Joint Abstract of Record — Wisconsin v. Illinois

Supreme Court brief1940

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

IN THE

Supreme Court of the United States

October Term, HE Oe} /75¥

STATE OF WISCONSIN, STATE OF

MINNESOTA, STATE OF OHIO and

STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Complainants, No. 2

v. a

STATE OF ILLINOIS and THE SANITARY

DISTRICT OF CHICAGO,

Defendants.

STATE OF MICHIGAN, 3

Complainant,

v. No. 3

STATE OF ILLINOIS and THE SANITARY Original

DISTRICT OF CHICAGO,

Defendants.

STATE OF NEW YORK,

Complainant,

V. No. 4

STATE OF ILLINOIS and THE SANITARY Original

DISTRICT OF CHICAGO,

——— ———

JOINT ABSTRACT T OF RECORD

VOLUME I

TESTIMONY

Filed April 30, 1941

lle

The Gilman Press — Madison, Wis.

IN THE .

eae Court of the United States

October Term, 1940

STATE OF WISCONSIN, STATE OF

MINNESOTA, STATE OF OHIO and

STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Complainants, No. 2

v. . Original

STATE OF ILLINOIS and THE SANITARY

DISTRICT OF CHICAGO,

Defendants. |

STATE OF MICHIGAN, a

Complainant,

v. No. 3

STATE OF ILLINOIS and THE SANITARY Original

DISTRICT OF CHICAGO,

Defendants.

STATE OF NEW YORK,

Complainant,

v. No. 4

STATE OF ILLINOIS and THE SANITARY Original

DISTRICT OF CHICAGO,

Defendants.

JOINT ABSTRACT OF RECORD

VOLUME I-

TESTIMONY

Filed April 30, 1941

The Gilman Press — Madison, Wis.

FOREWORD

While petitioner and respondents have endeavored,

for the convenience of the court, to set out in this Joint

Abstract of Record the respective portions of the tran-

script, record aftd exhibits in these causes which are

deemed material for consideration of the issues in-

volved herein, petitioner and respondents have agreed

that this Joint Abstract of Record filed herein shall not

be construed as barring reference to a consideration of

any other evidence appearing in thé record which inad-

vertently may have been omitted from this Abstract of

Record.

~» his Joint Abstract in narrative form of the tdsti-

mony of the witnesses is not in chronological order mor

arranged in accordance ‘vith the transcript of theRec-

ord, but is grouped according to the nature and vharac-

ter of the evidence. Each witness’ testimony has been

followed to its conclusion although the witness’ testi-

mony may not so appear in the original transcript.

on 14

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART I

EXHIBITS “

| Exhibits of Illinois

| ee Record Page Case Page

| State of Hilinois Exhibits

i 5—Base map of Sanitary District showing channels,

= sewers, and sewer treatment works (Record: page 8) 242 195

6—Tabulation showing completed work as of Decem-

ber J, 1988 ....... sonserresgy~peomosestasougggeesenoerenseremneeemncoyenenee 25 8

7—Tabulation showing expenditures Dec..1, 1938 to

June 1, 19490 ............. | ERE tase nesta eee anal 26-29 : 8

1539-1540 29

9—Estimate of cost of fut e work after June I,

RR eee Ti a 3, SS 5 SSR a Ee Ra 32-33 9

° 1540-1541 29

1592 52

1541 29

36-40

3856-3860 83

10 D.E.F—Bring down to date, data on Exhibits 10 B

SI ska inssininseicdicddinan Sick bainlidapnaesiet bbignnndcenietapeotesinsibonte 3856-3860 83

1I—Flow in main drainage channel, yearly averages,

III seciarcsatc retin cocalntsnioniaprileotesontts Sep tae sitestinnasibadigins 54 13

12—Flow in main drainage channel, monthly averages

TS or ECR LL Wie "Ware anew tee 55-58 13

| 13—Flow in main drainage channel, monthly averages :

ak SS eer ete eee Balod wh 62 ~ i

127-130 20

14—PWA Review Board report, pages 15-17, 4447,

PNG TE NI aac, er rtcrineceepneinnecnioar pr Mihasen 73-83 17

15—Supplemental report of Sanitary District filed May

23, 1984, specifically Page 4. -nvicc<cseteccereesveee teas 84-92 17

16—Report on additions by Engr. Dept., Sanitary Dis-

| trict of Chicago, dated April 16, 1940 _................ ... 95-110 17

17—Copy of report of PWA Review Board to Joshua .

D’Esposito, May 3, 1940 0... dehnsnabatig aneteapecih 112-117 18

— es

wren

Record Page Case Page

i8—Letter from Joshua D’Esposito transmitting copy

of PWA Review Board Report 2000.00.00... -cccccccesseeeeeee. 118-119

19 4,B,C—Certificates from county clerk of Cook County

showing assessed values in Sanitary District in 1937,

doc tg Hg ET Sal REELS BBN NN AID 119-122

20—North Side Works—flow, B.O.D., D.O. and sus-

pended solids, monthly averages, 1929-1940 .......... 137-148

1433

1436

1442

21—Calumet Works—flow, B.O.D., D.O., and suspended

solids, monthly averages 1936-May 1940 ............ Be. 152-156

1436

1440

22—West Side Works—flow, B.O.D. and suspended sol-

ids, 1931-May 1940 ay See cabanas 158-168

1890

1440

1442

23—Southwest Works—flow, B.O.D., D.O., and suspended

solids, May 1939-May, 1940 ... 170-171

1442-1444

24—Dry solids removed from sewage at Treatment

Works,—yearly averages from 1929-May, 1940 ........ 183

1446

1458-1459

24 A--Showing total average for 1940 ooo. 3633

25—Flow at Treatment Works in million gallons daily

Pe Pee NII pettcctardentieceteanutads coomibto bi coks 186

25 A—Showing total average for 1940 oo... 3638

_26—Graphic illustration of dry: solids removed from

sewage in tons per day 1929-May, re, cvmhuneseiainnasi 183

188

1456

27—North Side Works, summary of results of operation,

yearly averages 1929-May, 1940 2.0.2... cecesccecceeseeeene 221-223

1446

(27 A—Total summary for 1940 200.0... ..eccscscescceceeseseeseee 2642

“98-Calumet Works, summary of results of operation,

yearly averages 1936-May, 1940 2002... ccececcccceeseeseeeees 224-225

28 A—Total summary for 1940 2... .ccccccccccccccssccecese 3642

185

Record Page Case Page

29—West Side Works, summary of results of operation,

yearly averages 1931-May, 1940 2.00.0 226-227

29 A—Total summary for 1940 oo ccceccceseeeneeeeee 3645

31-36—Kesults of analysis and chart dissolved oxygen

and oxygen demands at six stations on the Chicago

River, monthly averages, Jan. 1938-June, 1940 ........ 250-271

1359

1878

37—Main channel at Lockport, B.O.D., dissolved oxy-

gen, temp. of water, discharge, 1926-1940 00000000... $755

4464

37 A—Resuits through Dec. 1941 ...... 4464

40--Planned flow and actual discharge of water from

main channel at Lockport for 1938, 1939, 1940 ........ 1410

40 A-—Main Channel discharge at Lockport by monthly

averages for 1938, 1989, 1940 nnn... ececceccsscescesceeees 2672

41—Graph—profiles of water surface in Chicago River

So I I a saicormridsacaisnansooncluseociccteesas 1415

42—Chart—daily discharge at Lockport for 1939, 1940 1418

1591

43—Chart—Main channel half hour!y discharge at Lock-

port on 15th of month, 1939, 1940 200. 1418

15€7

1585

1587

44—North Side Works—Supplemental table flow, B.O.D.,

D.O. and suspended solids showing June and July

including material shown in Exhivit 20 .00000........ 1435

45—Calumet Works—supplemental table including June

and July, 1940 (flow, B.O.1)., D.O. and suspended

solids bead : as 1438

46—West Side Works—supplemental table of flow,

B.O.D., D.O. and suspended solids including June

i. SE vier Anteuatiacaaerinaan ake “ 1441-1442

47—Southwest Works—supplemental table of ow,

B.O.D., D.O. and suspended solids through July

ce en hn a NN EPS REA AE MTL CE Ol 1443-1444

47 A—Southwest Works flow—1940 200000 ccccecccceeeoee 3654

106

185

186

107

185

Record Page Case Page

48—Amount of air used in the various plants of the

Sanitary District, average for year cubic feet per

gallon GE sewage 1080-1040 nn... .cccceccoccocceseeess 1450-1451

49—Estimated sewage flow, sewage treated and ua-

treated, million gallons per 24 hours, 1930-1940 .... 1453

1465

49 A—Estimated flow of sewage plus average for 1940 3656

50—Sanitary District yearly record of sludge and grit

removed at sewage treatment works from 1929-1940 1460-1461

1463

50 A—Corrected copy of Exhibit 50 ......... paivnabcintiapipnenis 3660

51—Tons of sludge discharged to canal per year tor

IIR ‘aiccovs> sb-scemsns acavespiidienelenseaearadececatanamemeensouesiainlite 1467-1468

1475

1638

51 A—Retyped copy showing complete figure for 1940 3660

52—Record of sludge handling in tons from North

Side and Southwest Works from July 1939-July

SEP con picdchaedaspitaiiasadialionstibtoaatecapspeaictonlcisligitibaitomnand 1472-1473

