistic
in pointing with pride to their dramatic record of accomplish-
ment on this river in the past 10 years. They've made this
progress under a planned program which is a credit not only
to them, but to the leadership provided by ORSANCO and by
the State of Ohio.
... Applause ...
CHAIRMAN STEIN: , May we reconvene. While
I was listening to the excellent presentation of Mr. Doolittle.,
a lot of people in the audience kept raising the same question
and this was referred to in Mr. Doolittle*s talk, and that
was in referrence to low flow augmentation. Also, we have
had little staff, members, Trixie and Bubbles, going through
the audience and evidently they have had these requests too.
Now, I think the notion of low flow augmentation
has arisen since most of the rivers or an increasing amount
of rivers in the country no longer are regulated streams.
That is, they are not free-flowing streams. I think you may
have heard that in the history that Mr. Lloyd gave of the
6
Mahoning River of the condition here, for example, in the
before World War I. Or you would take the Missouri or the
Mississippi where you would have drought. They would attempt
-------
194
to regulate the flow to keep the flow relatively even for a
majority of water usages and various water uses and for uses
such as navigation, flood control,power and so forth.
Now, one of the uses in quality control, and at
key points in a river's regiment, water is released very
often for the purposes of quality control and, in order to
maintain the quality of a river, you can sometimes use the
energy such as you use for,say, an electric utility. The
electric utility has to be built so that its peak can fill
the needs for peak demands.
For example, at four o'clock in the winter afternoon,
while the men are still in the offices turning on the lights
and in the factory, and the women are at home turning on the
TV and often the radio, there must be sufficient juice to
come through.
During the same periods, during the period of low
flow where the quality of it might sink if even given the
best treatment, if you wipe out all the life, it is hard for
the river to come back; and sometimes provision is made at
these periods of low flow for augmented low flowc
Now, under the Federal Water Pollution Control
Act -- and I want to make this very clear about what the
Federal Policy is in survey of planning of any Federal
reservoir or county, it says "that consideration shall be
given to inclusion of storage for regulations of stream-flow
-------
195
for the purpose of water quality control."
This is Section 2(b) of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act. "That consideration shall be given for storage
of streamflow for the purpose of water quality control," -
here is the key point: "except that such storage and water
releases shall not be provided as a substitute for adequate
treatment or other methods of controlling wastes at the
source."
Now, another section of the Federal program handles
this and I think this is what was alluded to before the
Mahoning report of this morning, but they have made a
determination that adequate treatment means for purposes of
providing augmented low flow, secondary treatment, or its
equivalent. In other words, if you are not providing at
least secondary treatment, it is not going to be recommended
Uncle Sam give you free water for dilution or any water for
dilution. It is up to you to provide secondary treatment
first.
I just say this because evidently this is a
relatively arcane area of discussion and references have been
made to it.
Now, if we can turn to Mr. Doolittle's presenta-
tion. Are there any comments or questions?
MR. POSTON: Mr. Chairman, I have
some questions here. First off, this morning, at the time
-------
196
Mr. Eagle made his presentation and gave us a copy of his
report, I indicated that I would like an opportunity to
comment on it after I had had a chance to look. And I find
that there are not included in this report information on
specific details of effluents from industrial waste treatment
works. This information is essential if we are going to make
an engineering appraisal of the conditions in the stream and
what might be done.
For example, I think it is necessary for us to
know the flows from specific industries, volume-wise, plus
the amounts of phenols, the amounts of scale, the amounts of
cyanides, solids, acids that might be in these particular
flows and, I think, these are essential if we are to do --
make a sound evaluation of tiiis particular problem.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Sir, I wonder if we could
perhaps hold that for the purpose of the record. I wonder
if we could direct ourselves to Mr. Doolittle*s statement
because I would like to have the comments on that as close
to the statement on the record as we can get it.
MR. POSTON: All right. I could see
by the pictures that Mr. Doolittle, not as his name implies,
do little, he has done a lot in particular for Youngstown
Sheet and Tube in the way of providing waste treatment and
bringing to us today a story of activities with regards to
waste treatment. I do have some questions that I would like
-------
197
to ask of Mr. Doolittle.
I got this story quite rapidly here and I made a
few notes. I think one of the items of leaks and sludge and
dumping into the river that causes the taste problems in
the vicinity of Beaver Falls is of interest and I wondered
whether or not in this reporting service how many times
during this past year has it been necessary to report to
the Beaver Falls and to the state that some dumping of sludge
or leaks have caused problems that might be felt in Beaver
Falls?
MR. DOOLITTLE: Do you want me to answer
that, Mr. Poston? I think the gentlemen is here who may
have the figure. Mr. Wallace, at the back of the room, may
have it.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: By the way, I hope these
people will identify themselves.
MR. DOOLITTLE: This is Mr. DeYarman
Wallace of the Research Department of the Youngstown Sheet
and Tube Company.
MR. WALLACE: In 1964 we had three
occasions in which we contacted the Beaver Falls water
treatment plant and informed them that there had been an
emergency discharge upstream. They recognized this and
they were prepared for it; immediately set up a monitoring
system to trace this all the way down. Fortunately, it
-------
198
did not reach Beaver Falls. It died away by the time it
reached Lake Jackson Bridge which is just before the con-
currence of the Shenango and Mahoning River,,
MR. POSTON; This monitoring and this
recording system in which you notified the state, is this
just Youngstown Sheet and Tube that carries this out or do
other companies participate in this?
MRo WALLACE? All the companies par-
ticipate in this and we are the ones who are the workhorses
and carry it outc In other words, we act as the alert
agency.
MR0 POSTON; Then the three times
that were reported
MR. WALLACES They did not involve
Sheet and Tube alone.
MR. POSTON; They did not come down
from Youngstown Sheet and Tube but from one of the others?
MR. WALLACE; That's right.
MR. POSTON; Do you care to comment
on, are these all from one company?
MR. WALLACE; No, they are all from
different companies.
MR. POSTDN; Do you care to name those?
MR. WALLACE; I don't care to name them
at this time.
-------
199
MR. POSTON:
As I have indicated
previously, we are concerned with obtaining data relative
to effluents. Would your company be willing to give us
information on industrial effluents and the amount of
waste?
MR. WALLACE:
cleared with our management.
CHAIRMAN STEIN:
with?
This would have to be
Which company are you
I am with Youngs town
MR. WALLACE?
Sheet and Tube.
MR. DOC-LITTLE: I thought Mr. Cleary
in effect gave you reasons that in effect answered your
question, but since you have asked it of us directly, I
would be happy to add something to what Mr. Cleary said.
I might say that I am speaking only for the
Youngstown Sheet and Tube Company but I would like to
comment with respect to something you said a moment ago
when you were kind enough to say that I had indicated
that our company had done many things for the improvement
of the river. I want to make it clear that my talk this
morning °and the figures and the charts represented the
work that has been done by all of the companies on the river
and not solely by my company.
Now, with respect to the matter of effluent data,
-------
200
Mr. Poston, I understand that you have certain responsibilities,
and that you have set up methods that, in your judgment, are
correct for discharging those responsibilities and that you
are very interested in obtaining from individual companies
their individual effluent discharge data. I think, as everyone
knows, in Ohio we are subject to stringent regulations in
the State of Ohio and we have filed with the State of Ohio
elaborate information and reports on our effluent discharges.
Not only elaborate, but quite frequent with our annual
renewal permit system.
Under the Ohio law, that information is, as it
probably should be, in our opinion, kept confidential because
it is in part competitive information, and it is information
which we share with regulatory authority which has juris-
diction over us.
It is not given to them with the idea that it
would be made available to the public or where our competi-
tors could make use of it.
Now, it is my understanding -- and correct me
please if I am wrong -- that the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare has made it amply clear that effluent
data filed will not be kept private and it will be disclosed
to the public, and it is your view it is your obligation,
and it is for this reason, if no other, we are unwilling,
sir, at this time, to make effluent data available to you.
-------
201
Now I would like to say this so that, there is no misunder-
standing about this.
We seek to cooperate with duly constituted
regulatory authorities in seeking the ultimate goal of
improving the quality of this river. It is my understanding
that the jurisdiction of the Federal Government under the
present Federal Water Pollution Control law contemplates
that the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare may
well come into an area to hold a conference as it has here
if it finds,from whatever study reports it may make, as a
matter of fact, even before it finds, if the Secretary
has reason to believe that there is interstate pollution.
In our situation that means pollution originating in Ohio
and flowing down into Pennsylvania which endangers health
or welfare.
Now, I assume, Mr. Poston, that this conference
would not be called if you did not have such information
and had not reached the conclusion in your own minds that
interstate pollution of this kind existed. I think it is
very clear that we dispute that supposition but you must have
reached that conclusion in your own mind or there vtould
have been no reason for calling the conference.
Now, sir, since you have available, from whatever
sources you may have obtained them, information which
authorizes you, under the law, to call this conference, we
-------
202
find it difficult to understand why it is necessary for you
to have individual company effluent data in order to carry
on this conference.
We are here, the conference is here. Now, what
is the purpose of this conference? As I understand, under
the statute and perhaps Mr. Stein will differ with me
the purpose of this conference is first to determine the
extent of the pollution in Pennsylvania. We find it
difficult to understand why it's necessary to go to the
individual company discharges up in this area in order
to determine what the extent of that pollution is 30 miles
downstream in Pennsylvania.
I commented earlier about the self-purification
or a similar capacity of the stream. The report which
you circulated just as an example showed, I believe, two
and a half parts million of fluorides up in this stretch
of the riverj when it reached the first waterworks 30
miles below it had diminished to seven-tenths per million.
And this is within the optimum of this, a desirable amount.
This is not as great as the desirable amount.
So it would seem to me, sir, that your respon-
sibilities could be adequately discharged by making your
studies and your analysis at the point at which you are
supposed to be concerned before this conference is called.
NOVJ, what is the function of this conference?
-------
203
As I understand it, the issues before you now, in addition
to the extent of pollution in Pennsylvania, are; Are there
adequate measures being taken by the duly constituted
regulatory authorities for dealing with this situation?
The Federal Government is not supposed to inter-
vene, as I understand, unless they find the jobs not being
done by the regulatory authorities in the interstate agency.
So our inquiry, it would seem to us when we refused your
request -- and we did refuse the request for the reasons I
stated -- it was confidential information we did not want
to disclose to our competitors. The reason this conference
is called, the issue here, then, in addition to the extent
of the pollution in Pennsylvania and the adequacy of the
measures, is what is the progress that is being effected.
And certainly after the reports you have heard, Dr. Arnold,
Mr. Eagle, and the Mayor*s and Mr. Lloyd and all the others,
including our industrial presentation, we find it very
difficult to understand how anyone could reach the conclusion
that there are not adequate measures and that effective
progress is not being made.
And I understand, sir, that the jurisdiction of
the Federal Government to proceed further in the matter of
regulation is not a jurisdiction to go to individual com-
panies to find where particular pollution is coming from.
t
It is a jurisdiction to deal with the question of what is
-------
204
the pollution in Pennsylvania, at this time, and unless you
make further findings of inadequate measures and of a lack
of progress, there is no authority in the Federal Government
to go to the next step of a public hearing and to go after
the question of responsibility of individual companies for
enforcement.
Have I answered your question, sir?
... Applause ...
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Mr. Doolittle, I wouldn't
disagree with you on the purposes of the conference, but I
think we have a question of both Ohio and Federal law, I
think we have to consider. The first thing is not whether
Mr. Poston or anyone else believes there is interstate
pollution; it is whether the Secretary has reason to believe,
The Secretary has so stated that he has reason to believe
that.
The second point is, under Ohio law, the law, as
I read it, states that this information cannot be given
unless we get permission of the industry concerned. Their
permission was turned down. I might point out that in our
dealing with 700 industries throughout the contry, including
many, many major industries other than the steel industry,
we have never had a major industry refuse this information
to the Federal Government. This is our first experience
in the entire country where we have had this refusal, and
-------
205
I think that this is a rather significant issue.
Now, the next point is, I think, our technical
people will be making a report. I have hoped that, at
least, I have attempted not to draw any conclusions - and
I don»t think I have - until all the facts are in and our
technical people's report is in. It seems to me that you
are convinced that adequate progress is being made before
you heard our technical people and our presentation.
Now, may be you can make this determination else-
where but, as I see this, when pollution is coming into
another state, the key point is to trace that - our technical
people - to the individual sources. I think, as a part of
National policy in pollution control, it is felt that this
has to be traced back to individual sources and this, I
think, we have to give our technical people an opportunity
to make their presentation to see why they think it is so.
If you give us the information, we are sure going to make
it public. We have no need for confidential information.
I can't see what use confidential information would be to
a Federal regulatory agency, if we can«t make that infor-
mation available to the public, we don't need it.
MR. DOOLITTLE: Mr. Stein, I don't want
unduly to prolong this discussion but I would like to answer
one or two things' you have said.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Yes.
-------
206
MR. DOOLITTLE: You consider that effluent
data is a part of the province of the Federal inquiry, at
this time. We differ with you on that as a matter of principle
We have not withheld information that the State of Ohio has
asked from us. And the law in Ohio apparently has a different
approach to this than the one you have expressed because the
legislature of Ohio has seen fit to make this information
confidential as between us and the agency to which we report
it.
Now, one further observation. Granted that if the
time comes when your function becomes one of enforcement
against individual companies, at that time it will be
necessary, of course, for you to have data, but as I have
read the Act -- and I could be wrong -- it seemed to me that
your inquiry at this time is solely one into -- so far as
the pollution involved is concerned -- is solely one of
whether there is interstate pollution into Pennsylvania,
and we cannot see for that inquiry there is any necessity
for you to examine into the individual contribution of
different facilities and different places. It has seemed to
us that that inquiry could be inspired only by a desire to
go back to those particular companies, and it is our feeling
that that is still the function of the state by which we
are severely regulated and of the interstate commission
which, under an eight-state compact, has been delegated
-------
207
authority to deal with these questions; that this is not yet
a Federal question unless and until it develops that the state
and the interstate agencies are not doing the job; their
measures are not adequate progress.
When that time comes and you then move under your
enforcement procedures to a public hearing, it may well be
that then individual responsibility for a situation will
then have to be proved and proved before a board and ulti-
mately before a court decision which we have denied.
Individual responsibilities for such a situation
will then, of course, be relative to the inquiry. We do
not believe the purpose of this conference is to inquire
into the responsibilities for the individual sources of
whatever you may find in Pennsylvania.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you, sir. I would
like to again make this very clear. I do not say, as might
have been indicated, that the effluent data was necessary.
What I said was that our technical staff believed they had
to have the technical data in order to make a meaningful
or most meaningful report in this situation. Again, sir,
without attempting or wanting to dispute with you the meaning
of the Ohio law on the subject, I would like to have, at
this point in the record, the pertinent section of the Ohio
law inserted in the record. I think we are both familiar
with it.
-------
208
If anyone knows what that law is, offhand,
perhaps we can have it.
MR. COMPSON: For the purpose of this
record, I would suggest that you insert into the record
that a question was specifically made to the Department
to divulge data on certain industries in this valley which
we refused and, in the letter in response to this request,
the pertinent portions of Ohio law are quoted and this letter
was sent to Mr. Poston by certified mail, return receipt
requested.
May this go into the record?
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Yes, that may. May I
have a copy of that letter? Without objection, the pertinent
copy of the letter will go into the record and the pertinent
section of the law, as I indicated.
"Attention; Mr. H. W. Poston
"Re: WS&PC
"Dear Drc Mangun;
"Your letter of January 18, 1965, to E. W. Arnold,
M.D., Director of Health, has been referred to this office
for consideration and reply.
"Thank you for commending this Department on the
operation of the stream monitoring stations which we have
in operation of the Mahoning River. This is but one example
of the continuing interest and activity of the State of Ohio
-------
209
with regard to water pollution abatement and control in
the Mahoning River basin.
"In your letter you state that you do not believe
an agency of the Federal Government is included in the term
'public' as used in the last sentence of 6111.05 of the
Revised Code, which provides as follows:
"'The board may make copies of such records, but
if such records pertain to a private disposal system, such
copies may not be made available to the public without
express permission of the owner.'
"You are of course entitled to your opinion with
regard to this matter but as has been stated previously
we must disagree. The obvious intent and purpose of this
provision of law is to make such records confidential for
the exclusive use of the Ohio Water Pollution Control
Board and its authorized representatives in the administra-
tion and enforcement of Ohio's Water Pollution Control Law
(Sections 6111,01 to 6111.08, inclusive, of the Revised
Code).
"In good conscience I could not suggest that any
such records be released to the Federal Government or any
other agency of government in view of the very serious
consequences which could ensue as a result of such action.
Section 6111.07 of the Revised Code provides in pertinent
part as follows?
-------
210
'"(A) No person shall violate or fail to
perform any duty imposed by, sections 6111.01
to 6111.08, inclusive, of the Revised Code, or
violate any order of the Water Pollution Control
Board promulgated pursuant to such section.*
"Section 6111.99 of the Revised Code provides
in pertinent part as follows:
'"(A) Whoever violates division (A) of section
6111.07 of the Revised Code shall be fined not more
than $500 or imprisoned not more than one year, or
both.*
"A review of the foregoing section readily shows
that any person releasing such information would be subject
to prosecution for the commission of a crime with a possible
fine of $500 and imprisonment for one year. The persistent
requests of representatives of your department to employees
of this department to release any such records which we may
have is tantamount, in my opinion, to requesting the com-
mission of a crime, albeit unwittingly.
"In your letter you request that the Ohio Water
Pollution Control Board obtain permission for a review of
effluent data by your representatives of specified indus-
tries in the Warren-Youngs town, Ohio area. Since it is
your department which is interested in reviewing any records
we may have in this regard, may I suggest that you obtain
-------
211
permission from the owners .of,.these companies. Upon
presentation of proper authorization from the owners of
these companies we will be most happy to make any and all
records in our possession pertaining to such companies
available to you for inspection and review."
CHAIRMAN STEIN: I would like to read
the pertinent section of the law as I have it from the record
and I -- to my best knowledge and belief, this is correct,
this deals with the Ohio Board may make copies of such
record. "That if such records pertain to a private
disposal system, such copies may not be made available to
the public without express permission of the owner."
I think the law is as I stated, this doesn*t
necessarily make this necessarily confidential between
the Board and the owner. I think in your letter you have
pointed out that we had to go to the industry and ask for
their permission before you could make this available; is
that correct?
MR. COMPSON: This information, as
far as our department is concerned, is confidential informa-
tion and, furthermore, I think it might be observed that
it is the prerogative of our department and counsel for
our department, the attorney general*s office, to make a
determination as to the applicability of Ohio law; and
the provision of the Ohio law is perfectly clear to us
-------
212
and we cannot divulge this information.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Sir, I again am quoting
from your letter and I think the provision of the law
may be clear and your letter abundantly clear. You say,
,;
. " * -
and I quote from your letter, sir, signed by George Compson,
Chief, Division of Legal Services, to Mr. Poston ,whi:ch you
referred to before.
"in your letter you request that the Ohio Water
Pollution Control Board obtain permission for review of
effluent data by your representatives of specified indus-
tries in the Warren-Youngstown, Ohio area. Since it is
your department which is interested in reviewing any
records we may have in this regard, may I suggest that
you obtain permission from the owners of these companies."
Now, here we go -- "Upon presentation of proper
authorization from the owners of these companies we will
be most happy to make any and all records in our possession
pertaining to such companies available to you for inspec-
tion and review."
It seems to me your letter is abundantly clear.
Are there any further comments or questions?
MR. POSTON: I wondered if it is
possible, Mr. Doolittle, for other companies to indicate,
other companies whom you made this presentation on behalf of,
to indicate whether they are of the same opinion as Youngstown
-------
213
Sheet and Tube that they would not give this information?
MR. DOOLITTLE: Mr. Poston, the other
companies asked me to make the presentation concerning
the programs and problems. They have not authorized me
to commit the companies with respect to the question you
asked.
MR. POSTON: But I noted several
of the companies' representatives here and I wondered
whether they would care to say anything with respect to
this. If not, I have another question here that came to mind
and that is that there is dredging going on in the river,
dredging to remove flue scale from the river, and I am
interested with the new abatement program which would be
completed by '66 of this year.