1638

52 A—Retyped copy showing complete figures for 1940 3664

53—Record of sludge and grit at Sewage Treatment

Works, tons per month—1938 _................-ceeeseeseeee: 1481-1482

1638

54—Record of sludge and grit at sewage Treatment

Works, tons per month—1939-1940 2... 1483-1484

1486-1487

1638

54 A—Retyped copy including all additional figures $664

58—Photograph showing disturbance of surface sludge

caused by ship passing in Sanitary Canal ~.............. 2137

3386

59—Enlargement of Exhibit 58 0000... cccecceseeeeneeeee 2139

3386

109

il2

185

110

111

112

113

114

115

120

157

112

114

113

‘Record Page Case Page

60—Estimates of B.O.D. and dissolved oxygen sources

and conditions from Lake Michigan to Lockport,

RE, £ UIE 5 cereriseersaciponisiasknspinan mtn awnnnambens $528

‘ 3761-3767

3940

4034-4062

60’ A—Revised compilation of Exhibit 60 00000000... 4034-4062

61—Estimates of B.O.D. and dissolved oxygen sources

and conditions from Lake Michigan to Lockport,

June, July, August, 1938-1944 oo... ececcecececeesseeenes 3529

61 A—Revised compilation of Exhibit 61 22000000... 4034-4062

62—Diversion from Lake Michigan—monthly discharge

ie Oe, We. es... Renee ET Dees 3673

Gayton Exhibit

1—Affidavit of Loran D. Gayton, Engineer in Depart-

ment of Public Works, Chicago 2000002000000... -3538-3545

Mohliman Exhibits

1—Determination of Chlorine Demand—Main Channel

=jey 2 & 5, 1 Qn... 1820

2263

2—Report: “Chlorination in Sewage Treatment”,

Feu. PD. - HI ANG 2 ssn riceccsnrnranpiceninenenanacs 1826

2917

3—“Reduction of Biochemical Oxygen Demand by

Chlorination"—Reprimt 2.2... iesnecececiecesseeee serene 2412

4--Blue print showing cross section of drainage canal

at Lockport ................ cininasstninainctinettanpintineinsaetatiie 2425

5—Record of Chlorination, 1939 at Morton Grove and

acid tcl a EE a PR ee 2433

6—Table and graph showing analysis of sludge of

A ag Ng AO RS co TIL OE oc 2445

2441

2440

2448

2454

2500

3736,

187

188

189-190

187

188

189-190

248

189-190

186

. 336

413

;

| vi

7—Table and graph showing oxygen demand of sludge

from main channel at Lockport 20000000... 2441

2456

2500

| 3706

3736

| 8—Photostat of editorial by Mohiman in Sewage

BY I ccnheeeet a e n 2445,

| 9—Translation and photostat: Imhoff's Handbook on

| SARE IIE ceruthprenensvticnsbinesionnrtntiecsdeicteidea ieencsianitada 2448 ¢

“10 A, B, C, D & E: Volatile Suspended Solids Dis-

charged to Channel from various sources, 1939 to

| pene Sele SRL EES sneceniietdelecsaidieaaanemintnndiemoniasatio 2502

| 1l—Analysis of Howson Exhibit 10, Sources of Oxygen

for prevention of complaints at Brandon Pool ...... 3278

d 12—Discussion of Howson Exhibit 11, means of re-

ducing B.O.D. load to camal ec ceceeeeeseeenee 3298

i 18—Extension of Mohlman Exhibit 10 showing 1939-

SPOUT: scsnanicinagscsbilibiotieenbecasieen ich esieetmasincobasaiedslacinc co mecocegnten 2514

3303

18 A—Extension of Mohlman Exhibit 10 showing 1936-

PE noiioomntieed eipsceapeisiotosocanendiecncontgenecasadnsciapeeeseoeag sedocienl 3755

14—a—Basis for estimating additional diversion needed x

TMU - nettahationsnniceesecsportideicheamcrpunatrenagiaaee 3530

3620

b—Analysis at Lockport of diversion, 1940

<—Proposed increase of diversion for 1941

d—Proposed increase of diversion for 1942

e—Basis for estimating diversion needed in summer

at Brandon Pool

15—Record of dry volatile solids discharged to canal 3311

j 3530

j 3604

i6—Letter dated Nov. 28, 1940 showing scheme of sam-

IN UIE I iairticciasicetacsideaeernninenienceniecptinnnscsnss 3590

17—Suminary and conclusiouy of a report on the

_ flushing experiment. Jan 13, 1941. (Booklet form) 3595

3873

3886-3888

3895-3898

3903

, 3916

‘ ~.

~ uty

Record Page Case Page

224

225

226

242

245

224

230

W931

248

233

239

Vii

Record Page Case Page

18—a—Dissolved oxygen and B.O.D. at Lockport, Jan.

Jt B Gake see een Cie

b—Total discharge at Lockport, Jan. 1938 to 194]

c—Dissolved oxygen and oxygen demand at Sum-

mit. Jan. 1938 to 1941.

d—Dissolved oxygen and oxygen demand at Lock-

port, Jan. 1938 to 1941

19—Sewage disposal and stream pollution and sludge

SATS. ARS RTE Se Gc

20—Table showing results of analysis for dissolved oxy-

gen and B.O.D. at Lockport for January, 1941 .......

Muehlberger Exhibits

1—General orders on dusts, fumes, vapors and gases.

Issued by Industrial Commission of Wisconsin .......

Pearse Exhibits

I—Record of air used, Sanitary District of Chicago,

cubic feet per gallon of sewage, 1928-1940 0...

1—Weight and volume of sludge discharged to main

channel July 1939-Aug. 1940 (Rec. 2523) 20...

2—Southwest Intercepting Sewer System, number of

sewers connected and estimated dry weather flow,

po ke RRR aie Re va le

5—Calumet Sewage Works, record of air used Jan. !939-

4015

2799

1665

2522

2539

ST gpl A RE Re & 2564-2568

4—Division of flow—West-Southwest Works May 1939-

Le ue OER BR ME MGR ARES SEER TER SL Fie

4 A—Revised table showing figures from May 1939

oo Ug ite AE E eras inne AND

12—Sanitary District of Chicago estimates of B.O.D. and

dissolved oxygen Lake Michigan to Lockport, June

DMT icescedianceecdaclatonatcacs-ssacancndsoase :

13—Sanitary District of Chicago estimates of B.O.D. and

dissolved oxygen Lake Michigan to Lockport, June,

July and August, 1938-1943 2c

15 A & B—Memo on lagooning semictahiniges

16—Weighted averages, Major Works, 1940 2.

3670

3343

249

300

161

164-165

18)

182

191

192

Viil

Ramey Exhibits

1—Average time of flow, Damen Ave. to Brandon Road

ae dassieiahesiactsoniiat tacleclecsioaiaagicietiaonaiaehickvendiabi ideation 2219

2—Average time of flow, Damen Ave. to Brandon Road

SUNNY 0-ceneiniaad-iatsbebvimgcsteessesdianionennee: PEE ew 2219

3—Blue print of Brandon Road Pool showing loca-

tion of cross-section and drift of current—Dec. 9,

IITs aiacticsprscobacassahabiesesctmtgitcgnidanicisidanaksostcniecanaysiooaesonen 3844

3846

3851

4—Blue print of cross section of Brandon Pool sound-

Ss iy WIE nn scciecinhrhichetenycetbenqsstenptumecatuneaegant 3845

3848

$851

EXHIBITS

Exhibits of Master

Andrew Exhibits

1—Photograph: Aerial view of Brandon Pool and Locks 1496

1499

6—Map of Brandon Road Pool .....0.0....0.........ccc:-ccscececeseereees 3846

EXHIBITS §/ ™

Exhibits of Wisconsin et al.

State of Wisconsin Exhibits

7—Tests of air made in the vicinity of Joliet and Lock-

port along the Iflinois Waterway ........... SERA EN AN 2639-2646

2650

2648

- 2722-2724

15—Repori of tests and analyses of water. air and

scum at Brandon Road Pool 200000000000 2202.0.cccceececee 3103

16—Photo, enlargement of Opponent’s Exhibit 8 show-

ing section of Sanitary District Canal taken from

South Bank of canal at U.S.H. 45 bridge, Sept. 24,

I A Ae tice nendiecncaintretatanideniainiRasesmmiosciesipies 3386

Record Page Case Page

249

250

536

537

503

484

Enslow Exhibit

1—Chlorination in ie cciagetels of the

on ei he SO tS eee ~ Melos Ihe A SNe eel 2912-2917

Howson Exhibits

I—Diagram illustrating effect of flushing test at Bran-

OR PGE ecccncensenss iaieesiogindisigns eceeslarenieliaamstmereiaeedieiat 3875-77

2—Diagram illustrating effect of lowered pool level at

ec eth SE 2 Nine ha Le WEED 3884-3888

: 3891

3—Effect of lowering Brandon Pool one foot on ton-

nage carried through Pool ....... steuinlinbianinpietcieeabauiains 3889-3891

1—Effect of lowcring Brandon Pool on B.O.D. and

volatile solids ................. pntsiavaneipasienienges iteinndisidaiieibihhas od 3893

BNapaysis of Mohlman’s Exhibit 17 to determine

effect of lowering Brandon Pool level ....0.00........... 3911-3915

8—Chart showing use of water per capita 0000000... 28 14-2822

9—Orders and reports relative to metering of Chicago L

CE I arsiciieicertigcessceipi ates = - FES 2822-2825

10—Sources of oxygen for prevention of complaints

trspene se esc it i | re aR 2825-2832

$218

3220

3254

$278

1i—Means of reducing B.O.D. load to canal 2832

2839

2840>

2862

2870

$221

$229

$254

P=: ; $263

3291

3301

3302

3343

3344

Record Page Case Page

413

375

379-381

381

381-382

383

389

389-390

343

Record Page Case Page

12—Estimated cost of measures to remedy conditions

complained of at Brandon Pool... --»+--2833-2840

13—Sources of B.O.D. of canal at Lockport .............. 2852

$372

> $375

14—Estimates of B.O.D. and dissolved oxygen .............. 3230-3231

. 3260

a, 3348

3332

3375

McNally Exhibits

1—Physiological Response to Hydrogen Sulphide, ex-

cerpt from article in Am. Jour. of Public Health .... 2687

2—QOdor intensities for various concentrations of H2S ..2689-2690

343-340

345

346

347

349

353

363

372

423

348

182

345

352

363

181

184

352-353

499

Record Page Case Page

Adams, Charles L.

Direct examination eidieniche aieshaslaencundismaaapsaaet 228-233 336

Calvert, C. K.

ee a ccresccireieninecintnnenmndvrtinienionmninalgoaing 2609-2634 263-272

CUI ac sirene are oscossst erie beremsncinc reer 3161-3191 272-279

3193-3197 279-280

Examination by the Master ..........-..--ccsersesssesneeene 3192-3193 279

3204-3205 282

TT. 58 MEAL OTTO 3198-3204 280-282

TI I oe ee neealaiaes $205 262

Cartson, Anton Julius °

Direct examination .............. ROSES SEA Ait CoA a stes 2873-2885 282-286

Examination by the Master -....0.0..........-ic-scscecsseesseeeeeees 2897-2904 286-287

2980-2983 289-290

2985-2986 300-301

EEE LOLS Ee 2971-2979 288-289

Redirect examination .............. cll cendeisastemtecsebhaadspeuesdebeomeall 2983-2984 290-291

* 2987 292

IIIS ssc ecctersenictecnestseecnsovtstceceticcianinaionenais 2988-2990 292-293

2991-2992 293-294

Ivy, Dr. Andrew Conway , =

Direct |KAMIMNALION . .........cccccrcccccccceesccesepcovseovesesscoeesees etal 3032-3047 304-312

CORIIIID ccicdccceeserncteienteroriericttnemteenamnneh $048-3054 313-316

3054-3059 - $13-318

3059-3065 319-322

RIED.) ScoiceRiccncuiuinetenimaitiomemianuheagies 3065 $22

3067-3075 $22-325

3076-3077 325-326

Redirect examination ................. iE lpdicatdacaiedidmendcead 3077-3078 $26

RIN Bi cccnctenrevcsimnncorernnenonsarennvonneoncphatinnn 3078 326-327

McGuigan, Hugh Alister

eee A eo csesoneusendingelatinsigsaeeebiniae 3079-3086 — $27-329

Cross-examination _........--....-.-00.-0- suieaesadcakiosnneceemaae 3087-3089 330 ,

3089-3090 330-331

$091-3093 331-332

/ 3093-3094 332

8094-3095 332

CRIED ciitmciminandcnaene 3095-3096 332-333

3096-3097 333

3098 333

nde <

a 3

ah en ae a eM de EPR ARISTA 8 REED TD LRN art il SOLIS Paha Sebi ig BATON foal cdi Sa

Xii

Mohiman, Dr. Floyd W.

* Direct examination ............

Cross-examination ..

Redirect examination ...........0....... ale Benet

Examination by the Master .............:cs0

Muehlberger, Dr. Clarence W.

Direct examimation .0.00...........4...ccceceecececeeeeeeeeeteee

COO SRTTITTIGRIOGN occcvcsiscincecnereensvedgescurceversscnassecr®

Examination by the Master ........ RE RT AS

Pearse, Langdon

Direct EXAMIAMALION ooceee cece cecceeeceeeeseeceeeeeeeees

COPOGCRATTINEIONS | oan ccsevcstessrencvsvorcunnesercssCepecincovedsn

The Master’s examination 0.000.000.2000.

Explanation requested by the Master

Ramey, Horace P.

Direct GXAMIMACION .........0..0.......ccccdicccccccnecdececeseees

Cross-examination ............. ban Bact asa de needa tet

slissviigpbnde 234-283

1420-1426

sichiesiaaae 1819-1879

1882-1918

2414-2462

2492-2518

3699-3764

spioiaateaa 3278-3309

3589-3627

snaneiesnied 3310-3312

3530

1433-1493

3313-3341

3633-3770

iechepieniaphanls 131-22

palewigueitiand 1629-1692

1699-1726

1728-1800

2520-2550

2555-2597

2606

2730-2755 °

3343-3385

4033-4057

4065-4078

eicascbectataas 1692-1698

2598-2601

2757-2759

3932-3942

4058-4065

cna 4199-4200

4499

paudaaivats 9-130

1409-1418

bitline 1531-1626

1803-1817

2217-2224

3825-3828

2836

Record Page Case Page

193-204

205-206

206-217

217-220

220-225

226-228

282.233

241-249

228.232

233-240

232

233

302

303-304 *

87-106

z 106-117

% 179-181

* 485-187

118-132

134-140

140-157

157-"42

162-173

175

175-178

181-185

189-190

191-192

132-135

173-174

178-179

187-184

190

192

iy2

1-20

21-25

26-65

65-69

70-72

72-73

xiii

Record Page Case Page

3837-3838 77

3854-3855 82-83

The Master's examination ................. sAipiomaiaiokiaod 3829-3835 74-76

3837 76

3838-3840 77

3840-3842 77-78

3842-3853 78-82

« 3861-3863 84-85

3868 86

3869 87

Mibcivect Onmanbatbeny: scenes es 3840 77

3842 78

3855-3856 83

Recross-examination ssnidliablansosiksbunenphepbeicieidedees 3856 83

3864-3867 85-86

” $868 86

3870-3871 87

Schwob, C. E.

ie he RN EC EL a ein le 2136-2142 333-334

nennatscchegeratee sm acters MAO EE SOB ee 2148—C«; 334

PART I

Witness of Master

Andrew, C. R.

Direct examination (by the Master) .....cccccccccccesssssseeeee 1496-1510 249-252

1516-1518 253

1521-1523 254

2031-2041 255-256

RINNE © issisaciseenniccesndecninihhicasehsda sess ist ia 1510-1513 252

1513-1515 253

\ 1519-1520 254

1523-1524 254

3 1524 255

\ 2043-2051 256-257

2052-2056 257

2057-2058 258

Examination by the Master 20.0000... ccccccccscscssesssseesseee. 2727-2728 258

3581-3588 258-259

‘ 3781-3802 259-262

3810 262

_ 3817 .

Examination ...................... 4 ; 3802-8810

ee ee stein en ie

Record Page Case Page

xiv

PART I

Witnesses of Wisconsin et al.

Bergman, Willard L.

IEE, QI sopecrcetesciepterbicertiecneniencintetinnnininsenanin 2635-2637

(By the Master) 2637

Buswell, Arthur M.

Direct examination 1888-1898

2214-2216

Examination by the Master ..............--.-cecessseeeeeeseeesees 1898-1900

2254-2256

2262

2266

I csc vinsis cnntecdh docgetneresenintbiohinedeietinianae 2250-2254

2257-2262

2263-2266

2267-2295

Flims, Joseph W.

I I occ caceccenstccntecn event neeesenininnttitnns 2086-2097

ES net creer n= I AR 2296-2331

Master (Question) .............-.-.--.-csscecsessssesensesensenevensenensesensoen 2328-2329

, Linn H.

EES SE CNP TN Se Let EEA 1968-2028

2070-2085

een EE 2098-2100

Question by the Master 2954

REET EARLE OLEAN TD 2907-2947

Redirect examination 2947-2964

$213-3216

, Enzer, Dr. Norbert j

Direct examination ...... RRA TON Ea acters PET. 2145-2153

Si nt MERRIE ia Je Fed ater Se eae ean etter Uatomann ee eset! 2153-2157

2158-2159

CRIN acttererstsccienerininsiecrnimnimnssncncel 2159-2167

_ 2167-2173

Redirect examination .....................-..05 EEE SEE 2173-2174

2176

eee oi os msetniadenetivvinvniereremtcin 2175

2176-2177

Gute, Dr. Edwin B.

ileaet REIN on cocunaackertaponeneibriomavenrecommelt 2209-2210

485

431

437.438

436-437

441-442

444

446

439-441

442-444

445-446

446-453

454-458

458-474

473

392-408

408-412

412413

425

413

423-429

429-431

538-541

541-543

543-544

544-548

548-550

550-552

552

552-553

565

. Record Page Case Page

Howson, Louis R. (A witness called on behalf of Wisconsin et al.)

Direct examination . 1935-1952 338-340

~ 2812-2852 342-345

2862 346

3873-3878 374-376

Cross-examimation 2.20.2... ccc ccceccccccececceceeeee f Bars toe 1953-1966 340-342

2865-2870 346-347

3217-3258 347-365

3903-3911 386-389

Examination by the Master ...0.00..0.....0..c:cceccecceseesee ceeeeeeees 2854-2860 345

3260-3263 366-368

3878-3902 376-386

St SET NE A LR Cd FS 3259-3260 366

$273-3276 372-373

ERIE AT AEROS 3263-3272 368-372

3913-3931 389-392

Jenkins, Robert C. :

Et ee rs A, en RK Se 2639-2648 536-537

GS LE SSL RE 2724-2727 537-538

Kruiabiegel, Dr. Edward Richard_

Direct Examination See 2178-2180 553-554

Cross-examination .. sare APSE tans OOO eS ea 2180-2186 554-556

2186-2189 557-558

(Master) 2190-2196 558-560

2196-2197 561

Ca ee ee ee 2198 561

2200 562

NII. ie tantarvasssresentinmnstectasacetiocene 2200-2201 562

2202 562

Recross-cxamination pidaecidiaimniastnstemacmoionccnetiaeen 2203-2204 563

McNally, Dr. William D.

I a re 2659-2679 487-494

ee See ee eer ee 2680-2698 495-501

en aR oa sarseaeitinbibicedyen neice 2699-2700 501

2702 502

i a EO 2701 501

Moore, Dr. Josiah

Sa es eee 2649-2653 50-532

Examination by the Master ................-.cesssssssssscssecssseeeee 2654-2655 532

2657-2659 532-533

2769-2771 534-535

Cross-examination 2656 532

2764-2769 533-534

2771-2772 535 .

Redirect examination ...... ieee iatcahegk cba 2773 535-536

~ a en ce ee eh Cie tea STE PEGS OPE. 2 OT I PR GE PC NEE RSD * ORE re te (TK

Nichols, Dr. M. Starr

XVi

ae or 3100-3117

| ge SEE CE Pen 3117-3119

3119

SIND © raecsdissteddcevscamcnmensshaamanioecaeunies 3120

$121

(ESTES SESE SNES eae 3121-3126

3128-3136

Nh iat ee en nee DORR te near RL 3137-3147

pene ISD fal ee RAE a 3148-3150

3150-3152

RI « iil tcscudnslctsinssiceaveegstoenamne 3208-3210

oo, REET SP ooe ieee 3154

i) RE SERPERY IRENE RGR ats 3155-3156

$211

TETRIS Spa aR A CR bt ok a! 3157-3158

$211

Perkins, Dr. James Eliab

nn MTS tm ER IE EE RT 2465-2471

PRE ESCO See ate Prem. 2473-2483

2484-2489

(Master) ~........... = 5 lamcentecigilcanietecasaaeee 2491

Warrick, Louis F.

TA BA ns SOON TS 2100

2119-2120

5386

Examination by the Master .............ccccceces-cescses:sevsceesssee- 2110-2112

2236-2239

2245-2248

A ne ee 2226-2232

SE RREGD Cee RTE OS Se EO EIN 2233-2236

IE eA IA NE EES, 2240-2244

2249

} Record Page Case Page

502-506

506-507

507

508

508-509

510-512

513-515

516-517

517-518

519-520

518

518-519

520-521

519

521

521-526

526-528

529-530

530

475-477

477-478

484

477

480-481

483-484

478-479

479-480

481-482

484

XVii

Record Page Case Page

PART II

WITNESSES OF ILLINOIS

Medical and Lay Witnesses at Joliet, Mlinois

coins cosinace Mhconsan Ci, Ra TREN ES TE MINER nC 1233-1237 677-678

mer wae, Woe Ee og a ao 666-673 613-614

ces noses OP ccna A a Ne ETN MENTS Cs 1272-1277 680-681

serine es ge RO EI APN OTE ES ES) ee 612-615 607

cca Tih ce ie eT Sa oe een 7. 373-377 578

eee, BON a es 1315-1317 687

Ps OME accicessaniseans oer simiotoperncaicatgatbesedaenseenieteeeidioinas dete 1217-1223 675-676 be

, Beckwith, Dr. Henry M. ¢sesllobinshietiepiictiitevencoepheessiiehagien 927-932 639

rs 5 RT SRA Ne a eRe Nh 1174-1179 667-668

eee Se ns er oe ae 998-1002 645-646

scccsrmtarpnn! le cs co, LA NS ECE I RAS 491418 582-584

a Rg, SS RC a Maa a EN RE 5 1s 1072-1075 655

Boles, Dr. Donald sinenecinlenesipehdelae hialacsdipaimadaiadbadeinbdes ceadcubgnen 1318-1326 687-688