Will this practice be unnecessary after this
time? Will it be unnecessary to dredge the flue scale
from the iron ore
MR. DOOLITTLE: I doubt that I am
qualified to answer that, Mr. Poston. The dredging, as I
know, is a dredging of material which has accumulated in
certain sections of the river as the result of these
untreated discharges that I described, years ago. This has
been going on for years and years, and there have been
some substantial amounts deposited on the bed in these
earlier years. I don't know who all is doing the dredging.
-------
214
I know our company is having some done and it is for the
purpose of recovering the iron contents.
Now, I have no idea how long it will take to do
this. It would seem to me, however, from the schedule that
I have outlined to you, that with these discharges of flue
dust and mill scale cut down to the point where in another
year they are practically nil, there would hardly be any
need for dredging, certainly, of any future deposits
because there wouldn*t be any.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Off the record.
(Discussion off the record.)
MR. POSTON: One other question.
You spoke of a number of steel mills that do not have treat-
ment works and that it is the intent to shut them down in
the near future. And with this in mind, it was preferred
not to provide any treatment of wastes from these particular
mills.
Is there any definite closing date for these
particular plants?
MR. DOOLITTLE: This is not our particular
i
company and I will say very little about it, and anything
I say is what I have been told by the other companies.
The comment was not directed to all of the various waste
discharges that I discussed. It was directed only to the
matter of steel pits for collection of mill scale and oil,
-------
215
and it is my understanding that there are, in this valley,
certain very old plants with very old mills, some of the
kinds I have described before, have small pits. It is
economically prohibitive to deal with these pits for these
particular mills in the way they have been dealt with else-
where. And the decision that faces the company that has
these particular pits is that if they were forced to treat
with respect to those pits, it would be economically impossible
for them to continue the operation or they would close it
down.
MR. POSTON: One other question.
What is the plan or what will become of the ferrous iron
that you talked of?
MR. DOOLITTLE: Well, I see you are
catching me on the statement I said that there wouldn't be
any flue dust coming down. That, perhaps, was an over-
statment because I had said earlier that 19 percent of the
pits would not be what the Ohio authorities have called
adequate treatment, which means removal of substantially
all of the flue dust. This does not mean, sir, that they
are not now removing any of the flue dust. They are removing
flue dust but they are not doing a particularly good job of
it and, presumably, if the mills continue to operate, that
small amount would still continue to be discharged.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Are there any further
-------
216
statements or comments? If not, 1 think Dr. Arnold would
like to go ahead.
I have one further statement I would like to make,
but are you people going to be here until the end? I think
we might save that because we want to expedite some of these
people getting out who have appointments. Dr. Arnold.
DR. ARNOLD: Thank you, Mr. Stein.
If the remaining participants for Ohio will agree with me
to yield a little of our time at this time, to first of all
ORSANCO and later to Dr. Wilbar of Pennsylvania. Each of
these gentlemen have commitments and responsibilities that
cannot be delayed and each of them must depart very shortly,
and we yield to ORSANCO for their presentation.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: You are just taking them
out of order. Every one will have full time and be heard.
This is just yielding the position on the program.
MR. CLEARY: Mr. Chairman, the
Commission of the Ohio River Valley Sanitation Commission
delegated Chairman Barton A. Roll to make a statement.
I believe he is prepared now to make that on behalf of
ORSANCO.
MR. HOLL: Mr. Chairman, conferees,
ladies and gentlemen. My name is Barton Roll. I am chair-
man of the Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission,
and I make my statement in behalf of that agency. However,
-------
217
the record might also note that I am a member of the State
of Ohio Water Pollution Control Board and have served on
the Board since its establishment in 1951.
As a matter of background may I recall for you
that 16 years ago eight states in the Ohio Valley not only
recognized the problems associated with interstate water
pollution, but created a unique regional agency to do
something about it. With approval of the Congress of the
United States these states drafted a compact wherein they
pledged their resources and their police powers to
coordinate efforts in a crusade for clean streams.
This compact established the Ohio River Valley
Water Sanitation Commission, sometimes known as ORSANCO.
The Commission is made up of three representatives from each
state appointed by the governor of the state, and three
representatives of the United States appointed by the Presi-
dent. These 2? commissioners promulgate regulations for
interstate pollution control. If a state signatory to
the compact is unable to secure compliance with these
regulations, the Commission is authorized to intervene
and bring about enforcement.
What I wish to emphasize is that these states
did not wait on the Federal Government to discover that
interstate pollution existed. Nor did they stand by for
Federal funds or instructions before taking steps to curb
-------
218
pollution. Rolling up their sleeves and bending their backs
to this task of river cleanup, these states secured com-
pliance with pollution control measures from 1328 communities
and 1552 industries throughout the Ohio Valley.
The record compiled during the past 16 years bears
witness to outstanding progress in the control of water
pollution in the Ohio Valley. This is not to imply, however,
that the commissioners of ORSANCO and the states they repre-
sent are under any delusions that the job is completed.
They simply assert that thus far about 90 percent of the
toughest part of the program has been successfully dealt
with.
Why was conference called.
The reason I preface my remark in this fashion
is because the Commissioners of ORSANCO are sorely puzzled
why this conference was called. It could hardly have been
motivated by any evidence of lack of action in control of
pollution on the Mahoning -- you have heard the record with
respect to accomplishments. Nor could it have stemmed from
a presumed lack of interstate enforcement authority or
reluctance to use it.
Neither can we conceive that this conference was
called by the Federal .authorities simply for the purpose
of securing information. Items set forth for consideration
at the conference occurrence of pollution, adequacy of
-------
219
abatement measures, the nature of delays, if any, in securing
compliance, and schedules of performance are documented
in the public minutes, records and reports of ORSANCO.
Furthermore, the Secretary of Health/ Education, and welfare
has always had a representative -- in the person, no less,
than the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service --
serving as a member of the Commission. We find it difficult
indeed to understand why this well established channel of
communication and coordination is being bypassed.
,1 feel compelled to point out these things in
order to dispel any doubts about the ORSANCO states not
cooperating with the Federal Government, what concerns us
-- and must concern the citizens of the Mahoning Valley --
is the question of whether the Federal pollution control
authorities are constructively cooperating with us.
I am not reassured in this respect after reading
the HEW report on the Mahoning, which was handed to me a
few days ago. It hardly represents to me an appropriate
appraisal of the situation. In fact, it falls far short
of what I would expect to receive from an agency having
such competent scientists and engineers on its staff as
does the Public Health Service.
Among other things, I am l:ed to assume that this
report was hastily contrived arid:that not all of the facts
were adequately weighed. If this is indeed the case then
-------
220
the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare not only
has done a disservice to itself but to all of us who are
identified with the Mahoning Valley cleanup program.
Incidentally, I am one of those who have been working on
this program for more than a decade. Quite frankly, therefore,
I am dubious about the sweeping conclusions in a report that
seems to have been based largely on a quickie survey.
Incidentally, this seems to be an appropriate place
for me to request that the record be clarified with respect
to a statement appearing on page 2 of the HEW report. Here
it is stated that "attempts to obtain data on industrial
wastes from the Ohio Department of Health, ORSANCO and the
plants themselves were unsuccessful." Speaking for ORSANCO,
I wish the record to show that ORSANCO not only complied with
all requests for data from the Public Health Service when it
was scurrying around to compile the Mahoning report, but,
in fact, has for years been routinely providing all kinds
of data whenever it became available because the Public
Health Service holds membership on the-Ohio River Valley
Water Sanitation Commission,
The Mahoning River Cleanup.
Earlier I mentioned that when the states created
ORSANCO they clothed the Commission with enforcement powers
should occasions arise when a signatory state needed help
in securing compliance from a municipality or industry.
-------
221
The State of Ohio was hampered in expediting action in
Youngstown for the construction of sewage-treatment facili-
ties.
I might digress from my report for a minute to
say that I am very glad to hear Mayor Flask being an advocate
of the elimination of pollution. He is not always in that
boat. In fact, earlier he resisted us. He is like a man
when he quits drinking; when he quits he wants everyone
else to quit.
First there were problems associated with
financing, then there was a taxpayer's suit testing consti-
tutionality of ordinances.
Those familiar with the administration of pollution
control will recognize that there is nothing novel about
such a course of events. What should be mentioned, however,
is that Ohio not only employed its legal powers to expedite
compliance, but when local court action appeared to threaten
delay, the state prepared to call upon the .interstate agency
to intervene. In this fashion Ohio gave further evidence
of intent to speed the removal of obstacles in completing
the Mahoning program. At the request of Ohio, the com-
missioners of ORSANCO agreed unanimously to intervene.
Thereupon the Ohio Water Pollution Control Board informed
Youngstown of its intention to employ interstate compact
enforcement measures. Before ORSANCO started proceedings
-------
222
Youngstown made an agreement with the state board on a
compliance schedule. Youngstown has honored this agreement
and the treatment plant is now in operation.
"While the incidents outlined with respect to the
City of Youngstown were taking place, the State of Ohio
was not idle in prompting compliance with other components
of its pollution-abatement program for the Mahoning River.
The required remedial measures were detailed in a report
the Department of Health issued in October 1954 based on a
two-year investigation of sources of pollution.
One matter in connection with development of this
report is pertinent to the deliberations at this conference.
As far back as 1952 representatives of the Federal Department
of Health, Education, and Welfare had been invited by Ohio
to assist in the conduct of field surveys, in the evalua-
tion of data, and in the determination of treatment require-
ments. This collaboration was based on the desire of Ohio
to cooperate fully with the spirit and intent of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act.
Among other things, this Act directed the Surgeon
General of the Public Health Service to prepare;comprehensive
programs for reducing pollution of interstate waters. In so
doing the Surgeon General was authorized to make joint
investigations with state agencies in developing such
programs. It was the hope of the -State: of Ohio that by
-------
223
working jointly with the public Health Service on the Mahoning
program this would avoid duplication of effort and expedite
its acceptance by all parties.concerned. This, in fact,
was achieved because when the report was issued it contained
the statement that; "The Surgeon General, Public Health
Service, has reviewed this report and has determined that
it meets his requirements for a comprehensive program."
Since 1954 the status reports to ORSANCO made
by the State of Ohio have revealed consistent progress
toward attainment of the aims that were blueprinted. Not
the least of these aims was securing installation of
sewage-treatment facilities by all municipalities. Com-
pletion of the Youngstown facilities this summer will
represent full achievement on reaching this goal.
Summary in brief.
In conclusion, I wish to emphasize these points:
1. In so far as interstate pollution control
is concerned,, the commissioners of ORSANCO regard progress
on the Mahoning as evidence of conscientious and effective
compliance of the State of Ohio with the obligations assumed
as a signatory to the Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation
Compact.
2. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, a signatory
to the compact and the state was most intimately concerned
with pollution originating in Ohio, has not registered
-------
221|
disaatisfaction at meetings of the compact commission with
progress being made by Ohio. Quite to the contrary, the
view was expressed in 1962 (September 13, 1962) and again
at, a.meeting of the Commission last month (January llj., 1965)
that; Fe.nmylvania had no reason to voice complaint with
progress being made by Ohio in cleaning up the Mahoning.
3. Finally, the treatment requirements and
water-quality goals established by the State of Ohio were
developed in collaboration with the Public Health Service
and received the endorsement of the Surgeon General of the
Public Health Service as meeting interstate requirements
under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.
I respectfully urge that the conferees give
cognizance to these considerations when they undertake the
preparation of conclusions emanating from this conference.
Now, Mr. Chairman, as you might judge earlier, I
felt this conference was not necessary. As I sat here this
morning and again this afternoon and listened to the story
being told, I want to change my mind. I think probably I
want to state that I am glad this conference is being held
because it has given the industries and the municipalities
in the State of Ohio a chance to tell a story, a story of
accomplishment that we might not have been able to hear
effectively if this conference had not been called.
So I think much good has been accomplished and I
-------
225
am proud to have "been a member of the Water Pollution Board
of Ohio and a member of ORSANCO.
Now, Mr. Chairman, this concludes the ORSANCO
statement for the time being. After I have heard other
presentations at this conference, I may wish to make further
comments or call upon the ORSANCO staff for a statement.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you, sir.
.., Applause ...
CHAIRMAN STEINs I would like to make one
comment because this has come up before. We do have a
member of the President's Water Pollution Control Advisory
Board here; Mr. Haik.
You raised a point which was raised this morning
and I would like to give the position, at least as we see
it, from the Federal level, on our relations with ORSANCO.
Sir, we do not believe that the Public Health
Service is entitled to representation or ORSANCO have a
representative or ORSANCO per se. The compact provides
that there are to be three Federal members. One of those
Federal members happens to be the Surgeon General. He
represents the Federal Government generally. He is not
the Public Health Service or our Department delegate to
ORSANCO.
The President, tomorrow, if he wished, can re-
appoint, continue the appointment, or change him and have
-------
226
someone else. As I think I have pointed out before, we had
the same relationship with the Potomac Valley Commission.
When a member of the Public Health Service was always the
Federal representative, President Kennedy saw fit to terminate
that and place a private attorney in representation. The
President can do that not only with the Surgeon General but
either of the other two Federal representatives at any time.
These people represent the Federal Government generally and
not us at ORSANCO, and I think for the people that have
raised this question, I just want to put out the way we
look at that problem.
MR. HOLL: We have been very happy
with the representatives we have had. Upon assuming the
Chairmanship, I criticized the Federal Health Service in
their participation in ORSANCO because they did not take
an active part in the discussion. I accused them of being
the ears and eyes of whatever goes on and not taking part.
So the last meeting we had, we had full compliance
and full discussion on the part of the Federal people, and
for the first time since I have been a member of the Com-
mission, they told us what they had in mind; wildlife, Army
Engineers, Public Health Service, and they told us what they
had in mind.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Now, I think on your
second point, sir, on the question of asking ORSANCO for
-------
22?
information: Our investigators, I think, we will have to
wait until our investigators give their report. The repre-
sentatives of ORJSANCO will be here and we will spotlight
that question. I think, if we got into this now, we may
have difficulty in trying to keep with the schedule.
A very "brief other remark on the reason the
conference was called. As far as I know, the conference was
called, again, because of the statutory requirements.
Evidently the Secretary believed pollution in one state was
endangering people in another, the health and welfare of
the people in Pennsylvania. Again, I can appreciate your
remark about Mayor Flask because I used to be in the res-
tauxjant sanitation business. When we cleaned out the dirtiest
business restaurant in town> they would knock out the wall and in-
vite everyone into their kitchen. This was the typical operation.
But I would like to indicate that the I have
been in this business Just as Ions as Mayor Flash has been
a mayor or in politics. When I got into water pollution
control, it was in 19^. But I do remember not too many
years before I discovered what the score was, and that I
would go to meeting after meeting and hear about these
wonderful accomplishments that were done but find the rivers
being dirtier and dirtier, and there are two aspects to this.
One is to have pictures of the plant and to have a
description of all the progress being made, but the key point
-------
228
in pollution control is what's happening to the river.
Now, I suggest that our Federal report generally
deals with what's happening to the river, and when that
,report is made, we can make a judgment why the conference
was called and why it should have been, or maybe it shouldn't
have.
MR. HOLL: Mr. Chairman, I will
make one further comment that I did not intend to make when
I came here today. But my concern is, and I,have tried to
over a period of 20 years, contribute something to the clean
stream program. Last week, when I was in Columbus,: I read
a Columbus paper, a big headline across, the story that the
Public Works Committee in Washington is going to view a
o
motion picture film, 20 minutes in length, showing the pollu-
tion along the Ohio River.
It said the Ohio River was the most overworked
river in the Nation. I immediately called ORSANCO about
that statement because I was concerned about it. I didn't
believe it was true and I resented it with all of my might,
and I was informed by ORSANCO that representatives of the
Muskee committee, that's the committee, in the Senate that
was hearing the legislation on pollution, have sent repre-
sentatives of that committee to photograph all instances of
pollution, open sewers, either industrial or .municipal on
the Ohio River, and they got to Cincinnati and they got into
-------
229
the Army Engineers' office and were asked then what's being
done and they said, "You are hot going to talk about the
Ohio River without visiting ORSANCO."
They said, "We are not interested in talking to
ORSANCO, we are not interested in any progress that has been
mad e."
Now, I understand people who have seen that film
claim that it is not a fair representation of what the
situation is. That's the thing I am indignant about. I
want to cooperate with the agencies that are interested,
sincere, and want to do a Job, and we say it and we admitted
it, the Job is not done; probably will never be done. It's
like building roads, the population expands and industries
grow. We are going to have to be more and more watchful.
But let's go into this thing with the purpose of cooperating
and let's not; be pointing fingers at people who are trying
to do the Job.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: You know that the Public
Works Committee in the Senate, the legislative, is com-
pletely different from us. But in deference to them, if
this is the film I think you are talking about, as far as
I know, they Just didn't come to Ohio for that. Because,
at the time they were making that film, I happened to be in
Alaska. I happen to know these fellows I know them from
-------
230
Washington - and I know they also took films in Alaska.
Now, I understand they went all around the country.
This wasn't only ORSANCO. I would like to point out to you,
Mr. Holl, and I think the rest of the group here, I have
repeatedly answered questions this way, frequent questions
about what is the worst river you have ever seen. I don't
think you can compare them. We have never put them up. Each
river is a problem unto itself. We have a phrase of law
which means on its merits, and unless you consider the river
on its own merits, you are not dealing with a problem.
I don't tiiink that any statement ever emanated
from -- at least the Water Pollution Control Program or the
Executive Department - a comparison of what river was worse
than any other river.
MR. HOLL: I am not identifying you
with that motion picture. But this is one of the things that
gets a businessman kind of worked up about things.
MR. POSTON: I would like to make one
brief comment to Mr. Holl to the effect that I am very happy
to see that he is getting something out of this meeting and
something worthwhile in the telling about activities that are
going on. I have been involved in some five or six of these,
and my observation is that there are many of them just about
like this but this is a little more spicy, a little lively.
I think there have been accomplishments in all of
-------
231
these and I truthfully trust that much will come out of this.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Let's have a five-minute
break.
(Recess had.)
CHAIRMAN STEIN: May we reconvene, please?
I wonder if you people in the rear would try to be seated so
we can reconvene.
Dr. Wilbar.
DR. WILBAR: Thank you, Mr. Chairman,
members of the conference. Pennsylvania has about five
percent of the Mahoning Valley in it and so we won't need
so much time as Ohio, perhaps five percent or a little more
than five percent of the time used by Ohio in this matter.
The call to this conference by Secretary Celebrezze
said it would be held today and I am afraid I personally
took this literally because I have a meeting of the Penn-
sylvania Sanitary Water Board, of which I am Chairman,
tomorrow, and there is a hearing on the committees of our
legislature tomorrow of which I must appear so I will have
to leave this evening. But in my stead, we will have Mr.
Richard Boardman, who is Chief of the Water Quality Section
in the Pennsylvania Department .of Health,, I would like Mr.
Boardman to stand so you can see him and he will be with
the conference and represent Pennsylvania after today.
I also have with me and for the question and
-------
232
discussion period, Mr. Walter Lyon who is the Director of our
Division of Sanitary Engineering and Mr. William Gross who is
the Counsel for the Sanitary Water Board. We did not have
enough copies of our reproduced report for everyone, but if
those who wish copies and haven't received them will contact
Mr. Boardman or send any of us a request in the mail, we will
see that you receive copies.
Now, Secretary Celebrezze's conference call
indicated that the subject of this conference would be the
interstate pollution of the Mahoning River and I feel that
we must stick to that because that is what the conference
was called about. I have read the report of the Public
Health Service. Of course, it may or may not be submitted
the way it was reproduced and sent out, but I would say that
we should not argue because of the way the conference was
called and we are not prepared to discuss individual waste
sources in Pennsylvania on the Shenango River or waste
sources on the Beaver River or alleged interstate pollution
on the banks of the Shenango River or alleged interstate
pollution on the Shenango River. Since this material is
no't in any way pertinent to the question before this con-
ference, it seems appropriate at this time to request that
all this material, should it be brought up, be stricken
from the record. We rely on the water users of the Shenango
River.