Bolte, eS Eat NORE LE LD ON a Rate eS 698-702 617

Roeskes, Jom oe ea RN RA OS Lae AF 1265-1269 686

meee. We. DORI i 905-917 638-639

te Sen a CRN RC Reece ROR tuk 814-817 627-628

ely IN © cnrtncenndee cane 8 Te ne, 688-693 615-616

I: ee ae 1118-1127 658-659

Ss: Ss OR Medora ac ee es 849-851 632

ON: ee I any ON eee eaee 331-357 575-576

SI NR oe .607-609 606

J ge >} eee ie oi See Scenes. 859-868 633-634

a Eee das eh os eee SS 1003-1009 646-647

I I fo sa ee ee 640-649 610-611

ents a ND Ae ee 717-721 620

SIN DINE SS Sc tccente ere Ses ee 420-439 584-586

ey Regge RMA REACA cua eels SOIT AE tr CRA Anl-a We 622-633 608-609

rR: IN oe ee ee 1254-1259 679

IG NN ee ee ee 1207-1210 673-674

Cees Mee Pelee ee 1065-1067 653-654

nce, acing yea SoA ee SE ENIORT 5 RLESES A am 1260-1265 679-680

RS NE a A eee 596-606 604-606

Ay CU no ee es ee 677-681 614-615

Coyne, Richard J. ....t............. . Sa eel oe: 1076-1082 655-656

SS DIO NII. i eectcsacscsusossuncshpcecetninn: Basbcletncgeieaice 706-708 618-619

I: Mt I oe i ee eee 547-591 601-604

oe Renan Sen en CNL 1227-1230 676-677

I I ne ee 768-801 624-626

SNE Zion ularhciinainiiclinndacsdinois otutniniocn te eee .. 1062-1064 653

| EE RRR ET eae CI he OK 1145-1147 662-663

RNG, IN a isc dapinilletceladeotiace 852-855 632-633

OIL, VE Be cseetacetantbe wana Sea .. 360-368 576-577

RPNUNE Ts TMI, sencosceevatechatentancenngessnioretemsenionioesenesaaciaes siipasiathenes tines 1281-1283 682

bad .

Ma ene n Ta Pa REC CRECe BLROAS A ATION A PAG snRNA A aNylnc Nine thers olen Seep abi Aagelbnaaeres Pcoadogiecs ded ie

A ia id

tame

Record Page Case Page

XVili

I, TS NONE occetachsecasssetomervennenats ... 1232-1233

Fc DIOR. <tiipsdinceiminnierseasnvnienndittednihnantamaetigiaiiaasinanes 650-654

Evangelisten, Sister .......... sochsnpisishendeei loscndienbiujoitintadipicert Rib 1188-1193

RID iccsiccsinitiineecceigdineemerssnincrinebateeenniinaitinn 933-956

a ADy UE ee eememeee” con AOE Ser MM gn UAE ead Ar, 756-767

EG, | Ba II. Ble” cangiceeceronremesindeanmostomenieninenbiiadsid e... 442-465

GCosnvone,: Dire: Lawbe : —. PMA Be Bt LE hia te ee. 845-848

I UE EIN ccicsncsistonctanchiatetatevnonsnneiconmibencnenibansenieees 1211-1214

Grae, Semen Co ... Ss sonigc abies auehaaleae eee 506-516

REINS ONIN. <aestictpascn sensnyntiamsitincicnieoninginanicieoarnsetelimsietaclamiaiakcniniinte 1058-1061

Pea, Tee SN hike ceeen ence 702-705

Us GUUS SIRT cscs d srneservivnoatcswiriniontintuncedsnensbebbeeonediehads 1184-1188

Heggie, Janet ............... 1341-1347

I: IIIIE Bik. . wimsinenicineracismntcsmnnnintiashaenislaoetsiiovasanmmeninn 617-621

pT Rig Sy PO | RS SE RCE e anor tea aot 1022-1027

RUN, MINE © ios cacc stcnccil sv acencepadapnoasecgebananlieaiabmaseaicen eee 1109-1117

ie ESRC OEMS SRS Eire STAT Las Pee ROA Fn Loe. 1312-1315

Ne, Reet MEE Senna een es ae tat ts Bes" 1326-1333

Hortense, Sister ............/......... ¥ 1133-1140

BENIN <= UN a coseecbicaanesponcaeians sa 1128-1132

SRA Rees ite ll Ae Is SE Rear acis §oraece ne etal Ni re 1278-1280

oo A ee ee Cee ; .-1155-1158

I a Bes I bh farciecinsenininnbiececseniomricicetend-eaiahiaainisiibtadniatrsscaial 1163-1169

Jones, George T. 290-306

Joseph, Sister Aima ....... He 1203-1206

a SUE , TINIE c ctadtiiecnesrecphstcesvteermperiscastensesarapledeiedaasiatanal 1180-1184

NS IE, III. sccacsr nino sc slesetotinusneinioptsentebnisbenmmsaegianms 1069-1071

Cicmmmney,. Kiem J aia erereeneercesemnnsisinnesornensesapstons 1148-1151

ee RG MEETS

Kochi, Cathefine ............<..... .. scsasin binccisapghdekes-nsonaseiceatuaivtaseomotnaaeaah 1303-1308

Lawler, Mrs. Catherine .............. Fa RO BOS I tt 723-727

OE |. gia Reet ser Reena RE RAR IP dale nce 1052-1055

FR 5 a Gh (ROR et eR eat SER RAC PERT STEEL NE? 526-538

SO es WI op pecsesicdinnteeseloncetaraate 1170-1172

Louise, Sister Emma ...... A EES |

PN Se IR SE ah Gree ero eo ; 1239-1245

Marietta, Anna ee 752-755

TCE ERs IMI On ose octane en tera ace apace 610-612

RS See en en A a ee 1032-1036

CARIES SEINE: BOMIIED © vecccnsntneahiirgeeieniuhhabin tokeconseipinnicaiaeraiicnsbidilae 662-664

a ee a ne 963-980

ge eta aE 2 LENGE OU 5 AIRTEL OCTET OA -..--- 1153-1155

I, as Ri emmaavein mec 1037-1047

ee EE aE ILS LI MERRY PO RARPISRCRESIS S550 655-660

SR aaa itbcacasihs pickidntnticeneersinge cde etoncrmebahiaeniiogs 869-870

EE Te IN potcsttesorrnsetictnenasecinnindscdarininbenianirteindbcoes 1193-1197

Pee. i TO ii sc essntihenlenwennsmnisn eae tecermcttaioe 709-715

een hE, EO TREE ERE SR ENE oT 1301-1302

O'Daniel, Mrs. Jesse ............. =a 1298-1300

677

611-612

670-671

640-642

623-624

586-590

631-632

674-675

594-596

653

618

669-670

691-692

607-608

648-649

657-658

685-687

689-690

660-661

659-660

681

664-665

654

663

616-617

685

620-621

652-653

598-600

666-667

672

678

623

606-607

649-650

613

642-644

663-664

650-651

612-613

634

671-672

619

684

Record Page Case Page ,

—- - .......................... nscale tratchlonsionlansteeesassoawesa 1334-1337

oct go cae eS EET ESR ED Sa i RS 1141-1144

co ra a Se, PESOS ti STIRS RO AD 728-745

oe A EET a 1028-1032

con fe SASS ei 1215-1216

Petronia, Sister wo---eeeee 159-1161

ce |” 829-833

I ND co Kerouac: 634-639

coe wen Epes A eel ED Rate -- 314-318

ene a Ie a ate RE SS Ae Te AIRE 319-331

Renkenberger, Mrs. Sa as dele PGE OR See 825-828

Ie 1245-1254

Residori, Arthur ....... : rasbiasaailpianstbaieerireibishiteicepssats 802-813

Rooney, Dr. George W. . actereaverensnoreteresenecesoee 1283-1296

Ryan, Mrs. Martin ....... auauesirinnee eiachsbensbhaphiesisesiienssdisinnmessonunpstisiciis 993-997

cet ot i eee neha 1050-1052

Se eee ee 307-313

Santini, Charles 00... Shapeareensecilhctcteutlinnyebuninielihcapsiiiinoanisneccie 684-687

once fe ee A a a aa Scena 1224-1226

I aanbariomeopagst 516-520

eet cag ns Cat AE PEESTS a ale Pine 818-825

I IOS gic 5 pate aes 390-400

St. Germain, Mrs. Mable —. palieasistbiceasiasissspendmscels 987-992

ecg ee tN, aL TEE LS IT aE: 1015-1021

I UI a inc pacllarhiipemenettinaesasiics 834-841

Swanco, Mrs. Ray .................... sistehiadiemaliactaimesvapenepoedanondaioesen sine 746-751

epee cee lh lef Aer SOR REE, AO 1357-1398

ace ee Se See aS Reet Se 1099-1108

berg he. BRUINS A PURSES a RY Se TE Aad 1309-1311

Se a reap a I ERT en EOP a 1338-1340

US I cn 876-898

br sgcy oni et tiga, BeOS Ee NO 471-490

oe Tk ED 2B, | SSRIS Pee, 496-505

I aa I 521-526

ne lg STE ET 377-389

$90

668-662

621-622

649

675

665

629-630

610

572-573

573-575

629

679

626-627

682-684

645

652

571-572

615

676

596-597

628

580-581

644-645

647-648

630-631

622-623

692-698

656-657

685-686

69)

634-638.

590-592

593-594

597-598

578-580

rt amatahaees

Record Page Case Page

PART Il

WITNESSES OF MASTER

Detweilier, Thomas H.

Peete se CRONE oa oO

Cross-examination 2.000.002. ss pikislichda diebsobecunniiendat waite

Goodell, Harry L.

mecca ertmmnoneia on

Cross-examination 0... inickavevinibieGesnegues Resiie mate

Kerr, Dr. J. P.

NT tr RE nn oe ee eg

Cross’examination PN SARE MR A re ERLE ROM See NS VIP SA:

Moore, George Patrick

en or II 0 se ae

eS Ree CTR ele ASSEN Ae

2344-2347

2347-2348

2385-2400

2403-2494

2402-2403

2405-2409

2409-2410

2351-2375

2376-2383

2332-2336

2338-2339

709-710

711

718-721

722

723

723-724

711-717

717

707-708

708

708-709

709

ae ee es a

Pewee cw. 4

are

3 on

Part ONE

TECHNICAL AND SCIENTIFIC

EVIDENCE

Lg SO ENY FE asic 1. end URS ROR HN Or

ne kee eae ee ee LOE FT i TAO = a =] ant a

IN THE

ce Court of the United States

October Term, 1940

STATE OF WISCONSIN, STATE OF

MINNESOTA, STATE OF OHIO and

STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA,

No. 2

Complainants,

v. Original

STATE OF ILLINOIS and THE SANITARY

DISTRICT OF CHICAGO, |

Defendants.

STATE OF MICHIGAN,

- Complainant, |

v. No. 3

STATE OF ILLINOIS and THE SANITARY Original

DISTRICT OF CHICAGO,

Defendants.

STATE OF NEW YORK, f

Complainant,

V. No. 4

STATE OF ILLINOIS and THE SANITARY Original

DISTRICT OF CHICAGO,

Defendants.

—_—-ss

- ——————

JOINT ABSTRACT OF RECORD

VOLUME I

HORACE P. RAMEY, duly sworn for Defendants,

Direct Examination by Mr. Clausen.

Reside Chicago, Illinois; graduated from high school,

10 Carlisle, Kentucky; two years literary work, Kentucky

State University; then four years Civil Engineering,

University of Michigan, graduating 1907. Later, Degree

Civil Engineer, 1917, from University of Michigan.

Worked for Sanitary District since 1907, as, rod man,

Be 4

computer, instrument man, assistant engineer, resi-

dent engineer, division engineer, acting chief engineer

1922, asgistant chief engineer since January 1, 1923;

worked on surveys and construction 1907 to 1910 of

Lockport Power House; worked on construction of

Lockport Power House 1907; on surveys and construc-

tion of North Shore Channel 1908 through 1910; con-

struction of eight-track bridge 1909; designed Calu-

met-Sag Channel; in charge of maintenance and op-

eration of works of Sanitary District 1912-1920; made

economic studies 1921 leading to outline of present

sewage treatment program; since July 1925 in charge

of all design work of Sanitary District.

The 442 square miles of area in the Sanitary District

of Chicago is divided into four projects for purposes

of sewage treatment (North Side project, Calumet

project, West Side project, Southwest Side project).

The North Side project covers 115 square miles,

north of Fullerton Avenue, Chicago, to the north line of

Cook County, and from Lake Michigan to the water-

shed between the Des Plaines and Chicago Rivers.

This project consists of a sewage treatment plant, lo-

cated at Howard Avenue and the North Shore Chan-

nel and about 39 miles of intercepting sewers, ex-

tending south from Glencoe through the North Shore

towns and Evanston to the treatment plant and ex-

tending north from Fullerton Avenue to the treat-

ment plant. The treatment plant is of the activated

sludge type and at present serves a sewered area of

82.5 square miles. The treated effluent is discharged

into the North Shore Channel and the waste sludge

from the plant is pumped through a 14-inch pine line,

d —

- : —

Lac ea ea ERR |

17.5 miles long, to the Southwest Treatment Works

for disposal. This treatment plant was placed in par-

tial service October 3, +928 and in complete operation

June 28, 1930. The plant was originally designed for

an average flow of 175 M.G.D. and in May 1937 by

the addition of 12 new final settling tanks, this av-

erage capacity was increased to 250 M.G.D. At this

plant, sewage passes through bar screens, with 4-inch

openings, is then pumped up 36 feet; then passes

through grit chambers; then through bar screens with

5/8 inch openings, then through preliminary set-

tling tanks (detention period 20 minutes); then

through aeration tanks (detention period 5 hours);

then through final settling tanks where the activated

sludge is settled out and from which the effluent passes

to the North Shore Channel. Approximately 20 per

cent of the activated sludge taken from the final set-

tling tanks is added to the fresh sewage just before

it is passed into the aeration tanks. The remaining

activated sludge (waste sludge) is combined with

the sludge collected from the preliminary settling

tanks and pumped through the 14-inch pipe line to

the Southwest Treatment Works. Air for the aeration

of sewage in the aeration tanks is provided by elec-

trically driven blower units, compressing the air to

7.75 pounds per square inch. All the pumping units

and other mechanisms in this plant are electrically

driven.

The Calumet Sewage Treatment Project covers an

area of 95 square miles, south of 87th Street, in Chi-

cago, to 159th Street and from the Indiana State line

west to Kedzie Avenue. This project covers the Calu-

met industria! district and the municipalities immedi-

ately south of Chicago. The project consists of the

Calumet Sewage Treatment Plant of the activated

sludge type and about 42 miles of intercepting sewers,

draining a sewered area of 42.6 square miles. The

collecting sewers lead to the plant from the 95th Street

pumping station on the Calumet River from Harvey,

from Calumet City, and ffom Blue Island. This plant

was placed in service December 3, 1935, and was de-

signed for an average flow of 136 M.G.D. with a maxi-

muni of 200 M.G.D. At this plant, the sewage passes

through rack screens with 4-inch | openings; is then

pumped up 33 feet; then passes through bar screens

with 5/8-inch openings; then through preliminary set-

tling tanks (detention period 10 minutes); then after

dosing with returned activated sludge passes through

aeration tanks (detention period 5 hours); then through

final settling tanks where the aciivated sludge is set-

led and from which the effluent passes to the Calu-

met-Sag Channel. Approximately 20 per cent of the

activated sludge is added to the raw sewage before

aeration. The remaining activated sludge (waste

sludge) is combined with the sludge from the pre-

liminary settling tanks; it is dosed with ferric chlor-

ide and dewatered to about 80 per cent moisture on

vacuum filters; then broken up and mixed with pre-

dried sludge, the mixture placed in flash dryers, in

which it is dried down to 6 per,cent moisture; and

this final dried material is then burned in a furnace

which provides the heat for drying. This dried sludge

can be used as a fertilizer. When dried sludge is re-

moved for sale as a fertilizer the heat for drying is

supplied by the combustion of fuel oil.

The West Side Sewage Treatment Project covers

an area of about 40 square miles, in Chicago, be-

tween Fullerton Avenue and Taylor Street, and be-

tween Lake Michigan and Cicero Avenue. This in-

cludes the “Loop” district of Chicago. This project

consists of the West Side Sewage Treatment Works,

at Laramie Avenue and 39th Street, and 22.2 miles of

intercepting sewers paralleling both sides of the Chi-

cago River and the northwest side of the Drainage

Canal, leading from Fullerton Avenue, southwest to

the treatment works. The West Side Sewage Treat-

ment Plant was designed for an average flow of 472

M.G.D., with a maximum of 700 M.G.D. The plant con-

sists principally of three batteries of Imhoff tanks for

the sedimentation of sewage and the digestion of sludge.

Battery A of the Imhoff tanks was placed in service

June 2, 1930; Battery B on July 14, 1930: Battery C

on April 29, 1935. At this plant the sewage passes

through rack screens with 4-inch openings; is then

pumped up 61 feet; then passes through bar screens

witn 1-inch openings; then passes through skimming

tanks, from which the surface flow passes to the Imhoff

tanks (Detention period 2 hours, Batteries A and B; 1

hour, Battery C) where the sludge is settled from the

sewage and digested and from which the effluent passes

to the Main Channel. The underflow from the skimming

tanks is diverted to grit chambers where the grit is

settled out and from which the flow is passed to the

Imhoff tanks. The grit is collected and hauled for fina]

disposal to a-spoil pile. The solids settled from the

sewage in the Imhoff tanks pass down into the digestion

compartment of these tanks and remain until thorough-

ly digested. The digested sludge is drawn out under

favorable weather conditions and placed on sludge

drying beds from which after suitable drying it is strip-

ped by macaines and hauled away to the waste sludge

dump.

The Southwest Sewage Treatment Project covers an

area of about 192 square miles, between 87th Street and

Taylor Street, in Chicago, and west from Lake Michi-

gan, to include the Summit-Clearing industrial district.

This project also includes the towns in the Des Plaines

River Valley from Riverside, north to Des Plaines. At

one time, this Des Plaines Valley was served hy a sepa-

rate treatment plant at Maywood but this plant was

‘ abandoned October 15, 1931 and the flow from it then

absorbed in the West Side project, and to be ultimately Pa

absorbed in the Southwest Side project.

The West-Southwest Treatment Works now serve a

sewered area of 125 square miles drained by 67 miles

of intercepting sewers. The sewage treatment plant is

of the activated sludge type, was originally designed

for an average flow of 400 M.G.D. with a maximum of

600 M.G.D. This plant, as presently constructed, has

been designated the “Southwest Side Treatment Plant”

for treatment#of sewage from the southwest area, in-

cluding Packingtown and the Stockyards. This plant is

to be extended to provide final treatment for the West

Side sewage and as a consequence is designated the

“West-Southwest Sewage Treatment Works”. The

Southwest Side Plant was placed in partial service May

23, 1939 when sewage was pumped from the West Side

ele aan ats Sit

OR eck AM ee Se

EPA SRP eg ae eee

intercepting sewer. The activated sludge was started

June 9, 1939 and by June 27, 1939 the first battery

of aeration tanks was in service. Dewatering and in-

cineration of sludge began August 7, 1939 and the first

part of the plant has operated continuously since Aug-

ust 28, 1939. The Southwest intercepting sewer was

placed in service September 7, 1939, draining sewage

from an area west of Western Avenue. The remaining

part of this sewer system, including the Racine Avenue

Pumping Station ,was placed in service March 20,

1940. At the Southwest Plant, the sewage pagses

through bar screens, with 2-inch openings; is then

pumped up 45 feet; then passes through preliminary

settling tanks (detention period 34 minutes); .then

through aeration tanks (detention period ¥ hours)

then through ‘final settling tanks where the activated

sludge is settled and from which the effluent passes to

the Main Channel. Approximately 20 per cent of the

activated sludge (return sludge) is mixed with the

raw sewage just before it enters the aeration tanks. The

remaining sludge (waste sludge) is passed to concentra-

tion tanks where it is mixed with sludge from the pre-

liminary settling tanks, also, with waste sludge which

has been pumped from the North Side Treatment Plant.

The main sewage pumps are steam turbine driven and

air for aeration of sewage and other plant uses is pro-

duced by steam turbine driven blowers which com-

press the air to a pressure of 7.75 pounds per Square

inch. The waste sludge for concentration in the phd

concentration tanks is conditioned with ferric chldride

and dewatered to about 80 per cent moisture on vacuum

filters. This dewatered sludge is mixed with pre-dried

sludge and the mixture placed in an enclosed flash

dryer and dried down to about 6 per cent moisture.

This dried sludge is then burned in furnaces under the

boilers which produce steam for the pumping and blow-

er units, or the dried sludge can be removed from the

system and sold as a fertilizer base. When sludge is

sold as a fertilizer, approximately one-half ton of coal

is required to furnish heat for drying one-ton of sludge.

Illinois Exhibit No. 6 was received in evidence. This

exhibit is a tabulation showing the completed work

on the sewage treatment construction program of The

Sanitary District of Chicago up to December 1, 1938, in

the amount of $159,795,331.70.

26-29 Iliinois Exhibit No. 7 was received in evidence, being

a tabulation of the expenditures of the Sanitary Dis-

trict on sewage treatment construction from,December

1, 1938 to June 1, 1940, in the amount of $5,311,188.12.