-------
233
That water quality of the Shenango River before
its confluence with the water quality of the Beaver River
may have to be considered. I do not wish to imply that all
persons who are interested and concerned with waste sources
on the Shenango or the Beaver are not free to obtain this
from the Pennsylvania Sanitary Water Board.
This information is available to the Public Health
Service and to anyone else who has a legitimate interest in
this information. This information does not appear to be a
pertinent part of the subject of this conference and does
not have anything to do with the pollution which may flow
from Ohio to Pennsylvania by the Mahoning River.
We in Pennsylvania have a keen interest in the
quality of the water in the Mahoning River, although only
about 12 miles of its length lies within Pennsylvania. The
quality of the water in the Mahoning has a definite influence
on the quality of the water in the Beaver River which is used
intensively as a source of industrial and public water supply.
As Chairman of the Sanitary Water Board of Penn-
sylvania, I have been requested by that Board to present to
this conference official facts and opinions of our common-
wealth concerning pollution of the Mahoning River basin and
steps which will be taken and should be taken for abatement
of such pollution.
It is essential that the water quality in Pennsylvania's
-------
234
streams be maintained at the highest level possible. There
is an ever increasing demand for water of good quality to
meet the health, social and economic needs of our populace.
We must be assured that this need is met.
As Pennsylvania^ water pollution control agency,
the Sanitary Water Board has since its inception in 1923
been striving assiduously to assure that Pennsylvania*^
streams meet the quality requirements of all water users.
The basis of this program has been the requirement that
all water users return water to the streams in a condition
which does not adversely affect present and potential water
users.
While working to protect water quality for water
users in Pennsylvania we have also recognized our responsi-
bility to protect the quality of interstate streams. We
have been an active signatory state in the Ohio River Valley
Water Sanitation Commission since its creation in 1948.
We have cooperated fully with neighboring states in correct-
ing and preventing interstate pollution. We have worked
closely with the staff of the U.S. Public Health Service in
connection with the performance of its responsibilities under
the Federal Water pollution Control Act.
The Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare has
authority under Section 8 of the Federal Water pollution
Control Act to call a conference such as this when on the
-------
235
basis of reports, surveys or studies he has reason to believe
that there is pollution endangering the health or welfare of
persons in a state other than that in which the discharge is
occurring. I am sure, however, that all parties concerned
realize that the Act clearly places primary responsibility
for preventing and controlling water pollution with the
state and interstate agencies as distinguished from the
Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare or his designee.
It should also be pointed out that the interstate
compact on the Ohio River basin was officially sanctioned
by the Congress of the United States and the legislatures
of the States of Ohio and Pennsylvania. The Federal Govern-
ment and the States of Ohio and Pennsylvania are represented
on the Commission. Any of the parties involved may bring
up before the Commission interstate pollution problems and
have frequently done so in the past,, Neither the Federal
Government nor the two States involved have up to now requested
specific action regarding the Mahoning River.
We are willing to discuss the problem of pollution
of the Mahoning River with representatives of the State of
Ohio, the Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission, and
the Federal Government. To supplement this official pre-
sentation, the Sanitary Water Board has also invited repre-
sentatives of the Pennsylvania Section of the American Water
Works Association, the Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen's
-------
236
Clubs, the Pennsylvania Division of the Izaak Walton League,
and the City of New Castle to make statements.
I shall introduce these spokesmen later but at
this time I will briefly describe Pennsylvania*s Water
Pollution Control program, summarize water quality in the
Mahoning River and its effects on various uses in Penn-
sylvania, and outline what Pennsylvania is doing and has
been doing to improve water quality in the Mahoning River
basin.
II. Pennsylvania8s Portion of the Basin.
Physical Description. The Mahoning River
originates in eastern Ohio and flows into western
Pennsylvania, joining the Shenango River to form the
Beaver River. The drainage area of the Mahoning River
is 1100 square miles, 54 square miles, or about five
percent, of which lie in Pennsylvania. The Mahoning
River basin constitutes about one-third of the area
of the Beaver River basin.
The Pennsylvania portion of the Mahoning
River lies entirely within Lawrence County. The largest
population centers in the Pennsylvania portion of the
basin are Bessemer Borough (approximately 1500 persons)
and the unincorporated villages of Hillsville and
Ederiburg. The City of New Castle lies in the Shenango
River basin immediately upstream from the confluence of
-------
237
the Shenango and Mahoning Rivers. Some urban development
on the outskirts of New Castle extends into the Mahoning
basin.
The topography of the Mahoning River basin is
characterized by rolling hills and broad stream valleys.
The broad stream valleys of the Shenango, Mahoning and
Beaver Rivers form natural passageways for the flow of
traffic between Lake Erie and Pittsburgh industrial
complex. Major highways and rail lines follow these
river valleysi
The Mahoning River basin is underlain by
deposits of clay, limestone, sandstones, natural gas,
oil and coal. Limestone deposits have been mined
extensively and are probably the most important mineral
resource of the basin. Although coal seams underlie
the basin, variability in quality and size of the coal
deposits has limited their development. Coal mining
is not a major industry in the basin. Some farming
is practiced, but most of the residents of the basin
are employed in the industrial complexes centered in
and around New Castle and Youngstown.
Stream Flows.
Stream flow in the Mahoning River is regulated
to some extent by a network of reservoirs in Ohio. The,
average flow at Lowellville, Ohio gauge (near the
-------
238
Pennsylvania-Ohio State line) is approximately 1100
cubic feet per second.
Water Use.
Little or no use is made of the Mahoning River
in Pennsylvania. The Beaver River is used extensively
as a source of municipal and industrial water supply.
Two water treatment plants (both operated by the
Beaver Falls Municipal Authority) use the Beaver River
as a source of raw water. The two plants are located
in the lower reaches of the Beaver River. One is
located immediately upstream and one immediately down-
stream from the Borough of Beaver Falls. The plants
serve 11 municipalities with a combined population of
about 75,000 people. The Beaver River is used extensively
as a source of industrial water supply, most of which is
used for cooling purposes. Relatively small quantities
of water are used as boiler feed water or for manufacturing
processes. Major industrial water users include;
Republic Steel Company at Beaver Falls, Moltrup Steel
Company at Beaver Falls, Townsend Company at Fallston,
and B. and W. Tubular at West Mayfield and Pennsylvania
Power Company at West Pittsburgh, The total average
daily water usage by these industrial establishments
is over 300 million gallons.
Now as to Pennsylvania's water pollution control
-------
239
program, water pollution control legislation:
The first step to control water pollution
in Pennsylvania was taken in 1905 when the legislature
passed the "Purity of Waters Act," This act prohibited
the discharge of sewage waters of the commonwealth
unless it was the unanimous opinion of the Governor,
Attorney General, and Commissioner of Health that the
discharge would not create a public health hazard.
After the Sanitary Water Board was created in 1923,
the powers formerly vested in the Governor, Attorney
General and Commissioner of Health by the "Purity of
Waters Act" were transferred to the Board.
The second law dealing with stream pollution
was passed in 1937. This legislation is commonly
referred to as Pennsylvania's Clean Streams Law. This
law supplemented and strengthened tne authority of the
Sanitary Water Board in its administration of the common-
wealth's stream pollution control program. It added
provisions for the control of pollution from industrial
wastes in addition to pollution from sewage. It did,
however, exclude from control acid drainage from mines
and silt from coal preparation plants until such time
as in the opinion of the Sanitary Water Board practical
means for the removal of the pollutional properties of
such waters had become known.
-------
240
In 1945 the Clean Streams Act was amended
to give the Sanitary Water Board jurisdiction over acid
mine drainage discharged to or effecting clean waters
of the commonwealth, and removed from the law the
exemption previously granted for discharges of silt
from coal preparation plants.
The Pennsylvania Sanitary Water Board, an
administrative board within the Department of Health,
was the first state agency of its type to have the
responsibility for a state's pollution control activities,
It introduced the concept of having on one Board
representation from major interest groups concerned
with water polltuion control. The Board is made up
of three public members and representatives of five
major state agencies -- the Department of Health,
the Department of Mines and Mineral Industries, the
Department of Forests and Waters, the Department of
Commerce, and the Fish Commission. The Secretary of
Health is Chairman of the Board.
The Board carries out active programs to
control pollution from sewage9 industrial waste and
mine drainage.
As to sewage, the Sanitary Water Board has
the power to order a municipality or person to abate
the discharge of sewage that causes pollution.
-------
241
To determine if a municipality or person
should receive an order, the Department of Health makes
a study of the case and presents its findings to the
Board. A public hearing is held and interested parties
are given an opportunity to hear the evidence presented
by the Department of Health and to present information
that they feel is pertinent. All evidence is considered
by the Board and an order is issued if the Board finds
that sewage is being discharged from a sewer system
owned and maintained by the municipality or person
and that the discharge of this sewage "is or may
become inimical or injurious to the public health,
animal or aquatic life, or the use of the receiving
waters for domestic, industrial, or recreational
uses."
If orders are not complied with, the Board
takes appropriate legal action to obtain compliance.
The powers of the Board in this regard have been
reaffirmed in a number of recent court decisions.
Now as to industrial waste, the Clean streams
Law prohibits the discharge of industrial wastes unless
a permit for the discharge has been issued by the Sanitary
Water Board. The Board may not approve discharges that
will cause pollution. Industrial plants that were dis-
charging wastes prior to 1937 must abate or provide
-------
242
treatment when so ordered by the Board. Because the
Clean Streams Law made it unlawful to begin to discharge
wastes without a permit from the Board, orders are not
necessary for discharges that have begun since 1937.
Mine Drainage. The mine drainage control
program began with the 1945 amendment to the Clean
Streams Law which made it illegal to open a new mine or
to reopen or continue an existing mine operation without
securing approval of a plan of drainage from the Sanitary
Water Board. To carry OUT this program, the Board
developed a permit system for regulating both deep and
strip mining.
The field inspection program. In addition to
the Board's permit system for controlling pollution,
an active field inspection program is acrried out to
insure that permit requirements, Sanitary Board Rules
and Regulations and provisions of the Clean Streams
Law are being met. When violations are detected, the
responsible individual is given a reasonable time to
correct the violation. When violations are not corrected
within the time specified by the Sanitary Water Board,
legal action is taken to secure compliance.
Stream Classification. The basis for the
Sanitary Water Board*s sewage and industrial wastes
control program is a state-wide system of stream
-------
243
classifications.
In 1944 the Sanitary Water Board conducted
a series of 10 hearings at various places throughout
the state concerning classification recommendations
made by its staff. Due notice was given to municipal
and industrial representatives of the place and time
of the hearings. The Chairman of the Board explained
in detail the purposes and plans for the state-wide
pollution control program. An opportunity was afforded
those present to express their views on the subject,
either orally at the hearings or in the form of a brief.
The Board held classification hearings for the Mahoning
River basin in Pittsburgh on June 20, 1944.
Following these hearings, the Board considered
the testimony and classified the streams as to the degree
of treatment that would be required for sewage and
sewagelike industrial wastes. The Board has also
established minimun treatment requirements for other
industrial wastes.
Changes in stream quality and waste loads
have made it necessary in recent years to conduct
reclassification studies in a number of watersheds
throughout the state.
The Mahoning River throughout its length in
Pennsylvania is classified as a stream on which "primary"
-------
244
treatment is required. Primary treatment is defined
by the Board as follows:
"Primary treatment of sewage is such treatment
as, in the opinion of the Board, will remove practically
all the settable solids; will remove at least 35 percent
of the organic pollution load as measured by the bio-
chemical oxygen demand test; will provide effective
disinfection to control disease-producting germs; will
provide satisfactory disposal of sludge; and will
produce a final effluent that is suitable for discharge
into the receiving stream."
The tributaries of the Mahoning River in
Pennsylvania were classified by the Board as requiring
"complete" treatment. Complete treatment is defined by
the Board as follows:
"Complete treatment of sewage is such
treatment as, in the opinion of the Board, will remove
practically all of the suspended solids; will remove
at least 85 percent of the organic pollution load as
measured by the biochemical oxygen demand test; will
provide effective disinfection to control disease-
producing germs; will provide satisfactory disposal of
sludge; and will produce a final effluent that is suitable
for discharge into the receiving stream."
-------
245
In addition to the above, primary and complete
treatment must include the removal of "oils, greases,
acids, alkalis, toxic, putrescible, taste-and-odor
producing substances and other substances inimical to
the public interest in the receiving stream.
Field work has been completed and a draft
report written in connection with a study of the Beaver
River and its tributaries to determine if reclassifi-
cation of the streams is necessary. Sampling for this
study was begun in 1959. After a thorough review of
the data collected is completed, a report will be sub-
mitted to the Board with recommendations on necessary
changes in the present treatment requirements. We
expect to have this report completed this spring.
The review of stream classifications is a
continuous program in Pennsylvania assuring that
treatment requirements are tailored to meet the needs
of changing water uses, population and waste discharges.
ORSANCO Requirements. Pennsylvania, as a
member of ORSANCO, has agreed to the ORSANCO recommenda-
tions for sewage and industrial waste treatment in the
Ohio River basin. The Sanitary Water Board's present
treatment requirements for the Mahoning basin meet the
ORSANCO recommendations.
Pollution control progress. First on Sewerage.
-------
246
No untreated sewage from communities in
the Pennsylvania portion is being discharged to streams
in the Mahoning basin.
Three sewage treatment plants discharge
treated effluent to streams in the basin. The locations
of the sewage treatment plants are indicated on the map
on page 57 of the Appendix. The largest plant is a
primary degree treatment plant serving the City of
New Castle. The New Castle plant discharges to the
Mahoning River about one-half mile upstream from its
mouth. The plant presently serves 55,000 persons.
The design population is 60,000. The Sanitary Water
Board recently granted a permit to the City of New
Castle's sewerage authority approving plans to
enlarge and improve the treatment efficiency of the
existing plant. The plant has been designed to
provide intermediate degree treatment for a 1980
population of 90,000, Intermediate degree treatment
in this case has the same requirements as complete
treatment except that the B.O.D. removal requirement
is 65 percent. Because the design of the plant provides
for complete treatment of sewage from approximately
45,000 persons, the plant will be capable of providing
treatment approaching complete treatment for a number
of years. As the waste loads increase the efficiency
-------
247
will decrease to a minimum of 65 percent 'B.O.D. removal
at the design population of-90,000.
The city has .accepted a. ;Frederal Water Pollu-
tion Control Act grant to partially cover the cost of
the new facilities. We expect construction to begin
in the near future since the city has already advertised
for bids for the project.
The other two plants are small package type
treatment plants which provide complete treatment.
The larger of the two plants serves the Mohawk Area Jr.-sr.
High School. It was designed to serve 1500 students and
presently serves 1200. It discharges to an unnamed
tributary of Hickory Run.
The other plant serves the Villa Maria
School, It is presently serving its design population
of 300 persons and discharges to an unnamed tributary
of Coffee Run.
All of the sewerage facilities in the
Mahoning basin are presently in compliance with
Sanitary Water Board Requirements.
Now as to industrial waste. Four industrial
establishments in the Mahoning River basin have waste
treatment facilities and have Sanitary Water Board permits
to discharge treated waste water to the waters of the
commonwealth. Only one of the plants presently has a
-------
248
waste discharge. TWO plants operate closed systems.
The Robinson Indus trial Waste Company has not operated
for several years. The industrial establishments are
listed in Table 1. Their locations are shown on page
57 of the Apprendix.
Table 1
INDUSTRIAL WASTE TREATMENT PLANTS
MAHONING RIVER BASIN
Name
Location
Type Waste Treatment
1. Robinson
Industrial
Waste Co. *
Bessemer
Waste Pickle Neutralization
Liquor Sedimentation
2. Carbon Lime-
stone Co. **
Mahoning Twp.
Limestone
Wash water Sedimentation
3. Vanport
Stone Inc. **
Mahoning Twp.
Sand and Gravel
Wash Water Sedimentation
4. American
Cynamid Co.
Neutralization
North Beaver Twp. Acid waste Sedimentation
* Presently not operating
** Presently operated with closed systems.
All of the industrial establishments in the basin
-------
249
are in compliance with Sanitary Water Board requirements.
As to mine drainage. The Mahoning River basin
lies on the western edge of Pennsylvania's main bituminous
coal filed. In general, the cola beds are thin and as a
result have not been developed extensively. Mine drainage
resulting from the limited mining carried out in the
basin has not had a significant effect on water quality in
the streams of the. basin. ..,..
Water Quality. Beaver River Basin Survey Data
(1959-1960)
Department of Health staff conducted a
two-year water quality survey on the Beaver River basin,
from September 1959 through September 1961. Twenty-six
sample for chemical analysis were collected at each
sampling point in the basin. Chemical analyses performed
in the Department's chemical laboratory in Harrisburg
included pH, alkalinity, hardness, chloride, sulfate,
total and suspended solids, aluminum, iron, manganese,
and B.O.D. field analyses included dissolved oxygen
and temperature. In addition to the chemical and field
analyses, a total of 26 coliform determinations were
made for each sampling station. The results of these
analyses are tabulated in Tables 8 through 33 and Table
37 in the Appendix.
-------
250
The sampling stations that have a direct
bearing on water quality on the Mahoning River and its
effects on the Beaver River are:
Station No. 1 - Located at Wampum on the
Beaver River, approximately seven miles downstream
from the confluence of the Shenango and Mahoning
Rivers at the Pennsylvania Route 288 bridge.
Station No. 4 - Located on the Mahoning
River, approximately 0.3 miles upstream from its
confluence with the Shenango River at Pennsylvania
Route 18 bridge.
Station No. 5 - Located on the Mahoning
River, approximately 1.4 miles upstream from its
confluence with the Shenango River at the Pennsylvania
Route 108 bridge.
The locations of these stations are shown on
the map on page 58 of the Appendix.
The results of the survey are summarized and
discussed below. Unless otherwise indicated, all results
are in milligrams per liter, probability plots of selected
parameters are included in the Appendix (Figures 1 through
4).
-------
251
1. Iron and Manganese:
Table 2
IRON CONCENTRATION
Beaver River Survey - 1959-1961
(Results in mg/1)
Station Number Mean Median 3 Highest Values
1 1.9 1.0 8.4, 6.8, 6.8
4 3.4 1.2 20.0, 12.0, 10.0
5 3.6 2.0 16.0, 14.0, 12.0
Table 3
MANGANESE CONCENTRATION
Beaver River Survey - 1959-1961
(Results in mg/1
Station Number Mean Median 3 Highest Values
1 0.28 0.2 0.8, 0.8, 0.7
4 0.41 0.3 1.0, 1.0, 1.0
5 0.45 0.3 1.3, 1.0, 1.0
It can be seen from Tables 2 and 3 that water
treatment works would be required to remove considerable
quantities of iron and manganese to meet recommended
drinking water limits. Of greater concern is the
variability of the iron and manganese concentrations.
Iron which settles on the stream bottom during low or
-------
252
or normal stream flows is flushed from the river bottom and
carried downstream when the flows rise sharply. The three
highest iron concentrations given above occurred during
flushouts.
Bacterial Quality.
Table 4
COLIFORM DENSITIES
(Beaver River Survey - 1959-1961
(Most Probable Number per 100 ml)
Station Number Mean Median Geometric Standard Deviation
1 900,000 84,000 8.9
4 614,000 130,000 5.1
5 566,000 7,800 18.8
These results illustrate the effect of the
effleunt from the New Castle primary degree sewage treatment
plant which is downstream from Station 5 and upstream from
Station 4. The relatively constant rate of discharge
from this plant tends to keep the coliform densities
uniform at Station 4. The high value of the geometric
standard deviation illustrates the variability of coliform
densities above New Castle. This variability is probably
due to variations in coliform die-off ratesc During warm
-------
253
weather when coliform die-off is greatest, coliform
densities were 10, 000 per 100 ml or less, but during
winter when die-off rates are usually lower than in summer,
and particularly during periods of high stream flows, the
coliform concentrations were highest at Station 5.
Because of these high coliform densities the Mahoning
River is not suitable for public bathing nor is it
desirable as a source of public water supply. However,
we expect that the hew Youngstown sewage treatment
plant will result in a considerable reduction in these
t
densities.
3. Biochemical Oxygen Demand
and Dissolved Oxygen.