Regarding the Southwest Side Project and the West-

Southwest Treatment Plant: In the reports made to

the Supreme Court the cost figures for Southwest Side

project include only the cost of sewers on the south-

west area and the Racine Avenue Pumping Station,

which is a part of the sewer system. The West Side

Project includes the West Side sewers as well as the

West Side Treatment Plant. The West-Southwest Plant,

shown on such tabulations, includes the activated

sludge sewage treatment plant, which has formerly

been referred to as the “Southwest Side Plant”. This

has been given the hyphenated name “West-Southwest

Side Sewage Treatment Plant”, because ultimately it

will provide complete treatment for the Southwest Side

sewage and also provide final treatment for the-West

ser re

Side sewage. At the present time, only Southwest Side

sewage is being treated at the West-Southwest Plant.

I \have’ prepared an estimate of cost of future work

of sewage treatment construction after June 1, 1940.

32-33 This amounts to $12,969,092 and is shown on Illinois

Exhibit No. 9. This future work consists of $912,192

remaining unpaid on 27 existing contracts and of $12,-

056,900 of estimated future work. The 27 contracts

34-40 are actual commitments, most of which are well

under way. The future work is divided into certain

prospective contracts. These future estimates are based

on the best judgment of the engineering department of

the Sanitary District and on its past experience in

constructing work of similar nature. The future work

consists principally of $10,554,900 for construction and

equipment sufficient to increase the capacity of the

West-Southwest Treatment Works so that it will be

able to handle 900 M.G.D. of sewage, of which sewage

600 M.G.D. would be given complete treatment and

300 M.G.D. would be effluent from the West Side Sew-

age Treatment Plant, which is to be given secondary

or final treatrnent in the West-Southwest Plant.

The Sanitary District has available at present suffi-

cient resources io pay for approximately 90 per cent

of this construction work. On June 1, 1940, the Sanitary

District had cash, or equivalent, in its funds tur con-

struction of $1,308,942; then, in addition,”the Sanitary

District on June 27, 1940 sold bonds in the amount ‘

of $5,000,000; after the sale of these bonds the Sanitary

District had $2,455,000 of unencumbered debt incurring

capacity and on July 1, 1940 redeemed $3,000,000 of

bonds, after which there was $5,455,000 of unencum-

bered debt incurring capacity in addition to the $6,308,-

942 cash on hand June 1 and cash from bonds sold June

27, 1940. This should cover all the construction work

which can be done-up into 1942.

The bonding capacity of the Sanitary District is five

per cent of the assessed valuation of the property with-

in the Sanitary District. At the present time, there is

about $5,400,000 of unencumbered capacity and bonds

are being redeemed at about the rate of $5,000,000 per

year, so that if the assessed valuation of property of

the Sanitary District should remain approximately the

same in 1941 and 1942 as at present, there should be

available about $5,000,000 additional each year to carry

on the work.

At present, the Sanitary District has approximately

$6,308,000 cash on hand and a bonding capacity of ap-

proximately $5,400,000 in addition, or total resources

of approximately $11,700,000 to date. This additional

future construction work will cost approximately $13,-

000,000 so we lack only about $2,000,000 today of enough

money to complete this future construction, assuming

that all these funds can be used for this purpose. There

is a possibility of other liabilities against the Sanitary

District, a judgment, for instance. The Sanitary Dis-

trict is now engaged in patent litigation; is being sued

for the infringement of certain patents. Approximately

$5,000,000 of bonds are being retired each year by the

use of taxes collected for the redemption of bonds and

when {5,000,000 of bonds are retired it then becomes

possible to resell such an amount of bonds. Ai the

present time the Sanitary District has outstanding

$110;000,000 of bonds. The Sanitary District has ap-

R93 ees SRO ————e

Ve Creat se EN De ah ee me

—_———— a ae

eS a ae

proximately $6,000,000 in cash for construction at pres-

ent and in addition has an unencumbered debt incur-

ring capacity of abeut $5,000,000. This relates to future

construction of approximately $13,000,000 which will

take about 2-14 years from now to complete. During

that period of 2-14 years, the Sanitary District will have

the benefit of additional debt incurring capacity over

and above the approximately present $11,000,000 when

and as bonds*are:redeemed and if the assessed valuation

is not reduced, and in another 2 years, on the present

assessed valuation, the Sanitary District would have an

additional $10, 000,000 which would increase potentially

the present set-up to about $21,000, 000, for performing

approximately $13,000,000. worth of work. I base my

statement that it will take until December 31, 1942 to

complete this work on my experience with past work

of this kind. This work is being placed under contract

as fast as possible, contracts are being let for the me-

chanical equipment which goes into this plant addition;

plans are being drawn for additional final settling tanks;

for an extension to the present pump and blower house,

for an extension to the sludge inzineratiog building. It

will take four or five months before any plans can be

out for those buildings..Contracts can be let for these

buildings early in 1941 but no work can start until the

spring of 1941 since it is concrete construction on which

work cannot be reasonably done in freezing weather.

I do not believe that work can start actually on the

, tanks or the buildings until April 1941 4nd know from

past experience it will take two full working seasons

to do the physical work which is necessary in‘that pro-

gram. This proposed extension of the West-Southwest

—

TTL

es 12

% \ —_—- e y

Plant has been approved by the “PWA Review Board”.

Practically all the construction work which the Sani- 7

tary District has done in the past six or seven years has (3

been done under agreement with the Public Works Ad-

ministration, through which the Sanitary District was

able to sell $42,000,000 of its bonds and obtain in addi-

49-53 tion thereto a grant of $16,000,000, and under this

agreement the Public Works Administrator appointed

a Review Board to review all the plans made by the

Sanitary District from January 1934 down to date.

One of the projects under the PWA Agreement just

mentioned was a project-which provided for certain

experimental work on the West Side sewage. Since

this experimentation was a PWA project, it was neces-

sary to report results to this PWA Review Board, even

though there was no PWA agreement regarding the fu-

ture construction which might result therefrom. These

experiments were made on several processes of sewage

treatment, including chemical precipitation, activated

sludge, the Guggenheim process, two filter processes,

and although the experimental work was finished in

1939 the formal report showing the results of such

work was not compiled until April 1940. The experi-

mental work itself was a PWA project and the cost of

experimental work was paid out of PWA funds and the

PWA Review Board suggested the studies that should

be made so it was necessary to report the results to ‘

this Review Board. A formal report of something like :

150 pages and certain recommendations were submitted 4

to this PWA Board in April 1940, and this PWA Review :

Board approved the recommendations made by the

Sanitary Distrigt engineering department, regarding

& OE ose,

Ss ee Ss

this report, and recommended that the Sanitary Dis-

trict proceed to construct facilities for giving final

treagment to West Side sewage by activated sludge, as

recommended in that report.

I have prepared a table showing the flow in the Main

Drainage Channel of the Sanitary District, yeerly av-

erages, 1930 to 1940. These records are in the somi-

annual reports made to the Supreme Court up to

December 1938 and to such figures I have added figures

for the other two years. These figures of flow are shown

in Illinois Exhibit No. 11.

55-58 I have compiled a tabulation showing the flow in the

Main Drainage Channel, by months, for the year 1939.

These figures are compiled from records of flow from

the Main Channel at Lockport and from other records

kept by the Sanitary District in the ordinary course of

business and as reported monthly to the United States

District Engineer at Chicago. Such figures for flow by

months during the year 1939 are shown in IIlinois Exhi-

bit No. 12.

59-60 The PWA Review Board was appointed early in

April 1934 by Mr. Ickes, the Administrator of the Fed-

eral Emergency Administration of Public Works. This

Review Board was appointed at that time to review

plans and specifications prepared by The Sanitary Dis-

trict of Chicago for certain sewage treatment works

and made a report to Mr. Ickes in April 1934.

The Sanitary District of Chicago in May 1934 filed

a special report with the Supreme Court, indicating

that the Sanitary District intended to modify the order

of procedure in its sewage treatment construction pro-

gram and was going to proceed at once with the con-

struction of the Southwest Sewage Treatment ‘Works

because the PWA’s Review Board had so recommended

and directed in its report, made to Mr. Ickes in April

1934. The Sanitary District transmitted this PWA Re-

view Board report to the Supreme Court as a part of

the special report which the Sanitary District filed with

the Court in May 1934. The PWA Review Board rec-

ommended, in its report of April 1934, that instead of

going ahead with complete treatment facilities for the

West Side sewage at that time, the Sanitary District de-

lay that work and study what method could best be used

for secondary treatmnet of the West Side sewage and

spend the funds on hand for complete treatment facili-

ties for the Southwest sewage. The Sanitary District

proceeded along those lines and during the years fol-

lowing made certain experiments to determine the best

method of supplementing the West Sidé treatment

plant. After those experiments had been made, the

Sanitary District, in April 1940, made a report to the

PWA Review Board on such tests. The PWA Review

Board then studied this report and recommended that

the Sanitary District adopt activated sludge for second-

ary treatment of the West Side sewage so it was April

1940 before the PWA Review Board made a recommen- .

dation as to the type and character of treatment which

should be used to supplement the existing treatment

of sewage from the West Side plant.

Illinois Exhibit No. 13 was received in evidence. This

exhibit is a tabulation of flow in the Main Drainage

Channel, monthly averages for the moriths of Jan-

uary to May, inclusive, 1940.

a a Ne

RAR erica

The Board of Trustees of The Sanitary District of

Chicago, in June 1940, approved the construction pro-

gram as recommended by the PWA Review Board (in

connection with the report made to it April 1940.) The

Sanitary District of Chicago sold $5,000,000 of bonds

June 27, 1940. The money received for these bonds

can be used on the $900,000 of contract work in force

and for other work now being placed under contract.

One of these contracts for tightening the Government

breakwater in connection with the Chicago Rivet Con-

trol Works will cost around $200,000. Another contract

for which bids are advertised to be received the latter

part of July is a contract for additional blowers for the

West-Southwest Plant. This work may cost around

$500,000. The interest rate on this last bond issue of

the Sanitary District was 2-14 per cent but there was

a premium of $107,000 on the $5,000,000 bond issue, that

is, the bonds were sold at par plus a premium of $107,-

000. That money is now on deposit and with the $1,300,-

000 in the construction fund as of the first of June 1940,

65-66 the resources on hand for construction are $6,300,000.

The Sanitary District has something over $6,300,000

cash on hand at present, resulting from the cash on

hand June 1, 1940 and the sale of $5,000,000 of bonds

on June 27, 1940. In addition to that the Sanitary Dis-

trict had $2,400,000 of unused bonding capacity after

June 27th and then the Sanitary District redeemed $3,-

000,000 of bonds on the first of July 1940, bringing the

unused banding capacity up to $5,400,000. This figure

in addition to the $6,300,000 cash on hand brings the

total resources of the Sanitary District for construction

purposes up to above $11,000,000.

: 16

67-

69 Discussion by the Master and Counsel.

70 The $5,000,000 of bonds sold by the Sanitary District, |

June 27, 1940, ‘were for the following purposes: u

Calumet Project..................:00.45. ....$ 150,000

North Side Project 250,000

Southwest Side Sewers ......... 490,300 |

West-Southwest Sewage Treatment Works 3,909,700 ts

Chicago River Controlling Works .. 200,000

The total flow from the Main Drainage Channel dur-

ing June 1940 averaged 2866 c.f.s.; inflow from the Des

Plaines River was 53 c.f.s.; domestic pumpage of the

Chicago metropolitan area, 1662 c.f.s.; net diversion ,

from Lake Michigan, 1161 c.f.s.

71 On May 16, 1940, The Sanitary District of Chicago

filed an application with the Pubiic Works Adminis-

tration requesting that $5,598,200 be added to the re-

sources in the existing agreement .between the Sani-

tary District and the PWA, in ord@r. to carry out this

amount of construction at the West-Southwest Sewage

Treatment Plant. This application for an amendment

to the present PWA agreement is still pending. The

purpose of such an application to the WPA is to save

money for the local taxpayers since under the PWA

agreement the Sanitary District receives a grant of 30

per cent of the cost of labor and material, and under

this request the PWA is asked for a total grant of $19,-

000,000 in place of the grant of $16,692,000 under the =|

present PWA agreement. This would enable the Sani- :

72 tary District to carry on additional construction work

to the extent of this increase in the grant of $2,308,000.

This report of the PWA Review Board, made April 30,

1934, to Mr. Ickes, Administrator of the Federal Emer-

gency Administration of Public Works, was filed with .

the Supreme Court in May 1934, in connection with

this case now under consideration.

Pages 15, 16, 17, 44, 45, 46 and 47 of this PWA Review

Board report were received in evidence as Illinois

Exhibit No. 14. Said exhibit appears in the record of

these hearings, pages 73 to 83.

83-84 The supplemental report of the Sanitary District,

filed with the Supreme Court of the United States, May

23, 1934, in particular page 4 of said report, was received

in evidence as I]linois Exhibit No. 15. Illinois Exhibit

No. 15 appears in the record of these hearings, pages

84 to 92, inclusive.

93-94 The report of the Engineering Department of The

11]

Sanitary District of Chicago, dated April 16, 1940, re-

garding additions to the Southwest Side Sewage Treat-

ment Works, and also supplemental treatment for the

West Side sewage, originally submitted ¥o the Chief En-

gineer of The Sanitary District of Chicago, and by him

transmitted to Joshua D’Esposito, Resident Projects

Engineer of the Public Works Administration, and in

turn, transmitted by D’Esposito to the PWA Review

Board, was received in evidence as Illihois Exhibit No.

16. This report appears in the record of these proceed-

ings, pages 95 to 110, inclusive.

The PWA Review Board, after studying the Sanitary

District report of April 16, 1940, made a report to Josh-

ua D’Esposito, Resident Projects Engineer, PWA, May

3, 1940, in which it was recommended that certain con-

struction be undertaken to increase the capacity of the

West-Southwest Sewage Treatment Works and to pro-

18 :

vide secondary treatment for the West Side sewage.

This report of the PWA Review Board was received in

evidence as Illinois Exhibit No. 17 and appears in the }

record of these proceedings, pages 112 to 117. The let-

ter from Joshua D’Esposito, Resident Projects Engineer,

PWA, transmitting a copy of the PWA Review Board

report. of May 3, 1940, to Ross A. Woodhull, President

of The Sanitary District of Chicago, was received in

evidence as Illinois Exhibit No. 18, and appears in the

record of these proceedings, pages 118 to 119.

119-122 Certified copies of certificates from Michael J.

Flynn, County Clerk of Cook County, Illinois, showing

the assessed values of property in the Sanitary Dis-

trict for the years 1937, 1938 and 1939, were received

in evidence as Illinois Exhibits No. 19-A, 19-B and 19-C,

and appear on pages 119 to 122 in the record of these

proceedings.

122-123 In regard to the financial status (for construction

purposes) of the Sanitary District, for the years 1937,

1938 and 1939, etc., the Sanitary District had:

Debt Based on

Incurring Assessed Bonds

Date Capacity Valuation Outstanding

Jan. 2, 1937 $119,915,555 1935 $133,322,390

Jan. 2, 1938 115,732,909 1936 124,992,890

Jan. 2, 1939 122,861,672 1937 117,484,390

Nov. 1, 1939 115,430,278 1938 114,484,390

Jan. 2, 1940 115,430,278 1938 111,489,390

May 1, 1940 121,375,552 1939 111,488,390

These figures given as of May Ist indicate that May

1940 was the first time for the past three years that the ®

bonds outstanding were substantially less than the debt

124

125

126

incurring capacity. This came about because of the in-

crease in the assessed value of the property within the

Sanitary District for the year 1939, which figures be-

came official April 15, 1940. In the years 1937 and 1938

the outstanding bonds either exceeded the bonding

capacity or were not substantially less. In 1939 the debt

incurring capacity was almost $1,000,000 more thar the

bonds outstanding and in 1940 this difference became

about $4,000,000. These figures do not take into account

contractual obligations of the Sanitary District, which

amount to about $2,500,000. The figures of May 1, 1940

indicate the difference between the debt incurring ca-

pacity and the outstanding bonds of practically $10,000,-

J00, and with $2,500,000 of contractual obligations that

left resources available for construction of approxi-

mately $7,500,000. This figure was further increased

by the retirement of $3,000,000 of bonds on J uly 1, 1940.

The permit, under which the Sanitary District diverts

water from Lake Michigan, authorizes a diversion of

1500 c.f.s., annual average, from the Great Lakes-St”

Lawrence watershed. This includes the run-off from

_ the Chicago and Calumet Rivers, which amounts to ap-

,»

proximately 500 c.f.s., annual average. This leaves

about 1000 c.f.s. which can be diverted directly from

Lake Michigan. In budgeting the flow, we determine at

the first of each month what flow should be produced

in the Main Drainage Canal for that month and in doing

so set up a certain amount for so-called “storm reserve”

to take care of storm water. In the month of June, 1940,

we budgeted a certain amount of fiow and figured there

would be normal rainfall whereas in the month of

June 1940, the rainfall was actually 1.31 inches, which

was about half the normal rainfall, so that in the month

of June not as much as half of the storm reserve was

used. If the rainfall had been n-.mal, the flow from

Lake Michigan, including the rainfall as diversion,

127 would have been about 1300 or 1400 c.f.s. The 1506 c.f.s.

permitted from the Lake Michigan watershed is a net

. figure. The total discharge from the end of the Channel

at Lockport is measured. A credit is then taken for

domestic pumpage in Chicago and for inflow from the

Des Plaines River and after these credits are taken, the

remainder is the net diversion, which cannot be more

than 1500 c.f.s., annual average. The figure uf approxi-

mately 1161 c.f.s. on the tabulation for the month of

June would correspond with 1461 c.f.s. for the period

January 1 to May 31, 1940, shown in Illinois Exhibit

No. 13. This 1161 c.f.s. would correspond to the 1698

c.f.s. for the month of May; 1437 for the month of April;

1578 for the month of March; 1228 for the month of

128-130 February; and 1364 for the month of January, all

as shown on Illinois Exhibit No. 13.

‘le rainfall is charged as a part of this 1500 c.f.s., an-

nual average diversion, even though it is not water di-

rectly from Lake Michigan, it is water which is tribu-

tary to Lake Michigan. It is necessary to average up

by the end of the year at 1500 c.f.s., or less, but since

rainfall is so uncertain sometimes we have saved up a

little too much in the early part of the year. There

have been other times when we haven’t saved quite

enough and have had to cut the flow down very low

in the latter part of December to average out.

HORACE P. RAMEY—Direct Examination

1409 When the diversion of water from Lake Michigan

was reduced to 1,500 c.f.s. in January 1939, we started

to budget the flow very carefully. I have prepared a

tabulation showing the planned flow and the actual

discharge of water from the Main Channel at Lockport

1410 for the years 1938, 1939 and 1940. This was introduced

as Illinois Exhibit No. 40. On this exhibit, under the

heading “Planned Flow”, column one indicates the to-.

tal flow as planned at the beginning of each of the

years 1939 and 1940. Column two shows this flow as

revised from month to menth. Column three, marked

“Storm Reserve”, shows the estimated amount of storm

run off. Column four indicates the average dry weather

flow as planned. The canal is operated with a flow cor-

responidng to the planned average dry weather flow and

this condition is not changed except when it is neces-

Sary to increase the flow to carry off storm run-off. In

1411 the table there are three columns under “Actual Flow”.

Column seven, “Actual Dry Weather Flow”, does not

differ greatly from column four, “Planned Average Dry

Weather Flow”. Column six, “Storm Run-off”, does

vary from column three, “Storm Reserve”, . because

actual storm run-off has not followed the normal esti-

mate in the past two years. Column five is the actual

average monthly flow. In February 1939 it was planned

to flow 2,400 c.f.s. of dry weather flow and 400 cfs. was

estimated for storm reserve, making a total of 2,800

c.f.s. It can be noticed that the actual average dry

weather flow, on days not affected by storm run-off,

was 2,430 cfs. It can be noticed that actual storm

run-off was 1,559 c.f.s. so it became necessary to flow [

a totai of 3,989 c.f.s. in that month. That was one month i

when the storm run-off exceeded normal. It also ex- :

ceeded the normal in March 1939.

An opposite case is shown in the month of June 1940;

In that month, it was planned to flow 2,800 c.f.s. dry

weather flow, with an allowance of 400 c.f.s. for storm

run-off, making a total flow of 3,200 c.f.s. The actual i

average dry weather flow was 2,746 c.f.s., not much

different from the 2,800 c.f.s. planned. The storm run-

1412 off was only 130 c.f.s. instead of the 400 c.f.s. planned,

so the total actual flow became only 2,876 c.f.s.

From this exhibit it can be noticed that by October

1939 the actual storm run-off had been very much less

than the planned storm reserve so it was safe in Octo-

ber to increase the original budget of total flow from

2,900 c.f.s. to 3,100 c.f.s. Then, in November, it was in-

creased from 2,800 c.f.s. to 2,900 c.f.s. There was no

storm run-off in November and considerabie storm

reserve was accumulated, hence in December, it was

possible to plan a total flow of 3,500 c.f.s. and the actual

flow was 3,469 c.f.s.

Now, you notice in February, March, April, May,

1939, we planned an average dry weather flow of

about 2400 c.f.s., and our average dry weather flow in

the days not affected by storm run-off, that is, the ac-

tual flow, was 2430 c.f.s., in February, 2476 in March,

2417 in April, 2263 in May. |

Now, that is about as low dry flow as is safe, when

you consider that the domestic water pumpage andthe

inflow from the Des Plaines Valley amounts to about

1600 c.f.s., or perhaps 1650. and when you consider

that the average run-off of the Chicago and Calumet

1413 Rivers amounts to about 550 c.f.s., you have a total

flow of around 2100 c.f.s., exclusive ot diversion, so

when we planned a flow of 2400 c.f.s., that means we

planned to take only 300 c.f.s. out of Lake Michigan.