Table 5
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
Beaver River Survey - 1959-1961
(Results in mg/1)
Station Number Mean
1 6.9
4 7.2
5 7.2
-------
254
Table 6
DISSOLVED OXYGEN
Beaver River Survey - 1959-1961
Percent of
Percent Time Time D.O.was
Station Mean Median Sample Less Than Less than
Number (% Saturation) (% Saturation) 50% Saturation 4 mg/1
1 59 51 46 27
4 49 42 62 62
5 49 42 66 62
The high B.O.D. of the Mahoning River has an
adverse effect upon water quality. Although the dissolved
oxygen concentration in this section is generally too low
to support a normal aquatic population.
The major cause of depression of dissolved
oxygen in the Mahoning River apparently is the result of
wastes discharged in Ohio. The Youngstown sewage treatment
plant will undoubtedly improve the B.O.D. and D.O. situation.
4. Other Parameters.
Both the Mahoning and Shenango Rivers were
alkaline throughout the survey periods.
phenolic substances were detected at all sampling
stations during the surveys. Concentrations were highest
-------
255
at stations on the Mahoning River.
Recent Survey Data.
During the first two weeks of January 1965 three
samples were collected at each of five sampling stations
on the Mahoning River. These stations are designated as
Stations 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 on the sampling stations location
map on page 58 of the Appendix. The results of analysis
of these samples are tabulated in Tables 34 through 37
of the Appendix. These samples were collected during
a period of higher than average flow following a period
of low flow. They may reflect the effects of a flushout
of sludge deposits which accumulated during periods of
low flow.
The concentrations of iron, B.O.D.,and dissolved
oxygen were compared to curves which illustrate the range
of the values recorded during the two-year survey. The
values recorded in 1965 are well above the median values
of the two-year survey period, and concentrations of
iron and B.O.D. were particularly high.
Effects of Mahoning River on water uses.
The waters of the Mahoning River in Penn-
sylvania have no known public use. It is difficult to
judge whether this is primarily the result of stream water
-------
256
quality or whether it is the result of a combination of
influences involving geography and geology.
As a major tributary of the Beaver River, the
quality of the Mahoning has a definite effect on the
quality of the Beaver River. Users of the water of the
Beaver River are adversely affected by high iron and
manganese concentrations, low dissolved oxygen concen-
trations, poor bacteriological quality and taste-and-odor-
producing substances. Public water supplies report that
taste and odor problems have diminished in recent years.
Pollution abatement plans.
The 1962 report by the State of Ohio presented
to the Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission, and
the 1964 report recently issued, indicate that consider-
able progress is being made toward abating the remaining
pollution problems in the Ohio portion of the Mahoning
River. And I might add that we heard a great deal more
about that today.
The only waste discharge having an effect on
water quality in the Pennsylvania portion of the Mahoning
basin is the discharge from the City of New Castle's
primary degree sewage treatment plant which meets the
Pennsylvania Sanitary Water Board's treatment standards.
The increased treatment proposed by the city-will even
-------
257
further improve water quality below the discharge. The New
Castle authority has already advertised for binds on
the treatment plant improvements.
Conclusions.
The Mahoning River is a relatively small stream
burdened by heavy industrial and municipal use. The
quality of the stream limits its usefulness. Reports by
the State of Ohio indicate that much progress in pollution
abatement is taking place there. Some improvement has
already been noted in reduction of taste and odor problems.
It is evident that in addition to water pollution abatement
efforts, further water resource development-is needed to
assure the full range of beneficial uses of the Mahoning
Riv er.
-------
258
APPENDIX
20
-------
259
Table 7
Sampling Station
Descriptions
Station 1. The Pennsylvania Route 288 bridge at Wampum on
the Beaver River approximately seven miles down-
stream from the confluence of the Shenango and
Mahoning Rivers. Sampling period September 1959
to September 1961,
Station 2. The Baltimore and Ohio and Pittsburgh and Lake
Erie Railroads bridge in New Castle on the
Shenango River approximately 0.9 miles upstream
from its confluence with the Mahoning River.
Sampling period September 1959 to September 1961.
Station 3, The LR37031 bridge upstream from New Castle on
the Shenango River approximately 7.5 miles upstream
from its confluence with the Mahoning River.
Sampling period September 1959 to September 1961.
Station U. The Pennsylvania Route 18 bridge in New Castle on
the Mahoning River approximately 0.3 miles upstream
from its confluence with the Shenango River.
Sampling period September 1959 to September 1961
January 1965
Station 5. The Pennsylvania Route 108 bridge in New Castle on
the Mahoning River approximately 1.4 miles upstream
from its confluence with the Shenango River.
Sampling period September 1959 to September 1961
January 1965.
Station 6. The Township Route 372 bridge at culverts on Mahoning
River approximately 4.5 miles upstream from its
confluence with the Shenango River. Sampling period
January 1965.
Station 7. The U.S. Route 22k bridge at Edinburg on the Mahoning
River approximately 6.5 miles upstream from its con-
fluence with the Shenango River. Sampling period
January 1965
Station 8. Township Route 324 bridge at Hillsville on Mahoning
River approximately 9.5 miles upstream from its con-
fluence with the Shenango River approximately 2.5 miles
downstream from the Pennsylvania-Ohio state line.
Sampling period January 1965»
21
-------
Table 8
RESULTS OF CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
BEAVER FIVER BASIN
260
Date Sampled September 15, 1959
Analysis
Appearance
: Color
Odor
Turbidity
pH
Alkalinity
Acidity, Hot pH 8
Hardness
Chloride
Fluoride
Cyanide
Sulfate
Total Solids
Suspended Solids
Aluminum
Total Iron
Manganese
Phenol
B.O.D.
D.O.
D.O. % Sat.
Stream Temp. °C.
Station 1
clear
25
faint
musty
20
7.4
72
0
ino
13
68
250
20
0
0.5
0
0
7.9
5.9
67
22
Station 2
clear
25
faint
musty
15
7.3
68
0
90
7
38
160
20
0
0.6
0
0
2.9
sat.
19
Station 3
clear
25
faint
musty
5
7.1
52
0
78
7
42
160
25
0
1.6
0
0
5.7
8.0
86
19
Station k
clear
30
faint
musty
10
7.2
84
0
155
17
88
300
15
0
0.5
0
0
U.I
5.0
57
22
Station 5
clear
25
faint
musty
10
7.2
82
0
160
15
68
310
20
0
0.5
0
0
11.5
4.9
55
22
Remarks! All results except pH expressed in mg/1 unless otherwise indicated.
Abbreviations:
v. -
si. -
It. -
very
slight
light
sat. - saturated
% sat.- percent of saturation
°C. - degrees centigrade
-------
Table 9
RESULTS OF CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
BEAVER RIVER BASIN
261
Date Sampled September 23, 1959
Analysis
Appearance
Color
Odor
Turbidity
PH
Alkalinity
Acidity, Hot pH 8
Hardness
Chloride
Fluoride
Cyanide
Sulfate
Total Solids
Suspended Solids
Aluminum
Total Iron
Manganese
Phenol
B.O.D.
D.O.
D.O. % Sat.
Stream Temp. °C.
Station 1
v. si.
brown
25
distinct
musty
15
7.7
72
0
140
19
--
76
300
15
0.5
0.2
0.1
0.02
6.8
4.0
46
23
Station 2
v. si.
brown
25
distinct
musty
20
7.8
61
0
92
9
45
190
15
0.5 :
0.5
0.0
0.02
5.0
sat.
19
Station 3
V. Si.
brown
25
faint
musty
20
7.3
46
0
76
8
.
41
180
15
0
0.8
0.1
0.01
6.0
6.7
72
19
Station 4
v. si.
brown
25
faint
musty
15
7.1
76
0
175
24
--
95
340
15
0.5
0.3
0.1
0.05
6.8
2.9
33
22
Station 5
v. si.
brown
30
faint
musty
20
7.1
84
0
155
23
100
350
10
0
0.4
0.2
0.02
5.8
3.8
42
21
Remarks: All results except pH expressed in mg /I unless otherwise indicated.
Abbreviations:
v. - very sat. - saturated
si. - slight % sat. - percent of saturation
It. - light °C. - degrees centigrade
-------
Table 10
RESULTS OF CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
BEAVER RIVER BASIN
262
Date Sampled October 6, 1959
Analysis
Appearance
Color
Odor
Turbidity
pH
Alkalinity
Acidity, Hot pH 8
Hardness
Chloride
Fluoride
Cyanide
Sulfate
Total Solids
Suspended Solids
Aluminum
Total Iron
Manganese
Phenol
B.O.D.
D.O.
D.O. % Sat.
Stream Temp. °C.
Station 1
I1'
brown
_ _
taint
musty
--
7.4
72
--
--
12
--
--
--
--
--
--
0.8
--
0
--
4.0
47
24
Station 2
Si.
brown
--
di sti nc t
musty
--
7.3
54
--
__
9
--
--
--
--
--
--
1.2
--
0.01
--
7.5
84
21
Station 3
si.
brown
_ _
distinct
musty
--
6.9
50
--
--
11
--
--
--
--
--
--
1.6
--
0,02
--
7.0
78
21
Station 4
si .
brown
--
faint
musty
--
7.2
66
--
--
18
--
--
--
--
--
1.2
--
0.04
--
3.1
36
23
Station S
s 1 . - -
brown
_ _
di stinct
mu?ty
--
7.1
66
--
16
-- .
--
--
--
2,0
0.2
0.03
-- .
3.5
40
23
Remarks: All results
Abbreviations t
v. -
si. -
It. -
except pH expressed in mg/1 unless otherwise indicated.
very
slight
light
sat. - saturated
% sat.- percent of saturation
°C. - degrees centigrade
-------
Table II
RESULTS OF CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
BEAVER RIVER BASIN
263
Date Sampled November 6, 1959
Analysis
Appearance
Color
Odor
Turbidity
PH
Alkalinity
Acidity, Hot pH 8
Hardness
Chloride
Fluoride
Cyanide
Sulfate
Total Solids
Suspended Solids
Aluminum
Total Iron
Manganese
Phenol
B.O.D.
D.O.
D.O. % Sat.
Stream Temp. °C.
Station J
v. si.
brown
10
V. faint
earthy
25
7.3
74
0
135
14
--
78
280
30
0
2.2
o.o
0
5.3
8.9
87
14.5
Sta-tion 2
v. si.
brown
15
no
oo or
10
7-2
56
0
95
12
--
--
67
190
15
0
0.8
0.3
0
4.5
sat.
14
Station 3
v. si.
brown
10
f«unt
earthy
20
7.4
52
0
85
8
--
--
52
200
30
0
1.0
0
O
4.2
sat.
--
12
Station 4
v. sL .
bnwn
15
v. faint
earthy
30
7.2
70
0
165
15
--
^
100
340
45
0
2.8
0.0
0
12.0
8.8
93
13
Station 5
v. st .
brown
20
v. faint
earthy
20
7.2
70
0
165
16
< -w
--
102
320
60
--
2.4-
0.6
O
4.6
9.3
83
10.5
Remarks: All results except pH expressed in mg/1 unless otherwise indicated.
Abbreviations:
v. -
si. -
It. -
very
slight
light
sat. - saturated
% sat.- percent of saturation
°C. - degrees centigrade
-------
Tabia 12.
RESULTS OF CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
BEAVER RIVER BASIN
264
Date Sampled January 5^ JL960
Analysis
Appearance
Color
Odor
Turbidity
PH
Alkalinity
Acidity, Hot pH 8
Hardness
Chloride
Fluoride
Cyanide
Sulfate
Total Solids
Suspended Solids
Aluminum
Total Iron
Manganese
Phenol
B.O.D.
D.O.
D.O. % Sat.
Stream Temp. °C.
Station 1
brown
7?
taint
musiy
40
6.4
40
0
98
7
--
52
210
55
O.I
6.8
O.I
0.02
4-4-
sat.
8
Station 2
brov*n
50
v. taint
musty
40
6.4
32
0
70
5
--
--
44
150
45
0.1
1.6
O.I
0
4.2
sa£.
2.
Station 3
brown
50
dJ.Sti.net
Triusty
30
6.3
32
0
6(5
3
--
39
200
25
0.1
1.6
0,1
0
4.0
s«t.
3
Station 4
brown
ao
flrs.t i net
disag.
60
6.4
44
0
125
11
--
--
73
330
115
O.I
20.0
0.2
0.01
9.6
-S*<.
10
Station S
brown
80
fai nt
musty
50
6.3
44
0
125
U
--
73
340
90
O.I
16. 0
o.z
0.05
6.6
Sd"t.
10
Remarks: All results
Abbreviations j
v.
si. -
It. -
except pH expressed in mg/1 unless otherdse indicebed.
very
slight
light
sat. - saturated
% sat.- percent of saturation
°C. - degrees centigrade
-------
Table 13
RESULTS OF CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
VlVjtfrtff
BEAVER RIVER BASIN
265
Date Sampled February 1, 1960
Analysis
Appearance
Color
Odor
Turbidity
PH
Alkalinity
Acidity, Hot pH 8
Hardness
Chloride
Fluoride
Cyanide
Sulfate
Total Solids
Suspended Solids
Aluminum
Total Iron
Manganese
Phenol
B.O.D.
D.O.
0.0, % Sat.
Stream Temp. °C. .
Station 1
v. si.
brown
40
v. faint
chemical
25
6.4
50
0
115
15
--
71
230
30
0.1
5.0
0.2
0.05
4.4
sat.
8
Station 2
V. Sl.
brown
30
v. faint
chemical
25
6.2
44
0
88
8
48
160
20
0.1
1.6
0.0
0
4.4
sat.
1
Remarks: All results except pH expressed
Abbreviations:
Station 3
v. si.
brown
35
v. faint
musty
20
6.5
50
0
80
20
45
140
10
0.1
1.0
0.0
0.1
4.4
sat.
4
Station 4
si.
brown
70
faint
chemical
40
6.5
50
0
150
19
--
115
330
50
0.2
10.0
0.0
0.15
8.0
sat.
12
in mg/1 unless otherwise
Station 5
si.
brown
70
faint
chemical
50
6.6
52
0
150
19
110
330
50
0.5
14.0
0.2
0.10
5.0
sat.
11
indicated.
V.
si.
It.
very
slight
light
sat. - saturated
% sat. - percent of saturation
°C. - degrees centigrade
-------
Table 14
RESULTS OF CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
BEAVER RIVER BASIN
266
Date Sampled March 2, I960
Analysis
Appearance .
Color
Odor
Turbidity
PH
Alkalinity
Acidity, Hot pH 8
Hardness
Chloride
Fluoride
Cyanide
Sulfate
Total Solids
Suspended Solids
Aluminum
Total Iron
Manganese
Phenol
B.O.D.
D.O.
D.O. % Sat. ^
Stream Temp. °C.
Station 1
St.
brown
30
faint
musty
15
6.4
56
0
L52
23
--
200
270
20
O.Ol
2-2
0.7
0.03
6.2
s^t.
9
Station 2
si.
brown
40
distinct
musty
15
6.8
64
0
102
10
--
--
54
180
20
0.01
2.2
0.8
0
5.4
sa-t.
6
Station 3
si.
brown
20
faint
musty
25
6,5
64
0
108
14
--.
--
100
290
40
0.02
4.0
.1.8
0.02
5.8
sat.
5
Station 4
si.
brown
40
distinct
rousty
25-
6.4
64
0
180
36
--
--
HO
410
30
0.01
8.0
L.O
0.05
9.0
9.3
88
13
Station 5
St.
brown
50
dist inc-t
musty
35
6,6
64
0
198
-32
--
--
125
440
40
0
10. 0
1.0
0.06
6.2
9.1
84
12
Remarks: All results except pH expressed in mg/1 unless otherwise indicated.
Abbreviations:
v. -
si. -
It. -
very
slight
light
sat. - saturated
% sat.- percent of saturation
°C. - degrees centigrade
-------
Table 15
RESULTS OF CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
BEAVER RIVER BASIN
26?
Date Sampled April 19, I960
Analysis
Appearance
Color
Odor
Turbidity
PH
Alkalinity
Acidity, Hot pH 8
Hardness
Chloride
Fluoride
Cyanide
Sulfate
Total Solids
Suspended Solids
Aluminum
Total Iron
Manganese
Phenol
B.O.D.
D.O.
D.O. % Sat.
Stream Temp. °C«
Station
si.
brown
20
v. faint
musty
15
7.3
70
0
140
15
--
--
so
220
15
0
0.8
0.1
0.15
3.4
8.6
35
15
Station 2
v. si.
brown
30
distinct
musty
15
7.2
70
0
100
7
--
--
50
150
15
0.05
1.0
0.2
O.I
13.0
9.7
&8
1]
^~^^«»w«»i»-**
Station ..
si.
brown
15
faint
musty
15
7.4
66
0
SO
7
--
46
110
20
0.05
1.0
0.2
0
5.4
9-0
82
11.5
Station A
si.
brown
15
v. faint
musty
15
7.2
60
0
200
29
--
155
340
20
0
1.0
0.4
o.o
6.1
5.6
59
18
Station 5
v. si.
browrv
15
v. faint
musty
10
7.8
70
0
200
27
--
....
150
380
10
0
2.8
0.7
0.05
5.4
5.6
59
18
Remarks: All results except pH expressed in mg/1 unless otherwise indicated.
Abbreviations:
v. -
si. -
It. -
very
slight
light
sat. - saturated
% sat.- percent of saturation
°C. - degrees centigrade
-------
Table 16
RESULTS OF CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
BEAVER RIVER BASIN
268
Date Sampled May 4, 1960
Analysis
Appearance
Color
Odor
Turbidity
PH
Alkalinity
Acidity, Hot pH 8
Hardness
Chloride
Fluoride
Cyanide
Sulfate
Total Solids
Suspeaded Solids
Aluminum
Total Iron
Manganese
Phenol
B.O.D.
D.O.
D.O. 7. Sat.
Stream Temp. °C.
Remarks: All resul
Station 1
Sl.
brown
15
distinct
musty
20
6.8
60
0
200
27
--
--
135
360
10
0.05
0.2
0.3
0
--
6,1
66
19.5
Station 2
Sl.
brown
20
v. ! faint
musty
15
7.5
94
0
135
12
--
70
210
20
0.1
0.5
0.2
0
sat.
--
16
Its except pH expressed
Station 3
V. Sl.
brown
20
v. faint
musty
10
7.4
125
0
125
12
--
64
180
10
0.05
0.2
0.3
0
8.2
83
16.5
Station 4
v . s 1 .
brown
10
v. faint
musty
15
6.8
60
0
260
29
--
220
480
20
0.1
0.1
0.5
0
6.1
70
23
in mg/1 unless otherwise
Station 5
V. Sl.
brown
10
v. faint
musty
10
7.0
70
0
260
29
--
220
480
10
0.05
0.2
0.3
0
--
5.2
59
22.5
Abbreviations :
v.
si.
It.
very
slight
light
sat. - saturated
% sat. - percent of saturation
°C. - degrees centigrade
-------
Table 17
RESULTS OF CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
BEAVER RIVER BASIN
Date Sampled June 7, I960
269
Analysis
Appearance
Color
Odor
Turbidity
PH
Alkalinity
Acidity, Hot pH 8
Hardness
Chloride
Fluoride
Cyanide
Sulfate
Total Solids
Suspended Solids
Aluminum
Total Iron
Manganese
Phenol
B.O.D.
D.O.
D.O. % Sat.
Stream Temp. °C.
Station 1
v. si.
brown
15
v. faint
musty
15
7.4
80
_
145
16
60
300
20
0.1
0.6
0
0
6.4
5.3
60
22
Station 2
v. si.
'brown
20
no
odor
10
7.7
86
__
115
9
__
45
210
0.1
0.6
0
0.2
9.6
8.6
94
20
Station 3
v. si.
brnwn
25
no
odor
20
7.0
84
0
88
6
__
40
180
20
0.1
1.4
0
0
4.4
6.7
73
20
Station 4
y. si.
nrnvfn
20
faint
musty ^
15
7.3
90
0
205
33
^^
_
95
U40
10
O.l
1.2
0.4
0.2
10.4
4.1
48
24.5
Station 5
y. si.
JffTT'^Wri
10
no
odor
15
7.0
90
0
195
33
_ _ .
«._
110
420
__
0.1
l.U
0.5
Q.I
13+
4.0
47
24
Remarks: All results
Abbreviations:
v. -
si. -
It. -
except pH expressed in mg/1 unless otherwise indicated.
very
slight
light
sat. - saturated
% sat.- percent of saturation
°C. - degrees centigrade
-------
Table 18
RESULTS OF CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
BEAVER FIVER BASIN
Date Sampled July 6, I960
270
Analysis
Appearance
Color
Odor
Turbidity
PH
Alkalinity
Acidity, Hot pH 8
Hardness
Chloride
Fluoride
Cyanide
Sulfate
Total Solids
Suspended Solids
Aluminum
Total Iron
Manganese
Phenol
B.O.D.
D.O.
D.O. % Sat.
Stream Temp. °C.
Station 1
v. si.
brown
25
faint
musty
25
7.4
80
0
170
1A
~
83
320
25
0.3
0.9
0.1
0.05
7.6
4.6
52
22
Station 2
v. si.
brown
25
faint
musty
30
7.4
80
0
120
8
48
240
30
0.3
1.0
0.1
0.05
9.6
8.1
87
19
Station 3
v. si.
brown
20
v. faint
musty
30
7.4
66
0
100
8
~
40
370
30
0.1
2.2
0.1
0.1
6.0
7.0
76
20
. Station 4
v. si.
hrnwn
40
no
odor
30
7.0
68
0
180
24
115
400
30
0.2
1.4
0.2
0.1
6.0
3.3
38
23
Station 5
v.- si.
hrnwn
30
faint
musty
25
7.1
64
0
190
12
110
370
25
0.1
2.0
0.3
0.05
4.4
3.6
42
23
Remarks? All results
Abbreviations:
v. -
el. -
It. -
except pH expressed in mg/1 unless otherwise indicated.
very
slight
light
sat. - saturated
% sat,- percent of saturation
°C. - degrees centigrade
-------
Table 19
RESULTS OF CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
BEAVER FIVER BASIN
Data Sampled July 20, I960
271
Analysis
Appearance
Color
Odor
Turbidity
PH
Alkalinity
Acidity, Hot pH 8
Hardness
Chloride
Fluoride
Cyanide
Sulfate
Total Solids
Suspended Solids
Aluminum
Total Iron
Manganese
Phenol
B.O.D.
D.O.
D.O. % Sat.
Stream Temp. °C.
Station 1
si.
brown
15
distinct
musty
20
7.2
74
0
190
19
--
110
380
40
0.2
1.3
0.2
0.1
11.2
3.9
48
26
Station 2
31.
brown
25
distinct
musty
25
7.4
82
0
130
9
~
58
280
25
0.3
2.2
0.2
0.1
6.2
7.5
86
23
Station 3
Si.
brown
20
faint
musty
25
7.0
62
0
105
9
46
240
30
0.2
2.6
0.1
0.1
8.6
4.4
51
23
Station 4
si.
brown
40
faint
musty
15
7.1
105
0
210
30
140
440
20
0.3
1.8
0.8
0.2
11.0
2.6
33
28
Station 5
si.
brown
40
distinct
musty
25
7.2
78
0
210
31
135
440
30
0.2
2.0
0.2
0.1
10.8
3.1
40
29
Remarks: All results except pH expressed in mg/1 unless rtherwiae indicated.
Abbreviations:
v. -
el. -
It. -
very
slight
light
sat. - saturated
% sat.- percent of saturation
°C. - degrees centigrade
-------
Table 20
RESULTS OF CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
BEAVER RIVER BASIN
272
Date Sampled August 3, I960
Analysis
Appearance
Color
Odor
Turbidity
PH
Alkalinity
Acidity, Hot pH 8
Hardness
Chloride
Fluoride
Cyanide
Sulfate
Total Solids
Suspended Solids
Aluminum
Total Iron
Manganese
Phenol
B.O.D.
D.O.
D.O. % Sat.
Stream Temp. °C.
Station 1
v. si.
brown
25
distinct
musty
25
6.7
80
200
17
107
360
20
0.2
1.0
0.3
0
11.5
3.2
39
26.5
Station 2
v. si.
brown
35
distinct
musty
35
7.1
84
160
8
63
270
30
0.1
2.8
0.2
0
5.0
6.7
77
23
Station 3
v. si.
brown
25
distinct
musty
25
6.9
80
~
120
10
54
220
40
0.2
2.0
0.1
0
4.3
4.5
53
24
Station 4
v. si.
brown
25
distinct
musty
25
7.1
90
210
25
117
410
20
0.2
1.0
0.3
0
8.8
3.1
39
28
Station 5
v. si.
brown
35
distinct
musty
25
7.1
80
200
2k
126
400
40
0.3
1.8
0.3
0
11.7
1.9
24
28
Remarks: All results except pH expressed in mg/1 unless otherwise indicated.
Abbreviations:
v. -
si. -
It. -
very
slight
light
sat. - sat.vrated
% sat.- percent of saturation
°C. - degrees centigrade
-------
Table 21
RESULTS OF CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
BEAVER RIVER BASIN
273
Date Sampled August 24, I960
Analysis
Appearance
Color
Odor
Turbidity
PH
Alkalinity
Acidity, Hot pH 8
Hardness
Chloride
Fluoride
Cyanide
Sulfate
Total Solids
Suspended Solids
Aluminum
Total Iron
Manganese
Phenol
B.O.D.
D.O.
D.O. % Sat.
Stream Temp. °C.
Station 1
si.
brown
20
distinct
musty
15
7.3
do
0
190
21
120
340
20
0.50
0.5
0
0
5.4
3.4
41
25
Station 2
si.
brown
20
faint
musty
20
7.1
66
0
155
11
"
63
190
20
0.25
0.6
0.2
0
2.7
6.8
77
22
Station 3
si.
brown
20
faint
musty
20
7.2
72
0
110
15
50
160
40
0.14
0.8
0.05
0
3.3
4.9
56
22
Station 4
si.
brown
20
distinct
musty
25
6.9
66
0
210
33
146
380
40
0.25
2.4
0.3
0
9.0
3.3
41
27
Station 5
si.
brown
25
faint
musty
15
7.1
70
0
210
31
Ufl
390
20
1.0
2.5"
0.2
0
n.o
3.8
47
27
Remarks» All results except pH expressed in mg/1 unless otherwise indicated.
Abbreviations:
v. -
el. -
It. -
very
slight
light
eat. - saturated
% sat,- percent of saturation
°C. - degrees centigrade
-------
Table 22
RESULTS OF CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
BEAVER RIVER BASIN
274
Date Sampled September 7> I960
Analysis
Appearance
Color
Odor
Turbidity
PH
Alkalinity
Acidity, Hot pH 8
Hardness
Chloride
Fluoride
Cyanide
Sulfate
Total Solids
Suspended Solids
Aluminum
Total Iron
Manganese
Phenol
B.O.D.
D.O.
D.O. % Sat.
Stream Temp. °C.
Station 1
si.
brown
5
faint
musty
10
6.9
50
0
190
22
116
^^
*..
340
10
0
1.2
0.1
3.3
41.6
27
Station 2
si.
brown
20
v. faint
musty
20
7.2
70
0
120
9
»
^^
^»
240
20
0
1.0
0.2
7.2
83.9
23
Station 3
si.
brown
25
faint
earthy
30
7.1
58
0
90
8
50
^^
^
190
60
0
2.8
0.1
5,3
60.7
22
Station k
si.
brown
10
faint
musty
20
7.4
60
0
245*
29
150
^^
^»
450
30
0
0.6
0.3
2.i_
36.6
27
Station 5
si.
brown
5
v. faint
musty
20
6.9
46
0
24*0
29
140
..
..
380
20
0
0.7
0.2
3-1?
41.6
27
Remarksr All results except pH expressed in mg/1 unless otherwise indicated.
Abbreviations:
v. -
si. -
It. -
very
slight
light
sat. - saturated
% sat.- percent of saturation
°C. - degrees centigrade
-------
Table 23
RESULTS OF CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
BEAVER RIVER BASIN
275
Date Sampled September 28, I960
Analysis
Appearance
Color
Odor
Turbidity
pH
Alkalinity
Acidity, Hot pH 8
Hardness
Chloride
Fluoride
Cyanide
Sulfate
Total Solids
Suspended Solids
Aluminum
Total Iron
Manganese
Phenol
B.O.D.
D.O.
D.O. % Sat.
Stream Temp. °C.
Station 1
si.
brown
20
faint
grassy
20
6.8
68
0
240
24
118
320
20
0
2.0
0.2
0.0
6.6
2.9
35.4
25
Station 2
si.
brown
10
faint
grassy
20
7.1
70
0
120
9
60
220
10
0
1.0
0.2
0.0
6.3
7.2
77.7
19.5
Station 3
si.
brown
10
v. faint
miint.y
30
7.0
62
0
90
24
-.-
us
160
40
0
2.0
0.1
0.0
4.1
4.2
46.2
20
Station 4
si.
brown
15
faint
gra ssy
20
7.2
82
0
265
32
_
140
400
20
0
0.6
0.2
0.0
3.6
2.7
33.1
26
Station 5
si.
brown
15
faint
mnti+.y
20
7.2.
90
0
250
27
.
^*
120
mo
20
0
o.z
0.3
0,0
V.r
3-0
W3
26.5
Remarksi All results
Abbreviations:
v. -
el. -
It. -
except pH expressed in mg/1 unless otherwise indicated.
very
slight
light
sat. - saturated
% sat.- percent of saturation
°C. - degrees centigrade
-------
Table 24
RESULTS OF CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
BEAVER RIVER BASIN
2?6
Date Sampled October 19, I960
Analysis
Appearance
Color
Odor
Turbidity
pH
Alkalinity
Acidity, Hot pH 8
Hardness
Chloride
Fluoride
Cyanide
Sulfate
Total Solids
Suspended Solids
Aluminum
Total Iron
Manganese
Phenol
B.O.D.
D.O.
D.O. % Sat.
Stream Temp. °C.
Station 1
V. SI.
brown
20
faint
earthy
20
7.0
62
0
26
190
360
20
0.2
0.6
0.5
0
7.6
3.6
39.8
19.5
Station 2
V. SJ..
brown
25
v. faint
musty
25
7.0
72
0
16
82
210
60
0.1
2.4
0
0
8.2
7.3
69.5
13
Station 3
V. 81.
brown
20
v. faint
musty
25
7.1
62
0
10
~
62
190
20
0
0.8
0
0
5.0
5.6
54.0
1A
Station 4
V. 81.
brown
20
v. faint
musty
10
7.1
76
0
33
268
480
20
0.1
0.4
0.3
0
7.6
2.4
27.0
20
Station 5
v. si.
brown
20
faint
mustv
10
7.0
72
0
-_
30
*»
256
450
20
0
1.2
0.3
0
11.0
3.4
37.5
20
Remarkst All results
Abbreviations:
v. -
si. -
It. -
except pH expressed in mg/1 unless otherwise Indicated.
very
slight
light
sat. - saturated
% sat.- percent of saturation
°C. - degrees centigrade
-------
Table 25
RESULTS OF CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
BEAVER RIVER BASIN
277
Date Sampled November 16,
Analysis
Appearance
Color
Odor
Turbidity
PH
Alkalinity
Acidity, Hot pH 8
Hardness
Chloride
Fluoride
Cyanide
Sulfate
Total Solids
Suspended Solids
Aluminum
Total Iron
Manganese
Phenol
B.O.D.
D.O.
D.O. % Sat.
Stream Temp. °C.
5-tat i on 1
It.
green
, 10
faint
musty
15
6.1
70
0
220
27
.
--
190
380
30
0
1.0
0.3
0
7.3
5.2
54.2
17
Station 2
It.
qrc«n
20
distinct
musty
10
7.4-
94
0
160
15
--
86
270
20
0.2
1.0
0.3
0
5.8
8.0
71.3
10
Station c
It.
green
80 '
faint
T»iusty
20
7.4
120
0
130
12
--
--
76
200
20
O.I
1.2.
0.3
0
4.9
6.0
55". 5
1K5
.Station 4
brown
green
15
distinct
musty
10
7.1
100
0
265
32
--
260
460
30
0.1
0.4
0.3
0
5.1
3.2
33.2
17.5
Station i
brown
.green
10
faint
mustv
10
7.4
92
0
265
32
--
--
260
470
10
0.1
0,3
0.2
0
3.6
4.0
41.1
17
Remarks: All results
Abbreviations .
v. -
si. -
It. -
except pH expressed in mg/1 unless otherwise Indicated.
very
slight
light
sat. - saturated
% sat.- percent of saturation
°C, - degrees centigrade
-------
Table 26
RESULTS OF CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
BEAVER RIVER BASIN
278
Date Sampled December 14, 1960
Analysis
Appearance
Color
Odor
Turbidity
PH
Alkalinity
Acidity, Hot pH 8
Hardness
Chloride
Fluoride
Cyanide
Sulfate
Total Solids
Suspended Solids
Aluminum
Total Iron
Manganese
Phenol
B.O.D.
D.O.
D.O. % Sat.
Stream Temp. C.
Station 1
brown
15
distinct
musty.
15
7.5
115
0
245
40
215
470
20
0.2
0.8
0.5
0.025
3.5
8.0
62.5
5
Station 2
It.
brown
15
distinct
musty
15
7.8
125
0
190
18
120
320
20
0.2
0.6
0.1
0
3.5
12.0
81.9
0
Stdtlca 3
It.
brown
25
distinct
musty
25
7.4
105
--
23
--
--
110
580
30
0.2
0.8
0.25
0.015
3.8
11.0
75.0
0
Static A 4
brown
20
distinct
musty
20
7.1
115
0
255
48
--
280
590
20
0.1
1.0
0.4
0.045
4.1
7.0
53.3
4
Remarks: All results except pH expressed in mg/1 unless otherwise
Station 5
brown
25
distinct
must^y
30
7.2
105
0
270
48
--
280
570
30
0.2
1.2
0.4
0.05
4.6
8.0
57.8
2
indicated.
Abbreviations:
v. - very
si. - slight
It. - light
sat. - saturated
% sat. - percent of saturation
°C. - degrees centigrade
-------
Table.2?
RESULTS OF CHEMIC'AL ANALYSIS
BEAVER RIVER BASIN
Date Sampled January 17, 1961 & January 18, 1961
279
Analysis
Appearance
Color
Odor
Turbidity
pH
Alkalinity
Acidity, Hot pH 8
Hardness
Chloride
Fluoride
Cyanide
Sulfate
Total Solids
Suspended Solids
Aluminum
Total Iron
Manganese
Phenol
B.O.D.
D.O.
D.O. % Sat.
Stream Temp. °C.
Station 1
It. green
brown
15
distinct
musty
5
6.9
100
34
184
340
10
0.1
1.2
0.50
0
5.2
7.3
61.2
7.5
Station 2
It. green
brown
10
faint
musty
5
7.1
100
0
20
~ ,
92
240
10
0.2
1.2
0.10
0
3.8
4.5
33.0
2
Station 3
It.
creen
15
distinct
musty
10
7.2
100
0
20
64
240
10
0
1.4
0.33
0
3.8
9.2
68.3
3
Station 4
It.
green
10
distinct
musty
5
6.7
94
0
55
308
590
10
0
1.
1.00
0
4.9
3.1
28.5
11.5
Station 5
It.
green
10
faint
musty
15
6.8
110
O
53
308
600
15
0
2.
0.90
0
4.4
3.2
30.3
12
Remarks! All results except pH expressed in mg/1 unless otherwise indicated.
Abbreviations:
v. -
el. -
It. -
very
slight
light
sat. - saturated
% sat.- percent of saturation
°C. - dpgrees centigrade
41
-------
Table 28
RESULTS OF CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
BEAVER RIVER BASIN
280
Date Sampled February 15, 1961
Analysis
Appearance
Color
Odor
Turbidity
PH
Alkalinity
Acidity, Hot pH 8
Hardness
Chloride
Fluoride
Cyanide
Sulfate
Total Solids
Suspended Solids
Aluminum
Total Iron
Manganese
Phenol
B.O.D.
D.O.
D.O. % Sat.
Stream Temp. °C.
Station 1
It.
green
25
distinct
musty
15
7.2
90
0
260
55
205
450
20
0.1
0.8
0.5
0
5.9
3.3
27.9
7.5
Station 2
It.
green
10
faint
musty
10
8.0
115
0
180
31
--
95
280
10
0.1
0.6
0.6
0
5.9
10.5
73.5
1
Station 3
It.
green
30
distinct
musty
20
7.8
110
0
165
36
95
280
15
0
0.8
0.7
0
5.9
8.3
62.5
3.5
Station 4
clear
15
distinct
musty
15
7.1
82
0
300
77
320
570
10
0
1.2
1.0
0
5.6
2,7
24.8
11.5
Station 5
clear
20
faint
musty
20
7.5"~
90
0
300
70
3Z
560
15-
0.2
1.6
1.25
0
6.8
2.4-
21.7
11
Remarks: All results
Abbreviations:
v. -
81. -
It. -
except pH expressed in mg/1 unless otherwise indicated,
very
slight
light
sat. - saturated
% sat.- percent of saturation
°Ct - degrees centigrade
-------
Table 29
RESULTS OF CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
BEAVER RIVER BASIN
281
Date Sampled April 19, 1961
Analysis
Appearance
Color
Odor
Turbidity
PH
Alkalinity
Acidity, Hot pH 8
Hardness
Chloride
Fluoride
Cyanide
Sulfate
Total Solids
Suspended Solids
Aluminum
Total Iron
Manganese
Phenol
B.O.D.
D.O.
D.O. % Sat.
Stream Temp. °C.
Remarks: All resul
Abbreviations:
Station 1
muddy
25
v. faint
earthy
90
7.8
84
0
105
15
72
300
130
0.1
8.4
0.1
0.02
6.8
9.7
82.4
8
Station 2
muddy
35
v. faint
earthy
30
7.2
36
0
76
10
48
160
30
0.1
1.0
0
0
5.6
11.4
92.1
6.5
tr_*. PH e»pre...d
Station 3
muddy.
30
faint
musty
30
7.4
44
0
70
10
--
36
140
30
0
1.0
0
0
6.8
10.3
82.9
6
Station 4
dirty
brown
35
v. faint
earthy
90
7.8
74
0
155
22
--
108
350
90
0.1
12.0
0.5
0.045
5.2
9.3
81.0
9
in mg/1 unless otherwise
Station 5
dirty
brown
30
faint
earthy
100
7.5
68
0
150
22
108
340
140
0.1
12.0
0.6
0.035
7.6
9.1
77.7
8.5
indicated.
v.
si.
It.
very
slight
light
sat. - saturated
% sat. - percent of saturation
"C.
degrees centigrade
-------
Table 30
RESULTS OF CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
BEAVER RIVER BASIN
282
Date Sampled June 13, 1961
"
Analysis
Appearance
Color
Odor
Turbidity
PH
Alkalinity
Acidity, Hot pH 8
Hardness
Chloride
Fluoride
Cyanide
Sulfate
Total Solids
Suspended Solids
Aluminum
Total Iron
Manganese
Phenol
B.O.D.
D.O.
D.O. 7. Sat.
Stream Temp. °C.
Station 1
dark
brown
35
distinct
musty
30
7.1
58
0
124
10
72
270
20
0
2.
0.2
0
6.0
4.3
51.5
25
Station 2
dark
brown
30
faint
musty
30
7.0
56
0
100
4
62
130
10
0
1.0
0
0
1.0
6.9
78.9
22
Station 3
light
brown
30
v. faint
musty
25
7.0
62
0
120
7
62
240
10
0
1.2
0.1
0
6.0
5.2
60.8
23
Station 4
red
brown
40
faint'
musty
60
6.8
56
0
152
16
123
350
40
0
0.6
0.4
0
7.6
1.0
12.7
26
Remarks: All results except pH expressed in mg/1 unless otherwise
Abbreviations:
v. - very sat. - saturated
Station 5
red
brown
50
faint
musty
60
6.8
56
0
144
16
'
108
350
50
0
5.0
0.33
0
6.8
1.4
17.5
26
indicated.
si. - slight
It. - light
% sat. - percent of saturation
9C. - degrees centigrade
-------
Table: 31
RESULTS OF CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
BEAVER RIVER BASIN
283
Date Sampled July 5, 1961
Analysis
Appearance
Color
Odor
Turbidity
PH
Alkalinity
Acidity, Hot pH 8
Hardness
Chloride
Fluoride
Cyanide
Sulfate
Total Solids
Suspended Solids
Aluminum
Total Iron
Manganese
Phenol
B.O.D.
D.O.
D.O. % Sat.
Stream Temp. °C.
Remarks: All resu]
Abbreviations:
Station 1
si.
brown
25
faint
musty
30
7.2
52
0
138
12
91
280
50
0
2.8
0.25
0.0
9.6
4.3
49.7
23
ta except j
Station 2
si.
brown
25
. faint
musty
30
7.2
62
0
112
5
53
210
50
0
2.0
,0.1
0.0
3.5
7.0
78.4
21
Stdticn 3
si.
brown
30
faint
musty
35
7.1
60
0
100
5
48
210
60
0
3.4
0.1
0.0
6.9
4.4
49.0
21
Station 4
si.
brown
30
faint
musty
35
7.0
48
0
186
18
:
146
360
30
0
5.0
0.5 -
0.0
9.4
2.8
32.8
24
>H expressed in tng/1 unless otherwise
Station 5
si.
brown
30
faint
musty
35
6.9
46
0
200
18
153
360
30
0
'3.4
0.5
0.0
9.2
2.7
31.9,
24
indicated.
V.
si.
It.
very
slight
light
sat. - saturated
% sat. - percent of saturation
°C. - degrees centigrade
-------
Table 32
RESULTS OF CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
BEAVER RIVER BASIN
284
Date Sampled August 30, 1961
Analysis
Appearance
Color
Odor
Turbidity
PH
Alkalinity
Acidity, Hot pH 8
Hardness
Chloride
Fluoride
Cyanide
Sulfate
Total Solids
Suspended Solids
Aluminum
Total Iron
Manganese
Phenol
B.O.D.
D.O.
D.O. % Sat.
Stream Temp. °C.
Station 1
25
distinct
musty
25
6.5
44
200
23
.--
248
300
20
0
1.2
0.5
0.03
9.7
1.8
22.4
26
Station 2
--
25
faint
musty
25
7.1
54
128
10
--
100
280
10
0
0.6
0.5
0.02
2.3
6.8
77.0
22
Station 3
35
distinct
musty
30
7.1
84
--
.104. '
9
76
240
20
0
2.0
0.0
0.01
5.4
4.4
50.6
23
Station 4
--
25
faint
musty
15
6.4
44
,.. 235
28
336
490
10
0
2.0
0.6
0.04
6.1
2.0
24.8
25
Station 5
30
distinct
musty
20
6.5
50
.. 230"- "'"
28
336
500
20
0
1.2
0.6
0.05
5.4
1.9
23.4
26
Remarks: All results except pH expressed in mg/1 unless otherwise indicated.
Abbreviations :
v. - very sat. - saturated
si. - slight % sat. --percent of saturation
It. - light °C. - degrees centigrade
-------
Table 33
RESULTS OF CHBflLCAL ANALYSIS
BEAVER RIVER BASIN
285
Date Sampled September 20, 1961
Analysis
Appearance
Color
Odor
Turbidity
PH
Alkalinity
Acidity, Hot pH 8
Hardness
Chloride
Fluoride
Cyanide
Sulfate
Total Solids
Suspended Solids
Aluminum
Total Iron
Manganese
Phenol
B.0.0.
D.O.
D.O. % Sat.
Stream Temp. °C.
Station 1
green
15
faint
musty
15
6,9
48
0
175
23
--
168
420
5
0
0.6
0.80
0.01
6.8
2.4
31.3
28
Station 2
light
green
15
distinct
musty
10
6.8
48
--
105
10
--
58
190
15
0 '
2.0
0.13
0
5.4
sat.
23
Stdticn 3
light
green
25
distinct
musty
15
7.0
50
84
10
53
170
20
0
1.8
0.15
0
1.8
6.1
72.3
24
Station 4
muddy
green
15
faint
musty
10
7.0
52
270
30
--
238
530
5
0
0.3
0.60
0.03
6.2
2.4
32.2
28.5
Station 5
muddy
green
20
distinct
musty
10
7.0
50
245
30
--
268
490
10
0
0.4
1.00
0.02
6.0
2.3
29.8
29
Remarks: All results except pH expressed in mg/1 unless otherwise indicated.
Abbreviations:
v. - very sat. - saturated
si. - slight % sat. - percent of saturation
It. - light
JC.
- degrees centigrade
-------
Table 34
RESULTS OF CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
BEAVER KIVBB BASIN
286
Date Sampled January 4, 1965
Analysis
Appearance
Color
; Odor
Turbidity
PH
Alkalinity
Acidity, Hot pH 8
Hardness
Chloride
Fluoride
Cyanide
Sulfate
Total Solids
Suspended Solids
Aluminum
Total Iron
Manganese
Phenol
B.O.D.
D.O.
D.O. 7. Sat.
Stream Temp. °C.
Station 1
muddy
25
earthy
270
6.1
58
0
180
70
0.8
0.03
- 91
620
300
0
56
0.5
0.08
12.5
8.2
65.0
6
Station 2
- 'H.fl -
muddy
25
earthy
250
6.2
58
- 0 >
180
70
0.8
0.04
96
560
360
0.10
60
0.5
0.09
13
8.2
65.0
6
Station 3
muddy
25
earthy
250
7.0
"60
0
180
68
0.4
0.04
91
600
300
0.21
64
0.5
0.10
14
8.6
69.0
6
Station 4
muddy
25
earthy
280
6.6
58
0
180
68
0.4
0.03
96
520
240
0
42
0.4
0.11
11
9.0
72.0
6
Station 5
muddy '
25
earthy
270
6.4
62
0
180
66
0.8
0.03 .
96
480
260
0.09
44
0.5
0.9
12
8.7
66.5
4
Remarks: All results
Abbreviations:
v.
si.
It,
except pH expressed In mg/1 unless otherwise indicated.
very
slight
light
sat. - saturated
% sat. - percent of saturation
°C. - degrees centigrade
-------
Table 35
RESULTS OF CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
BEAVER RIVER BASIN
287
Date Sampled January 6, 1965
Analysis
Appearance
Color
Odor
Turbidity
PH
Alkalinity
Acidity, Hot pH 8
Hardness
Chloride
Fluoride
Cyanide
Sulfate
Total Solids
Suspended Solids
Aluminum
Total Iron
Manganese
Phenol
B.O.D.
D.O.
D.O. % Sat.
Stream Temp. °C.
Station 4
brown
20
musty
80
6.2
38
0
180
38
0.5
0.11
128
380
160
0.13
13.0
0.66
0.18
9.5
7.8
70
11
Station. 5
brown
25
musty
85
6.1
34
0
180
38
0.6
0.12
136
380
100
0.13
11.0
0.66
0.19
8.5
7.8
69
10
Station 6
brown
25
lisagreeable,
80
6.2
38
0
180
40
0.5
0.08
136
420
120
0.24
13.0
0.66
0.17
10.0
6.8
59.5
10
Station 7_
brown
25
disagreeabl
65
6.2
40
0
180
41
0.6
0.09
128
400
60
0.27
6.8
0.60
0.17
8.0
7.8
69
10
Station 8
brown
5
> musty
160
5.8
22
JO
180
40
0.6
0.09
183
440
80
0.31
26.0
0.80
0.19
13
6.1
55
11
Remarks: All results
Abbreviations:
v. -
si. -
It. -
except pH expressed in mg/1 unless otherwise indicated.
very
slight
light
sat. - saturated
% sat.- pei-cent of saturation
°C. - degrees centigrade
-------
RESULTS OF CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
BEAVER RIVER BASIN
Date Sampled January 11, 1965
288
Analysis
Appearance
Color
Odor
Turbidity
PH
Alkalinity
Acidity, Hot pH 8
Hardness
Chloride
Fluoride
Cyanide
Sulfate
Total Solids
Suspended Solids
Aluminum
Total Iron
Manganese
Phenol
B.O.D.
D.O.
D.O. % Sat.
Stream Temp. °C.
Station k
brown
30
distinct
musty
120
6.0
32
-
150
28
0.05
91
360
120
0
38
0.33
0.075
10
9.3
Ik
6
Station 5
grayish
brown
40
distinct
musty
120
6.0
32
~
150
28
0.4
0.05
96
360
100
0
20
0.40
0.08
13.5
9.4
71
4
Station 6
brown
30
distinct
musty
130
5.7
26
~
150
27
0.4
0.05
86
280
100
0
20
0.40
0.085
8.5
9.2
67
3
Station 7
brown
40
distinct
musty
130
5.8
24
150
28
0.4
0.04
96
400
120
_.
40
0.50
0.085
10
9.0
69
4
Station 6
yellowish
brown
50
decided
musty
120
6.0
30
155
26
0.4
0.055
96
340
120
0
32
0.40
0.09
12
9.5
76
6
Remarks: All results except pH expressed in mg/1 unless otherwise indicated.
Abbreviationsi
v. -
si. -
It. -
very
slight
light
sat. - saturated
% sat.- percent of saturation
°C. - degrees centigrade
-------
Table 37
BEAVER RIVER SURVEY :
RESULTS OF BACTERIOLOGICAL ANALYSES
CoHform Organisms/100 ml
Date Sampled
9/15/59
9/23/59
10/6/59
H/6/59
V5/60
2/1/60
3/2/60
5/4/60
6/7/60
7/6/60
7/20/60
8/3/60
8/24/60
9/7/60
9/28/60
10/19/60
11/16/60
12/14/60
1/17/61
1/18/61
2/15/61
4/19/61
6/13/61
7/5/61
g/30/51
9/20/61
Station 1
4,300
43,000
530
9,300
390,000
1,600,000
240,000
4,300
75,000
(4,600,000)
24,000*
11,000,000+
9,300
43,000
2,400,000
43,000
24,000
23,000
21,000
150,000
1,200,000
43,000
240,000
110,000
210,000
Station 2
43,000
930
23,000
1,500
15,000
12,000
2,400
930
930
4,300
9,300+
39,000
750
4,300
24,000
24,000
21,000
2,300
4,300
15,000
210,000
4,300
1,100,000
11,000
Station 3
43,000
21,000
4,300
4,300
750,000
7,500
72
2,400
43,000
29,000
24,000
110,000
640
93,000
7,500
93,000
9,300
930
1,500
43,000
1,200,000
15,000
7,500,000
2,400
Station 4
93,000
2,400,000
93,000
15,000
2,400,000
4,600,000
350,000
930
150,000
150,000
24,000
390,000
9,300
1,110,000
24,000
150,000
1,100,000
15,000
21,000
93,000
430,000
1,100,000
150,000
15,000
460,000
Station 5
1,110,000
4,300
23,000
24,000
210,000
1,200,000
240,000
430
24,000
7,500
24,000
230
4,300
230
9,300
7,500
9,300
2,300
2,900
9,300
11,000,000
210,000
24,000
1,100
2,900
ro
00
-------
Table 37
BEAVER RIVER SURVEY
RESULTS OF BACTERIOLOGICAL ANALYSES
Collform Organisms/100 ml
Date Sampled
1A/65
1/6/65
1/11/65
Station 4
218,000
1,100,000+
25,000,000
Station 5
253,000,000
1,100,000
11,000,000
Station 6
156,000
1,100,000+
1,100,000+
Station 7
1,100,000
1,100,000
460,000
Station 8
436,000,000
1,100,000
11,000,000
ro
vo
o
-------
99.99
99.9 99.8 99.S 99 98
95 90
80 70 60 50 40 30 20
1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.05 0.01
Figure 1
TOTAL IRON CONCENTRATION
BEAVER RIVER BASIN SAMPLING STATIONS
SEPTEMBER 1959 TO SEPTEMBER 1961
0.01 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1
2 S 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 95 98 99 99.S 99.8
Percent of Time Concentration Was Equal to Or Less Than Indicated Value
99.9
99.!
-------
99.99
99.9 99.8 99.5 99 98 95 90
80 70 60 50 40 30 20
1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.05 0.01
BOD CONCENTRATIONS
MAHONING RIVER SAMPLING STATIONS
SEPTEMBER 1959 TO SEPTEMBER 1961
>rr Station 5
0.01 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 5 10
Percent of Time
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 95 98 99 99.5
Concentration Was Equal to Or Less Than Indicated Value
99.8 99.9
99.95
-------
99.99
(N
CO
<0
p
*
CM
o>
6 °
o"
O
co
CO
«C
^
r>«
O
0.
,
"
,
; : .
; r-
' i
99.9 99.8 99.5 99 98 95 90
BEAVE
SEP1
1 ; ; '
l
- ; ,
-t - '
1
]
: :
;-;-
80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10
ri-^
Figure 3
BOD CONCENTRATIONS
R RIVER BASIN SAMPLING STATIONS
FEMBER 1959 TO SEPTEMBER 1961
i ^ I '
- i -J-
* h
1
1
i
h- i-
r-|-
i r
: 1
: ! ! !~~
,
.._
4
. ^
r^-7
1
- _
^.
. ,
] ;
. ,
1 '
. 1
, . ; i
^
, 1.-- ,
i rt-
, \~~ ;
i
^i ^
i . *^^
, i .
-~.
t
--
: !
! ' ' ''
1111
! '""^ ^~
i !
i i
1 . -( .
i ! 1 .
1 i ' \
. '^
^^
;- |- Station 1 ~r --
1 i i
i [ : i
^T±|^ ^
' \
, I '
1 i
---7*
^^^
... r] ..
\^-':T
' i . .
' ~h
! ; -
. '
: r-1-
~T ' '
i
r
~i~:
T"^
jX_>
***-
. i
; -^
>^^
_.__
JT'~
1 '
' 1
" ~
' ;
-r~r-
1^
^
-^-^
, ; ,
_^
:"
-- -
!~
' '..
- i
i
. 1_
i .
-.--
-4-
. i
-"TTT-
~ '
' :
j
-, .-
~^~3f
j^^-
--=-- -L
-.. . :
-= :
: ....
- ' i
:. -.
T -
~'r~r-~
: 1
: ' ' i
; ; 7 f
-r~T^T
. 1 , .
. t ; r
i i
-r
1 i '
^
^ ^
X^ i
'
7" :T~
"-:-.-, :
:
_^j_ ^
- ;
.......
.' '. -
I
-r~ -T
-r-
' 1 !
"' !
j-. '
r~~ ~
- ; ~
, ,
rH-h
-r-.jS*
^
^ r
\^r
- ~r-\
' I
_.__
i_:
: -
.' . ,
_
; . .
-r rr
, . ,
r_
,
r~
-rM-i-
1 'M
, . i ', '
,--r^
Stoti
' : ' '
-T-r T
I'LJ£
'jS '
/ i
' ^^
Xfr^
r ,
'-i*
^r rr
!. U-L"
~ - -~
:--:-:"
:
- .-.-
-r
TT^-r
"T
T i
~TT" i
"TT""^"'
^l-r^
! 1
. 1 :
i i II
- ' ^
',11
on 4
VH-
; '
H
!:-::,-
ir1-!-.
I 1 ':.'..
~ ----
: --i
~--
(
_,_; .J
!
,
. i
t: , -
: ' :
1 ' J >
_y^ .
/f-' ;
-r-f-i ^
7?
'^T'
I . <
' '>
~~-~T'~/~
\i-*^
l .^- ..
-r-t-T~r'
:_i -4.
1 i :
__,j.._
"_"""!"!
.: ..! h.
- -:j
-
i
'---
--J-
-. -
:J~
-M-l
T-;T
~~:~
. ._
---
. . ,
4 1._.
> i i
1 '~T
r
, ' ,
:~r~~t
-H
'-'--/
7^---y
-L_f_
'/
t~
--,
/
/*
....
:-
/ t,
'^4
fi
i~
/-"
(<---
totio
- - -^ -. -
.. ..... _
;- v
id
|:-i4-:~-~|
: : : "
::'
--H
;-i---
" " 1 :" i .":
' i 1
: l
- ;~ r -
1 ' 1
-r- -' --
1
' i ' '
- i . .
__!_ ^ . _
i i
. 1 ' '
T-H^"
^
vt^
/ '
fr-j ^
: : i L
[
-rr- 1 i
1 ; i !
-'-r-r-f-
-r '
n 2 ' '
" . I-
-~'^--^
L_.
J 2
f i ; '
'
i '
. ' -
LJ_' J
h. ,
:
^ ! H~r i '
i ' ' ' '
1 i ,
1
i i 1
i
! i
y&=
^
i ;
' "7
i
i i
!
1
: f '
;
i ' ' '
T-r~7 '
_i_4-_..
-i f r
jj
1 . 1
T , 't . - -
"i : j-77-r-
1 ' ' ' i
i
1 1
< i
!"
'r-i-T- -i ;
- : ,-
- ---
: ;r--
-' '. i !-
: ": --T~
-.-..:.. . -
' ' t
. __;_;
j_4-j_
: I .
;. ..,-_.
--..; -4 !:..:-:
_ j j
*
; i
i
.-!
- -: 1
-]
, '
" - -V
; . > ,
7~ r '"
Tr "
"":T:::
iiiir
0
-J
- . :
- I
T-^
'II
-. 'jr~
'-;-^-f
-. ; : :
1 i :
' , ,
"^r
, ~"-
-
- --!
L-r4-
---
- - -r ~ -
, :-
-++-
, - . __
:."-
5 0.2 0.1 0.05 0.01
' 1 ' '
H-- U-
1
" ^
1
, .
^
T ~ "^
1 1
-j 1
_i_4 ,
-H-
T
h
j ; ^{ '
: : :
~i r -
_j }
M : "i
-~ f
- T r
..._
.,;.J
1
j :
': f"
. ,....
.
;
]
'<
r
-^
i
-' 1
,
- 1
' " '
-. j :
|
i >
~
,
--
-
--
, !
- .- t ~
-r-i 1
'
j ;
i :
- i
_._
-j. : .
ro
vo
00
31 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 5 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 95 98 99 99.5 99.8 99.9 99.9S
Percent of Time Concentration Wai Equal to Or Less Than Indicated Value
-------
99.99
99.9 99.8 99.5 99 98 95 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20
10
2 1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.05 0.01
o
1
01
en
I
TJ
i
o
c
o
O
PERCENT OF DISSOLVED OXYGEN SATURATION
BEAVER RIVER BASIN SAMPLING STATIONS =
SEPTEMBER 1959 TO SEPTEMBER 1961
..... i ;___ ......
0.01 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5
1 2
Percent
5
of Time
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Percent Saturation V/as Equal to Or Less Than Indicated
90
Value
98 99 99.5 99.8 99.9
99.9S
-------
N
WASTE DISCHARGES TO THE
MAHONING RIVER BASIN
IN PENNSYLVANIA
JAN. 1965
2 MILES
LOCATION PLAN
?(
.BEAVER
FALLS
LEGEND
I-VILLA MARIA SCHOOL
2-MOHAWK AREA SCHOOL
3-NEW CASTLE
4-CARBON LIMESTONE
5-VANPORT STONE
6- AMERICAN CYANAMID
7-ROBINSON INDUSTRIAL WASTE
O-SEWAGE DISCHARGE
O-INDUSTRIAL WASTE DISCHARGE
BASIN OUTLINE
ro
vo
ui
-------
LOCATION MAP 296
STREAM SAMPLING STATIONS
BEAVER RIVER BASIN
JAN. 1985
-------
297
... Applause ...
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you, Dr. Wilbar.
Are there any comments or questions?
MR. POSTON: In the last conclusion
here, it said "It is evident that in addition to water
pollution abatement efforts, further water resource develop-
ment is needed to assure the full range of beneficial uses
of the Mahoning River." Does development include increased
waste treatment requirements such as perhaps chlorination
of all municipal wastes?
DR. WILBAR: I can't entirely answer
this. I will ask Mr. Lyon to help me, "but it would
include further flow augmentation, I think, specifically
Mr. Lyon, do you want to add to that? Mr. Lyon is our
director of the Sanitary Engineering Department.
MR. LYON: I think you have
answered the question. We have experience with similar
streams that have this heavy industrial use in Pennsylvania.
It is abundantly clear that additional flow regulation in
streams like this is essential if the industries in the
municipalities grow.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Mr. Lyon, I think you
should take that comment in light of the portion of the
statute I read right after the presentation of the slides
which indicated the limitation we have on providing augmented
-------
298
low flow and the interpretation put on it by our technical
staff which is secondary treatment is appropriate before
additional augmented low flow can be provided.
DR. ARNOLD: Dr. Wilbar, may I ask
a question?
DR. WILBAR: Just a minute until
Mr. Lyon responds to that.
MR. LYON; In answer to your
question, Mr. Stein, we understand what the Federal policy
is in this regard. However, I don*t believe that the
Federal Government intended at that time to say that
irrespective of what the problems are, this policy will
be black or white. It seems to me that in a situation like
this there is a very pressing need for rather complete
economic analysis as to the benefits of augmenting flow
versus the benefits of providing additional treatment.
This is certainly one of the things that should have been
considered in a situation like this.
DR. WILBAR: Yes, and I might
add that we are not only considering the Federal law here,
we are considering the needs and all ways of meeting the
needs, whether it be through Federal law or state law or
ORSANCO or by, simply by some corporation.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: I would certainly
-------
299
agree with that, Dr. wilbar, except, Mr. Lyon, I would ike
to indicate the position you have taken is certainly a very
logical one. However, the Congress has spoken of it. They
have indicated that augmented low flows will not be a
substitute for adequate waste treatment at the source.
These views were presented to the Congress when the Congress
considered the legislation. I would suggest, if you feel that
the legislation doesn't properly express the views that you
may have, or you think there is more flexibility, the proper
forum for that might be the legislature, the National legis-
lature, rather than us because this is a question that has
been thoroughly considered by the Congress.
DR. WILBAR: It may be, Mr. Stein,
that even with adequate treatment at the sources there is
still a need for the flow.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: No, I think we are all
agreed with Dr. Wilbar. I don*t think there is any disagree-
ment on that. Once that obtains, certainly if something has
to be done to need flow augmentation, that should be done.
DR. ARNOLD: Dr. Wilbar, as Secretary
/
of Health of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, it is your
opinion that the waste discharges from Ohio into the Mahoning
River' are, in fact, endangering the health of the people of
Pennsylvania?
-------
300
DR. WILBAR: Well, Dr. Arnold, there
is some pollution from the Ohio coming into Pennsylvania.
We have had no outbreaks of disease from this pollution
and, as has been pointed out so well by the Ohio repre-
sentatives, the sewage is getting to a point and as soon
as the Youngstown plant is open, will be a point where, I
think, the danger from any bacterial viral infection will
be almost nil.
First the matter of iron and acid and other
industrial wastes are not apt to make people ill but they
are a nuisance and we also feel, as I have stated, that
the program in Ohio, what's been done and what has been
promised to be done in the near future, is a good one
which should considerably improve the quality of the river.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Are there any further
questions?
DR. ARNOLD: No.
MR. CLEARY: Mr. Chairman, may I
make a comment? I heard your comment that the Congress
decided a policy, but it is your interpretation of that policy
I think that is in question here. Your technical staff
has decided that 85 percent removal must constitute adequate
treatment. I think that's a matter that is open to question
in terms of the frame of reference that Mr. Lyon pointed out.
So I don't think we could be completely satisfied over the
-------
301
fact that an administrative decision has been made as an
interpretation of what Congress meant. I think many of us
might find room for disagreement with that technical
interpretation. I just want to make it clear the Congress
didn't say 85 percent removal. Congress said adequate
treatment of sewage and you have interpreted that to mean
85 percent removal. I think that is the question at issue,
as I understand, Mr. Lyon was endeavoring to present to us.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Mr. Cleary, I am glad
you brought that out. I think we well understand that but
as you recognize, this provision has been in the law since
1961. The interpretation, if you will, was made shortly
after that time. We have gone before the Congress each
year for appropriations. Just recently the Senate public
Works Committee has considered amendments to our Act and
amended the Act, and the House is now considering amendments
to the Act. As far as I know, in legislative history and
interpretation, it seems to me that no one has asked for a
revision of this or questioned this, and by the fact that
this is being left alone, it would seem to me that there is
an enforcement of the Federal administrative policy on this.
This isn't as if the legislation hadn't been thoroughly gone
over and revamped.
Now, again, what I am suggesting is when something
-------
302
like this develops, I am happy to hear this and bring your
views back, although I think you are wall capable of bringing
these views back yourself. But I want to point out, as Mr.
Cleary and I think Mr. Lyon well knows, someone else in the
program made that interpretation. I didn't do it.
The point is now that with all this gone, I don't
know that this is the proper form where we can effect that
interpretation or changes. I think you have to look for
another form.
MR. CLEARY: Excuse me, Mr. Chairman,
but this may not be the proper form, but you are the one that
brought it up.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Excuse me,sir, I have
heard references to low flow augmentation all the time.
I am afraid this was brought up in the and the report
will bear this out -- by the states, by the industries,
by just the Pennsylvania report; all talking in terms of
low flow augmentation. And not only are we getting manna
from heaven but we are going to get water from uncle Sam,
and I just wanted to tell you what the ground rules we
are living under are so we can approach the facts of life
with a little realism.
MR. LYON: Mr. Stein, I don't
believe that Congress intended to say that 85 B.O.D.
removal would be necessary if the flow augmentation was
-------
303
going to help anything about the industrial waste problem,
I am not saying that the 85 percent removal general policy
is not a good one; all I am saying is that there is just a
possibility that the flow out in the Mahoning would be
needed because of the sewage problem, because of the industrial
waste problem, and it would seem to me an economical analysis
and technical analysis would determine this, but it may not
be necessary, possibly, to provide more sewage treatment and
it shouldn't be done simply because somebody made a bill
that it be 85 if 85 is not needed.
It may be needed but we should make a deter-
mination and not blindly follow that rule.
CHAIRMAN STEIN; I don't think anybody
blindly follows a rule, otherwise we wouldn't be here today.
MR. POSTON: I would like to pursue
Dr. Arnold's question relative to the quality of the water
at Beaver Falls and particularly under your recent survey
data, Dr. Wilbar, on page 17. And I would read. It says:
"The concentrations of iron, b.o.d., and dissolved oxygen
were compared to curves which illustrate the range of the
values recorded during the two-year survey. The values
recorded in 1965 are well above the median values of the
two-year survey period, and concentrations of iron and b.o.d.
were particularly high."
This, am I interpreting this right, that this
-------
304
infers that the quality now in 1965 is probably not as good
as it was at the time of the earlier survey two years ago?
DR. WILBAR: Well, this was taken,
as you noted, from my reading, just when a high flow
followed a low flow and, as they say, it may reflect the
effects of flushout of sludge deposit which accumulated
during the period of low flow. It just was one time, a
one-time sampling. It wasn't over a period of time so it*s
hardly an entirely fair comparison.
But it, of course, and on the whole, is hasn*t
shown very much improvement. We have to say that. But
I also point out that a good deal of the treatment which
was pointed out today, brought out today, has just been
put into effect.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Do you have anything
else? Are there any other comments?
Thank you,Dr. Wilbar, for an excellent and
comprehensive report,.
DR. WILBAR: May I call on three
people?
CHAIRMAN STEIN: We will now pause a
moment before we go on because I think we are going to have
a problem as to time with the conferees. We are dealing
with a question of time. It is 5:30 now. I would like to
make an appraisal of the time and see what we can do this
-------
305
evening before we adjourn.
There is one man here from HHPA who says he could
be over in two minutes and do you -- how long will these
three people take?
DR. WTLBAR: Under about 30 minutes
among them.
CHAIRMAN STEIN:
What's the view of the
conferees? Do you think we should handle this for another
30 minutes or not?
MR. CLEARY: Mr. Stein, speaking for
myself, I hope you don't have any problem with me. As a
conferee, I am willing to stay here and carry on as long
as you want to.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Will the HHFA man be able
to stay here for 30 minutes? All right.
DR. WILBAR: There is one thing I
wanted to add as long as we are talking about the conduct
of the conference, Mr. Chairman, since Mr. Holl and I will
not be here tomorrow. I would hope that no definite
conclusions from the conference would be arrived at and
publicized tomorrow but that all of us would have a chance
to review the record and then get together and make these
conclusions in some not too far distant but later date.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Do you want to call the
three people? I don't know that you can make a determination
-------
306
on that until we hear what the other people are going to say.
At least I wouldn't be able to make such a determination.
V
It may be apparent at the end of the day tomorrow. But I
wouldn't know what the conclusions will be. The Federal
people may have one view. You may have another. The State
of Ohio may have an entirely different view from your state.
And it may not make much difference when the conclusionsare
reached, just so long as we record what the respective views
are.
On the other hand, there may be a reasonable
chance for an area of agreement in the large segments of
the reports that are given and in the appraisal of the
situation. And until the Federal people have given that,
I don't know how close or how far apart we will be. I
think the representatives will understand your point of view
and your desire on that, and I think when the time comes the
other conferees will be able to assist us in making this
decision.
DR. WIIBAR: All right. I would like
to introduce the Mayor of the City of New Castle, Pennsylvania,
Mr. John Jordan, who has a statement to make on behalf of the
City of New Castle.
MAYOR JORDAN: Thank you very much,
Dr. Wilbar. My name is John C. Jordan, I am the Mayor of
the City of New Castle, Lawrence County, Pennsylvania.
-------
307
Mr. Stein, Dr. Arnold, Dr. Wilbar and conferees, ladies and
gentlemen; The hour is late and Dr. Wilbar has certainly
summed up his position of the State of Pennsylvania which
certainly includes the City of New Castle, so I will be very
brief and I can state very simply in a brief way the position
in regard to the pollution of the Mahoning River so far as
the City of New Castle is concerned.
I was most gratified as all people in New Castle
have been of the recent completion of the Youngstown sewage
treatment plant. This certainly is most appreciated and
gratifying to us in New Castle.
As Mayor Schryver said, he had no problems since
he was upstream and Mayor Flask said he had very few problems
because he was downstream. Maybe that's why I have so many
serious problems because I am downstream from both of them'".
But very seriously, I can say that the New Castle
plant discharges on the Mahoning River about one-half mile
upstream from its mouth and currently serves 55,000 people
and currently was designed to serve somewhere in the neighbor-
hood of 65,000. However, the Sanitary Water Board recently
granted a permit to the City of New Castle treatment plant
to improve treatment facilities. New plants have been
designed to provide intermediate treatment for a 1980
anticipated population of 90,000.
Because of the design of the plant, it provides
-------
308
for complete treatment of sewage for approximately 45,000
people. The plant will be capable of providing treatment
approaching complete treatment for a number of years. As
the waste loads increase, naturally efficiency will decrease
to a minimum of 65 percent B.O.D. removal at the designed
population maximum of 90,000.
I am happy to report that we will open bids for a
$3,700,000 sewage treatment facility this coming Wednesday
and anticipate construction in late March or early April.
And I think I can sum it up very well by saying
that if the taxpayers of the City of New Castle, as the
people the taxpayers of the City of Youngstown have faced
their responsibilities in the pollution of the Mahoning, we
only see fit that this is reasonable and just to assume that
others will face their responsibilities as well.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Are there any comments
or questions? If not, Dr. Wilbar.
DR. WILBAR: Thank you very much.
Mayor Jordan. I next call on Mr. Seth Myers. He has been
active Nationally in state and wildlife affairs. He is
Chairman of the National Wildlife Federation of the Penn-
sylvania Federation of Sportmen's Clubs. He lives in
Pennsylvania near the Ohio boarder and he is representing the
Pennsylvania Federation of the Sportmen's Clubs today.
-------
309
MR. MYERS: Mr. Chairman, gentlemen,
I think the worst thing that happens in America is for a
people not to be fully informed on what is being done. I
have gathered data here today which I believe the people of
Pennsylvania had in their possession prior to a meeting on
January the 2l|th, they would have given outdoor recreation
a little more consideration.
I think nearly everyone is interested in the
outdoor recreation future and those people over there look
at Mahoning River coming into Pennsylvania and they are
most unhappy. Back some years ago, I was President of the
Pennsylvania Outdoor Writers Association and I was asked to
secure a speaker and, at that time, the Sports Afield
magazine had assigned a very good friend of mine from
Philadelphia, Bill Wolfe, famous author, to tour the entire
United States and do a series of articles on the running
sewera of our land. Perhaps some of you read them. They
ran for 10 issues; later became a book which can be bought.
And I asked Bill Wolfe to be the speaker at a convention in
Harrisburg and he came and at the -- during the talk, he
made the statement at that time that the Mahoning River
was the worst polluted stream that he found in the United
States. It was at that time so filthy and so loaded -- and
this was 1950 -- it was so loaded that it did not freeze all
winter and I am not sure that it freezes over now. Prom the
-------
310
appearance of it and from what our outdoor recreation people
have told us, it still is polluted.
I have been introduced here. My name is Seth L.
Myers of Sharon, Pennsylvania. I am the duly elected
representative to the National wildlife Federation of the
SportmenVs Clubs, Inc. I am authorized to speak on behalf
of our 724 affiliated clubs with a total membership of
136,427 paid up members in 1964 with regard to the enforcement
of the Federal Pollution Control Act in the Mahoning River
which flows into Pennsylvania from the State of Ohio.
People in Pennsylvania are well aware of the
pollution of the Mahoning River, for many years have exerted
every possible effort to having the destruction causes of the
condition corrected without any real success. And, as I say,
I repeat we did not know of your all-out effort here,none of
the delegates present at this convention knew of it, and I cer-
tainly didn*t, and I live just 14 miles from here in Sharon.
I knew there was an effort being made to the extent that I
have heard, the data presented here today, mighty few people
in Pennsylvania outside of the Honorable Charles Wilbar knew.
As Secretary of Health he was in a position to
know that a major attempt was being made but again we did
not get that out, and had there been news releases sent out,
I think possibly the local people here might well issue
some authentic news releases and authentic data which the
-------
311
Youngstown Sheet and Tube Vice President presented today.
That is a marvelous program which mighty few people heard
of and I think it is important.
The statewide federation has been petitioned by
its Lawrence County Council affiliate to use every honorable
approach in this final effort to clean up this most unbearable
violation of the said Federal Water Pollution Control Act,
and by unanimous vote of its membership at a meeting on
January 24, 1965, authorized me to present this statement
before this hearing in Youngstown, Ohio, on this l6th or
17th day of February, 1965.
Just one or two more comments I would like to make.
This is not directed at Ohio or the effort that has been made
here, but the National Wildlife Federation has, for 25 years,
26 years, felt that pollution of the public waters cannot
be controlled through state legislation; it must be done
from the Federal level. There have been many, many con-
servationists who have plugged for that. They have fought to
have this law passed in the Congress and, incidentally, our
wonderful Michael Kirwan voted - or this law, and I see no
reason why the law doesn'" apply everywhere in the continental
V,.'' 1 .
United States.
I just wanted to make those comments for the
million sportsmen in Pennsylvania and for the 12 million
citizens in Pennsylvania.
-------
312
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you very much, sir.
Are there any comments or questions? If not,
Dr. Wilbar.
DR. UILBAR: Mr. Chairman, the Penn-
sylvania Division of the Isaak Walton League will file a
statement for the record.* It will not present it. We have
only one other statement to be made on behalf of interests
in Pennsylvania in this area and this will be by Mr. Samuel
McBricle, manager of the Beaver Palls Municipal Authority,
but his is somewhat longer and he has another dinner meeting
tonight so he has asked to be put on tomorrow instead. And
so with his presentation tomorrow, this will conclude
Pennsylvania's part of the presentation at this conference,
and I want to thank Dr. Arnold and Ohio for yielding to
Pennsylvania so that we may get our presentation in.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: May we now see if we
can call on Mr. J. J. Sullivan, Chief Engineer of the
Community Facilities Administration,
MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Chairman, ladies
and gentlemen, I hope I can be as brief as Mayor Jordan was.
Basically, Robert C. Weaver of the Highland Home Financing
Agency requested me to present this information to this con-
ference.
*Mr. Outright, President of the Ohio Division, Sir Isaak
Walton League, will not submit statement.
-------
313
The Highland Home Finance Agency through the
Community Facilities Administration has worked through the
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare to supply loan
funds for public utility or public facility projects, if
any of the communities involved need financing, we are pre-
pared to help them. Also, we have a program of advance
banking whereby communities may take advantage of our
program and prepare plans for community facilities. These
programs have certain requirements but the basic thing is
that 50,000 population or less, a community of that size
may band with other communities under authority and be
eligible for loan funds under our programs.
The address for this area is our Housing Home
Financing Agency, 360 North Michigan Avenue, in Chicago,
Illinois.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: Thank you very much,
Mr. Sullivan. Are there any comments or questions?
We do have two letters here and I would just
file them for the record to appear in the record as read
and the conferees can read them or, if you wish, I would
read them here.
One is from the State Conservationist, Raymond s.
Brown of Columbus, Ohio, addressed to Mr, Poston, and the
other letter is from the Manager-Director of the Youngstown
-------
314
Merchants Council. Now, I would recommend that these letters
be inserted in the record at this point and the conferees
can read them and, if you want, at any point for these to
be read aloud, I will be happy to do that tomorrow morning.
(The letters referred to are as follows):
311 Old Federal Building, Columbus, Ohio 43215
February 15, 1965.
H. W. Poston, Regional Program Director
Water Supply and Pollution Control
Department of Health, Education and Welfare
433 West Van Buren Street, Room 712
Chicago, Illinois 60607
Your Reference: WS&PC
Dear Mr. Poston:
We appreciate the opportunity to attend the
conference on the pollution of the waters of the Mahoning
River and its tributaries. The interest and responsibility
of the Soil Conservation Service, United States Department
of Agriculture, in the control and prevention of the pollu-
tion of these waters are in the area of erosion control
and prevention of sedimentation.
The Soil Conservation Service provides technical
assistance to land owners through local soil and water con-
servation districts for the planning and application of
conservation measures which help control erosion and reduce
-------
315
the amount of sediment reaching the streams. Soil and water
conservation districts in this basin in both Ohio and Penn-
sylvania have active programs at this time. The Soil Con-
servation Service also administers the Watershed Protection
and Flood Prevention Act (PL 566). However, no applications
for assistance have been received for any part of the Mahoning
River Watershed. Such projects can be effective in controlling
sediment and in limiting areas affected by sediment-laden
flood waters.
As interst and action increase in the control and
prevention of pollution in the waters of the Mahoning River
and its tributaries, the Soil Conservation Service stands
ready to participate in every way possible.
Sincerely yours, Raymond S. Brown, State
Conservationist.
Youngstown Merchants Council, 125 West Commerce
Street, Youngstown 3, Ohio, February 16, 1965.
U.S. Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare, Public Health Service, Region V, Chicago, Illinois.
Re; Statement on Quality of Interstate Waters -
Mahoning River, Ohio - Pennsylvania
Gentlemen-
It can be truthfully said that the retail mer-
chants of this area fully back the program of everyone,
-------
316
including our governmental agencies, to strive for and
effect maximum preservation and beautification of our
natural resources, rivers, forests and all for our pleasure,
recreation, enjoyment, etc. They, however, are businessmen
and well aware that in the early stages of our industrial
development and expansion, many major industries established
themselves on the banks of our rivers, because of the need for
water as water, water for drainage, and even water for trans-
portation. This movement by industry to water still continues:,,
whether it be to lakes, waterways or the seas.
Yes, the Mahoning River is now still a dirty
river even though many recent major programs have gone far
to reduce pollution. We feel that given ample time and
with help, our industries and communities will anxiously
and sincerely work toward the goal of having our river pollu-
tion minimized to a more than satisfactory condition.
However, it must be kept in mind that this valley comprises
the heart of the steel industry, that the Mahoning River is
a so-called aqueduct, not a river in the true sense of a
river, so recognized by our Government as a means of supplying
sufficient cool water to the steel plants on a continuing flow
basis, and also as an exit aqueduct to take out hot water
and the drainage residues of these plants.
The water storage reservoirs, such as Berlin Dam,
Mosquito Creek Reservoir and the West Branch Reservoir, built
-------
317
by our Federal Government to provide the necessary cool water
during the summer months and dry periods to our steel plants,
have also been planned to provide our beauty and recreation
spots.
We ask that much consideration and practical thinking
be given to this worthy program of non-pollution, beautifica-
tion and recreation for which all of us strive, and that our
badly needed industries are not impaired in their operations
as these non-pollution programs are effected.
Respectfully submitted, (Signed) Carl M. Wolter,
Managing Director.
CHAIRMAN STEIN: With that, I think we will
stand recessed until 9:30 tomorrow morning, the same room.
(Whereupon, at 6:30 p. m., the conference in
the above-entitled matter was adjourned until 9s30 a. m.,
Wednesday, February 17> 1965.)
ft U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1965 O - 795-163
-------
'.2--A
APPEARANCES:
Earl J. Anderson
Regional Program Director
Water Supply and Pollution
Control Region II
Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare
New York, New York
Todd A. Cayre
S. A Sanitary Engineer
Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare
Chicago, Illinois
Henning Eklund
Chief, Enforcement Section
Revion V
Public Health Service
Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare
Chicago, Illinois 60607
Edward V. Qeismar
Sr, Sanitary Engineer
U.S. Public Health Service
Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare
New York City, New York
Michael E. Godsi1
Sanitary Engineer
U.S. Public Health Service
Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare
Wheeling, West Virginia
Ben J. Gryctko
Water Pollution Control Advisory
Board
Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare
Washington, D. C.
Raymond A. Haik
Member, Water Pollution Control
Advisory Board
Minneapolis, Minnesota
George A. Jutze
Deputy Chief
Field Investigations Section
Abatement Branch
Division of Air Pollution
U.S. Public Health Department
Department of Health,Education,
and Welfare
Cincinnati, Ohio
P. W. Kittrell
Public Health Engineer
U.S. Public Health Service
Department of HeaTth,Education,
and Welfare
Cincinnati, Ohio
M. LeBosquet
Sanitary Engineer Director
U.S. Public Health Service
Department of Health,Education,
and Welfare
Washington, D.C.
Kenneth M. Mackenthum
Aquatic Biologist
U.S. Public Health Service
Robert A. Taft Sanitary
Engineering Center
Department of Health,Education,
and Welfare
Cincinnati, Ohio
Clark W. Mangun, Jr.,M.D.
Regional Health Director
Public Health Service .
Region V
Chicago, Illinois
James 0. McDonald
Construction Program Repre-
sentative
U.S. Public Health Service
Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare
Chicago, Illinois
-------
2-B
Lehn J. Potter
Public Health Engineer
U.S. Public Health Service
Department of Health,Education,
and Welfare
Cincinnati, Ohio
L. L. Purkerson
Microbiologist
Ohio River Basin Project
U.S. Public Health Service
Department of Health,Education,
and Welfare
Wheeling, West Virginia
R. W. Schrecongost
Sanitary Engineer
U.S. Public Health Service
Department of Health,Education,
and Welfare
Wheeling Field Station
Wheeling, West Virginia
C. E. Sponagle
Industrial Wastes Engineer
U.S. Public Health Service
Department of Health,Education,
and Welfare
Robert A. Taft Sanitary
Engineering Center
Cincinnati, Ohio
R. A. Vanderhoof
Project Director
Ohio River Basin Project
U.S. Public Health Service
Department of Health,Education,
and Welfare
Cincinnati, Ohio
Graham Walton
U.S. Public Health Service
Robert A. Taft Sanitary
Engineering Center
Department of Health,Education,
and Welfare
Cincinnati, Ohio
E. W. Arnold, M.D.
Director
Ohio Department of Health
Columbus, Ohio
Robert E. Barker
Superintendent, Waste Water
Treatment Dept.
Warren, Ohio
George Bindas
County Commissioner
Mahoning County
Youngstown, Ohio
Richard M. Boardman
Chief, Stream Quality Section
Pennsylvania Dept. of Health
Harrisburg, Pa.
Robert J. Boes
Chemical Engineer
ORSANCO
Cincinnati, Ohio
Sheldon G. Boone
Asst. State Conservationist
U.S. Soil Conservation Service
Columbus, Ohio
Larry G. Brake
Assistant Attorney General
State of Ohio
Columbus, Ohio
Walter Brazon
Civil Engineer
U.S. Army Engineer District
Pittsburgh, Pa.
Edw. J. Cleary
Executive Director and
Chief Engineer ORSANCO
Cincinnati, Ohio
Theodore P. Clista
Sanitary Engineer
Penna. Department of Health
Meadville, Pa.
Omar Cochran
City Sanitary Engineer
Trumble City, Ohio
-------
2-C
Charles R. Collier
Hydraulic Engineer
U.S. Geological Survey
Columbus, Ohio 43209
Larry Cook
.Secretary, Ohio Coal Industrial
Water Pollution Committee
Columbus, Ohio 43215
M. E. Doyle
Sanitary Engineer
DCS/CE CONAC U.S. Air Force
Robins Air Force Base, Ga.
Frank W. Dressier
Executive Director
Water Resources Assoc.-Delac
Philadelphia, Pa, 19107
David A. Dunsmore
Assistant Engineer
ORSANCO
Cincinnati, Ohio
Robert G. Emrich
Chief Sanitarian
Trumbull County Health Debt.
Warren, Ohio
J. W. Ferguson
Field Station Director
Wheeling Field Station
Wheeling, West Virginia
Sidney Franklin, M.D.
Health Commissioner
City of Youngstown
Youngstown, Ohio.
George B. Garrett
Asst. Engineer
Ohio Dept. of Health
Columbus, Ohio
Richard W. Gilbert
District Sanitary Engineer
Ohio Dept. of Health
Columbus, Ohio
J. Paul Good
Office Manager
Mahoning Agricultural
Stabilization and ;
Conservation Service
Canfield, Ohio
Sam Gould, Jr.
Mahoning County Engineer
Youngstown, Ohio
Bruce R. Graybill
Supt.,, Water and pollution
Control
Alliance, Ohio
William M. Gross
Asst. Attorney General
Commonwealth of Penna.
Harrisburg, Pa.
L. T. Hagerty
Asst. Engineer
Ohio Dept. of Health
Columbus, Ohio
G. A. Hall
Engineer Secretary
Ohio Dept. of Health
Water Pollution Control Board
Columbus, Ohio :
Richard D. Hall
Engineer
Ohio Dept. of Health
Columbus, Ohio
Douglas C. Hasbrpuck
P. District Sanitary Engineer
Ohio Dept. of Health
Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio
T. R. Haseltine
Partner, The Chester Engineers
Upper Ohio Valley Assoc.
Pittsburg 12, pa.
-------
2-D
Donald D. Heffelfinger
Secretary and Chief Engineer
Mahoning Valley Sanitary
District
Youngstown, Ohio
Walter N. Heine
Regional Sanitary Engineer
Region III
Pa. Dept. of Health
Meadville, Pa.
William R. Hill
Superintendent, Water Pollution
Contro]
Youngstown, Ohio
Barton A. Holl
Chairman, ORSANCO
Ohio Water Pollution Control
Board
Logan, Ohio
Wade Hoover
As s t. Superintendent
Water Dept.
Alliance, Ohio
Robert K. Horton
Asst. Director ORSANCO
Cincinnati 2, Ohio
Robert L. John
Consulting Engineer
Michael Baker, Jr., Inc.
Beaver Falls Municipal Authority
Beaver Falls, Pa.
William L. Klein
Chemi s t-Biologi s t
ORSANCO
Cincinnati 2, Ohio
Jerry Knight
Executive Secretary
Youngstown Metropolitan Area
Development Citizens Committee
Youngstown, Ohio
Eddie Kohl
Project Supervisor
Ohio Reclamation Assn.
New Philadelphia, Ohio
K. L. Kollar
Director, Water Industries Div,
Dept. of Commerce (BDSA)
Washington, D.C.
Nicholas J. Lardieri
Water Resources Engineer
Delaware River Basin
Commission
Trenton, New Jersey
K. M. Lloyd
Secretary
Mahoning Valley Industrial
Council
Youngstown, Ohio 44503
H. A. Lucas
Project Leader-Ohio River
Basin Study
U.S. Forest Service
Indianapolis, Indiana
Walter A. Lyon
Director, Div. of Sanitary
Engineering
Pa. Dept. of Health
Harrisburg, Pa.
Philip Majorhorn
Industrial Waste Specialist
Girard Waste Water Treatment
Plant
Girard, Ohio
F. W. Montanari
Asst. Conservationist
N.Y. State Conservation Dept.
Albany, New York
S. P. McBride
Mgr., Beaver Falls Municipal
Authority
Beaver Falls, Pa.
-------
Dr. M. K. McKay
ORSANCO-Pa. Commissioner
Pittsburgh, Pa.
William J. McNally
Administrator
Cleveland Plumbing Industry
Cleveland, Ohio
Fred Merrill
Soil Conservationist
U.S. Soil Conservation Service
Carifield, Ohio
Max L. Mitchell
Chief Engineer
Miami Conservancy District
Dayton, Ohio 45402
J. Paul Mossman
Executive Vice President
Youngstown Area
Chamber of Commerce
Youngstown, Ohio
George Newell
Asst. Engineer
Ohio Dept. of Health
Columbus, Ohio
John Palermo
County Commission
Youngstown, Ohio
Nick S, Panno
Sanitarian
Girard, Ohio
E. B. Ransom
Engineer
Ohio Dept. of Health
Columbus, Ohio
John E. Richards
Engineer.in Charge
Sewage and Industrial Wastes
Ohio Dept. of Health
Columbus, Ohio
J. Phillip Richler
City Engineer
Youngstown, Ohio
2-E
Merrill L. Riehl
Superintendent
Water Purification Plant
Mahonihg Valley Sanitary
District
Youngstown, Ohio
Art Robinson
Director of Public Relations
Ohio Dept. of Health
Columbus, Ohio
J. C. Ryan
Director
Mahoning County Planning ;
Commission
Youngstown, Ohio
James J. Sullivan
Director of Engineering
Dr. Robert Weaver, Administra-
tor, Housing & Home Finance
Agency
Washington, D.C.
Sam Vivelo
Superintendent
Girard Waste Water Treatment
Girard, Ohio
Fred H. Waring
Secretary
ORSANCO
Columbus, Ohio 43214
F. M. Warnement
Air & Water Pollution Control
Div.
Acting Commissioner
City of Toledo
Toledo, Ohio
James E. Saari, LTJG
United States Coast Guard
Cleveland, Ohio
Dale E. Whitesell
Chief
Ohio Div. of Wildlife
Columbus, Ohio
-------
2-F
Carl M. Wolter
Executive Mgr.-Mgr. Director
Downtown Board of Trade
Youngstown Merchants Council
Youngstown, Ohio
Thomas D. Anderson
Production Engineer
Packard Electric Div.
General Motors Corp.
Warren, Ohio
R. F. Armitage
District Manager
Republic Steel Corp.
Warren, Ohio
B. R. Atkinson
Republic Steel
Cleveland, Ohio
W. H. Baldwin
Sales Engineer
General Electric Company
Youngstown, Ohio
C. A. Bishop
Director, Chemical Engineering
Div,
U.S. Steel
Pittsburgh, Pa. 15219
A. D« Brandt
Mgr. of Industrial Health
Engineering
Bethlehem Steel Co.
Bethlehem, Pa.
Howard E. Brown
Research Engineer
Harens & Emerson
Warren, Ohio
P. L. Bruhn
General Manager
Republic Steel Corp.
Mfg. Division
Youngstown, Ohio
R. L. Fawcett
Asst. Superintendent
Industrial Waste D.S.
Plastics Division
Allied Chemical
Philadelphia 37, Pa.
R. H. Ferguson
Asst. Director
Industrial Relations
Republic Steel Corp.
Cleveland, Ohio 44101
H. M. Filkins
Mgr., Plant Engineering
General Electric Co.
Cleveland, Ohio
C. W. Fisher
Mgr., Effluent Services
Kpppers Company inc.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
R. H. Frushour
General Superintendent
Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co.
Youngstown, Ohio
L. H. Futrell
Plant Superintendent
Allied Chemical Corp.
Struthers, Ohio
A. E. Gregg
Works Manager
Pittsburgh Steel Co.
Warren, Ohio
Ernst P. Hall
Consolidation Coal Co.
Pittsburgh, Pa. 15219
R. L. Harbaugh
Asst. to Vice President and
Manufacturing Research
Inland Steel Co.
E. Chicago, Indiana
Dan Hartman
Supt, of Utilities
National Steel Corp.
Portage, Indiana
-------
Robert Hileman
Chemist & Chief Operator
Warren Waste Water Treatment
Warren, Ohio
N. J. Hitz
Ashland Oil & Refining Co.
Louisville, Kentucky
Michael B. Hornak
Senior Research Engineer
Interlake Steel Corp.
Cleveland, Ohio 44132
William E. Hughes
Sales Engineer
Calgon Corp.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
K. G. Jackson
Attorney
U. S. Steel Corp.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
Gerald L. Johnston
Controller
Builders Co., Inc.
Youngstown, Ohio
Jack J. Jones
General Supervisor Construction
U. S. Steel Corp.
Youngstown, Ohio
W. H. Jukkola
Supervisor-Chemical Services
Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
H. J. Karsten
District Engineer
Jufilco Puller Co.
Cleveland, Ohio
S. W. Kittredge
Asst. Chief Engineer
Sharon Steel Corp.
Sharon, Pa.
Robert G. Klaussei
Rackoff Associates
Cleveland, Ohio
2-G
Dr. David L. McBride
Research Engineer
Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co.
Youngstown, Ohio
W. P. MeShane
Director of Chemical Services
Pittsburgh Steel Co.
Monessen, Pa.
H. L. Milligan
Research
Youngstown Steel
Youngstown, Ohio
John W. Mills
Assistant Counsel
Republic Steel Corp.
Cleveland, Ohio
Gordon Mitchell
Supt., Industrial Relations
Republic Steel
Youngstown, Ohio
Donald J. Motz
Waste Control Engineer
Shenango Incorporated
Pittsburgh, Pa.
Walter Nummela
Research Supervisor
Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co.
Youngstown, Ohio
Edgar G. Paulson
Mgr., Process & Waste Water
Engineering
Calgon Corp.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
Grant A. Pettit
Industrial Waste Control
Engineer
Armco Steel Corp.
Middletown, Ohio
Jack Phelan
Engineer
Nalco
J. R. Philips, Mgr., Youngstown
District, Republic Steel Corp.
Youngstown, Ohio
-------
2-H
Robert J. Quinn
Ohio Valley Water Sanitation
Federal Paper Bd. Co. Inc
Steubenville, Ohio
Arnold Rathje
Industrial Hygienist
General Electric Co.
Cleveland, Ohio
John H. Robertson
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
Newton Square, Pa.
R. F. Rocheleau
Waste Consultant
E. I. DuPont
Engineering Dept.
Wilmington, Delaware
Paul N. Romack
Sales Mgr. - Pittsburgh
Centri-Spray Corp.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
George M. Rosengarten
Coordinator-Waste Abatement
Chemicals Div. - Union Carbide
Corp.
S. Charleston, West Virginia
Edward Salt
Editor
Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co.
Youngstown, Ohio
W. P. Schambra
Dow Chemical Co.
Midland, Michigan
N. G. Selby
Chief Chemist
Sharon Steel Corp.
Farrell, Pa.
Wm. M. Smith
Supervisor, Industrial Health
Engineering
Weifton Steel Co.
Weirton, West Virginia
John R. Stubbles
Senior Research Engineer
Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co,
Poland, Ohio
John R. Suitlas
Industrial Health Engineering
Weirton Steel Co.
Weirton, West Virginia
F. E. Tucker
Coordinator,Industrial Health
Engineer
National Steel Corp.
Weirton, West Virginia
John F. Tyler, Secretary
The American Welding & Mfg.Co.
Warren, Ohio
L. E. Vicarel
Public Relations Representative
Republic Steel
Cleveland, Ohio
Robert A. Walsh
Research Supervisor
Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co.
Youngstown, Ohio
K. S. Watson
Mgr., Water Management Lab.
General Electric Co.
Louisville, Kentucky
Stephen W. Wheeler
Asst. Chief Engineer
Republic Steel
Warren, Ohio
Ivan G. Yahn
Research Chemist
Sharon Steel Corp.
Farrell, Pa.
A. B. Flask
Mayor
Youngstown, Ohio
-------
2-1
John C. Jordan
Mayor
New Castle, Pa.
Raymond E. Schryver
Mayor
Warren, Ohio
Joseph A. Vrabel
Mayor
Campbell, Ohio
Robert M. Wilson
Mayor's Secretary
Campbell, Ohio
Mrs. E. R. Bellows
Director
League of Women Voters
Pennsylvania
Glenshaw, Pa. 15116
Mrs. J. C. Booth
District president
Ohio Federation of Women's
Clubs
Willoughby, Ohio
Mrs. Robert L. Cummings
Water Chairman
League of Women Voters of
Wickliffe
Wickliffe, Ohio
C. R. Cutright
President
Ohio Div. Izaak Walton League
Wooster, Ohio
Mrs. Milton Gittleman
League of Women Voters of
Salem
Salem, Ohio
Mrs. W. B. Harpman
President
League of Women Voters,
Greater Youngstown
Youngstown, Ohio
Verne L. Harris
Committee Chairman
League of Ohio Sportsmen
Cleveland, Ohio
Mrs. John S. Jensen
League of Women Voters
Mt. Lebanon
Mt. Lebanon 34, Pa.
Mrs. John Liggett
League of Women voters of
Salem
Salem, Ohio
Roxie Lodge
Water Resource Chairman
New Castle League of Women
Voters
New Castle, -Pa.
Mrs. R. C. Lycette
Water Resources Chairman
League of Women Voters of
Pittsburgh
Allison Park, Pa.
Mrs. H. T. Moore
Water Resources Chairman
League of Women Voters of
Ohio
Chardon, Ohio 44024
Seth L. Myers
National Delegate
Pennsylvania Federation of
Sportsmen's Clubs
Sharon, Pa. 16147
Mrs. Benjamin F. Roth
1st Vice President-Ohio Fed.
of Women's Clubs
Youngstown, Ohio
Mrs. James Walsh
League of Women voters of
Mt. Lebanon
Pittsburgh, Pa.
Mrs. Arthur S. Ziegler
Director-State Board
League of Women Voters p/---
Pennsylvania
Zelienople, Pa.
M. A. Coleman
Associate Editor
33 Magazine
Newark, New Jersey
-------
2-J
Paul E. Henretty
Chief Photographer
WKBN-TV News
Youngstown 1, Ohio
Thomas P. Holden
News Reporter
WBBW Radio
Youngstown, Ohio
Robert Jackson
Reporter, Pittsburgh Press
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Marc McCulloch
WKBN Radio-TV News
Youngstown, Ohio
Bob McGill
Reporter
Steel Valley News
Youngstown, Ohio
Arthur Zimmerman
Bureau Chief, Cleveland
McGraw-Hill Publishing Co.
Cleveland, Ohio
James C. Booth
Wi Hough by, Ohio
R. Fru^erman
Consulting Engineer
Pittsburgh 17, Pennsylvania
M. J. Harnisch
Poland, Ohio
Mrs. R. W. Lundstrom
Youngstown, Ohio Ij.l4.5l2
J. R. Hyland
Project Director
U. S. Public Health Service
Wheeling, West Virginia
Bruce Carpenter
District Manager
Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co.
Youngstown, Ohio
Thomas J. Cento
Industrial Wastes Control
Engineer
Crucible Steel Company
Midland, Pennsylvania
Hugh K. Clark
Attorney
DuPont
Wilmington, Delaware
A. J. Cochrane
Asst. to Vice-President
Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co.
Chicago, Illinois
A. P. Connors
Republic Steel Corporation
Cleveland 1, Ohio
P. J. Coughlin
Associate Director
Product Development
Procter & Gamble
Cincinnati, Ohio i+5215
Clyde C. Cupps
Rockwell-Standard Corporation
Newton Palls, Ohio
Ralph W. Dickson
General Superintendent
U. S. Steel Corporation
Youngstown, Ohio
Robert W. Dault
Manager, Public Relations
Chicago District
Youngstown Sheet & Tube
Chicago, Illinois
R. P. Doolittle
Vice-President
Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co.
Youngstown, Ohio
------- |