Now, the Calumet River is still open, that is, it has

an open connection with Lake Michigan. The Chicago

River has a so-called tight connection, on account of

the Chicago River Control Works, but with this 300 c.f.s.

coming in from the iake through a channel which is

20 feet deep and 200 feet wide, or 4,000 square feet, the

velocity is less than a tenth of a foot a second. In other

worgis, there is practically no slope from the lake, and

it would take very little surplus water running into

the river from land to reverse that flow, sor:we have

never felt that it was safe to operate the cana} with

a lower dry weather flow than 2400 c.f.s.

1414 During storms there are times when water runs off

the land into the Chicago and Calumet Rivers in quanti-

ties as high as 10,000 to 12,000 c.f.s. If the discharge

at Lockport was not increased to draw this water

from the Chicago River to Lockport, the water would

flow nto Lake Michigan. With the flow as at the pres-

ent time, there is a slope or drop of approximately six

inches between Lake Michigan and Lockport. To flow

16,000 c.f.s. through the Canal, which 10,000 c.f.s. may

come from an ordinarily heavy rain, a slcpe of seven

feet between Lake Michigan and Lockport is needed.

It is obvious that if a water level“at the Lockport end

of the Canal was not lowered, the storm waters run-

ning into the Calumet and Chicago Rivers near the

lake would raise the level of those rivers and cause flow

into the lake. This can be prevented in the case of the

Chicago River because of the control works at the

mouth of the River, but not in the case of the Calumet

River. While in the case of the Chicago River, there is a

limit. The level of the Chicago River cannot be permit-

ted to rise too high or there would be flooding of base-

ments in the Chicago area.

1415 In the latter part of January, I testified that the ;

Sanitary District had 27 contracts in force, the uncom-

pleted work on which was estimated ai $212,000. Since

that time, six of these contracts have been completed;

ten other contracts have been let; and $518,000 has

been expended. Three of the new contracts are major

contracts in our future sewage treatment construction

program.

Illinois Exhibit No. 41 was received in evidence. This

exhibit shows profiles of the water surface in the Chi-

cago River and Drainage Canal.

1416 ~=It shows that in June 1940, with an average flow of

2876 c.f.s., the water surface slope dropped from 0.78

c.c.d. at the mouth of the Chicago River to -1.25 at Lock-

port. In other words, there was a drop of about six

inches between Chicago and Lockport to produce a flow

of 2876 c.f.s.

- Another profile shownig a discharge of 10,140 cfs.

on September 1, 1927, shows the water surface at the

lake in Chicago at approximately the same elevation as

in June 1940. In other words, it required a drop of 7.2

feet to produce a flow of 10,000 c.f.s.

The 10 contracts I mentioned before as having been

recently let are a part of a supplementary construction

program amounting to about $12,000,000, of which $10,-

™

000,000 of work is for additional complete treatment fa-

1417 cilities for the West Side sewage, to be built at the

Southwest Side Plant. Of the three important contracts

mentioned, one was for additional pumps at the Racine

Avenue Pumping Station, to cost $90,570. Another con-

tract was for 3 blower units at the West. Southwest

Sewage Treatment Works, to cost $544,300, and the

other major item was a contract for making watertight

the breakwater in the Chicago Harbor, which is part

of the Chicago River Control Works. The contract price

on this work is $119,710. The work of constructing the

supplementary treatraent facilities is proceeding with

reasonable diligence.

1418 Illinois Exhibits Nos. 42 and 43 were received in

evidence, being a record of daily discharge at Lock-.

port, for the years 1939 and 1940, and a record of half _

hourly discharge at Lockport on the 15th day of each

month, for the years 1939 and 1940. In these tabulations

(Exhibits Nos. 42 and 43) there are certain half-hour

periods where the discharge increases approximately

1600 c.f.s. over the preceding half-hour periods. One

instance is in the column for January 15, 1939, at 10

P. M. This increase is probably due to lockage. A flow

of about 1600 c.f.s. for half an hour is required to fill

the Lockport lock. There are several places in these

tables where the discharge will vary in a half hour

from the preceding half hour about 1600 c.f.s., or in mul-

tiples of 1600 c.f.s., and the reason for this is the water

used for lockage.

HORACE P. RAMEY—Cross Examination

1531 As Assistant Chief Engineer of The Sanitary Dis-

trict of Chicago, I have a lot to do with the supervision

of the engineering department and I have charge of all

design work. I have very little to do with construction

or with operation.

I was a witness in the previous hearings before the

Special Master, now Chief Justice of the United States

Supreme Court. I was also a witness in the previous

hearings before Special Master Edward F. McClennen.

1532 I have assisted in the preparation of the semi-annual

reports of the Sanitary District to the Supreme Court;

also, assisted in the preparation of the supplemental

report relative to modification in sequence of the con-

struction program, filed with the Supreme Court May

23, 1934.

In previous testimony in these hearings, I introduced

tables bringing the costs on the sewage treatment con-

struction program up to June 1, 1940; from the figures

previously reported to the Supreme Court of gosts to

1533 December 1, 1938. The figures of expenditures for

sewage treatment plants and facilities from 1930

through 1938 were reported in the semi-annual reports

to the Supreme Court. These figures as compiled by Mr.

Naujoks were: For 1930, $5,339,377; 1931, $4,686,717;

1932, $705,469; 1933, $424,801; 1934, $6,755,594; 1935,

$11,214,353; 1936, $16,344,921; 1937, $14,940,266; 1938,

$9,570,98

$74,000,000\through 1939.

Q. In the petition of the State of Illinois, page five,

the statement appears: “It is estimated that the cost of

1939, $4,177,748; a total of a little more than-

moe neh yas esis ss VERS oan

i dab EER a Saabs Ep. eK. |

RY EY Ss itn

said works”, meaning complete sewage treatment facili-

ties at the West Side Works, “will not exceed $9,000,090,

and the estimated time for the physical construction of

said complete treatment for the West Side treatment

works will be two working seasons.”

1534 Q. Now, this will bring the total construction cost for

the completion of the sewage treatment construction

program of the Sanitary District to slightly in excess of

$83,000,000?

A. The record shows that prior to April 21, 1930

the Sanitary District had spent $89,812,847.25, and I as-

sume that the figures of $74,000,000 that you have put

in are in addition to that $89,000,000.

Q. My question referred to the total cost since the

entry of the decree of April 21, 1930.

A. Oh, that is approximately right, based on this

statement that it is estimated that the cost of said work

shall not exceed nine million, but later we put in a fair-

ly close estimate of those works at the West Side Plant

of $10,555,000.

The estimate of $10,555,000 was prepared in April

1940. The other figures (for $9,000,000) were compiled

in either October or November 1939.

1535 In the 1929 hearings, we submitted a future con-

struction program of $176,166,000.00. I would not say

that we were nearly $100,000,000 off on our estimates at

that time. Those estimates were made as of 1928, using

1928 costs, figuring an Imhoff tank and trickling filter

plant for the West Side, figuring an Imhoff tank and

trickling filter plant for the Southwest Side, together

1536 with the necessary right-of-way for the Southwest

Side, and before the processes of incinerating sludge

was developed. The estimates were on the high side

but I wounld not say quite as much as $50,000,000. The

reasons for accomplishing this work for figures less

than the estimated prices were explained in the reports

to the Supreme Court. Contracts were let during the

depression for about 25 per cent less than the figures

we had estimated; also, we effected certain economies

by developing the process of incinerating sludge. In the

report to the Court of January 1, 1933, it was estimated

that there would be a saving of $9,775,000 by the adop-.

1537 tion of the incineration process. We saved on the con-

struction of practically all the sewers built from 1930

on, but particularly for 1933. The amounts are all stated

in the reports to the Supreme Court. In testifying be-

fore Special Master McClennen, in 1933, I introduced

a chart, dated September 10, 1930, showing construc-

tion costs for the complete sewage treatment program

of The Sanitary District of Chicago, from September

10, 1939 to December.31, 1938, in which the total cost

1538 was estimated at $174,043,000. In that tabulation the

cost of the Chicago River control works was estimated

at $4,000,000. These controlling works actually cost

about $2,800,000 but this was for a different type of

construction. The estimate of $4,000,000 was made in

1929 and was not changed in the table dated\1932 and

introduced at the hearings in 1933.

1539 I furnished the representatives of the State of

Illinois with the figure of $9,000,000 for additional work

required at the West Side Plant and assisted in the pre-

paration of the petition of the State, in which this figure

was used. I testified in these hearings that the esti-

mated additional cost of construction work at the West

. Side plant after June 1, 1940 was $10,969,900. In the fi-

nal semi-annual report to the Supreme Court, the esti-

mated cost of future work on the Calumet project

after December 1, 1938 was shown as $302,000. Illinois

Exhibit No. 7 in these hearings shows that between

December 1, 1938 and June 1, 1940, $626,869.03 was ex-

pended on this project, and Illinois Exhibit No. 9 shows

that future expenditures after June 1, 1940 on the Calu-

1540 met project are estimated at $723,920. In the final

semi-annual report to the Supreme Court, the future

work on the North Side project, after December 1, 1938,

was estimated at $290,000. Illinois Exhibit No. 7 in

these hearings indicates that between December 1, 1938

and June 1940, there had been expended $235,836.16 on

this project. In Illinois Exhibit No. 9, the future work

after June 1, 1940 is estimated at $483,219.00. Illinois

1541 Exhibit No. 10 shows the items for which the future

estimates were made.

Q. Mr. Clausen: You might shorten this record a lot,

Mr. Naujoks. If it is the same identical kind of work

that he estimated on then or estimated on later, then we

will get somewhere, but just what he estimated back

three or four years ago, that isn’t in the record. This

isn’t cross-examination of any testimony I brought out.

The Master: I don’t think he would be limited to ex-

amining this witness, who is an important officer of

the Sanitary District, to matters brought out in direct

examination. He might, perhaps, have to put him on

for cross-examination; under the new rules he can cross-

examine any officer of an opposing party freely, even if

he never be directly examined, without being bound

by it, so I don’t think’ the objection that it was not

brought out in direct examination is important. I

should suppose that it was proper cross-examination

to show that estimates are, perhaps, not accurate. It

may be unnecessary time if it is all in the reports‘to the

Supreme Court already, and in your brief you could list

1542 those figures and these figures. After all, the figures

are there and maybe we could save time by having

the witness check up the figures in his answer. I thought

originally when you began that it might save time to

let him make the summaries now instead of having to

get it out of these earlier reports, but I doubt if we

are making any time. All you are questioning him

about is, did you say this at that time and is it this now?

You could put all of that in a brief, unless the witness

would like an opportunity to explain why the figures

are different. It would be desirable to let him have

that opportunity to explain. That is what you are try-

ing to do, Mr. Naujoks? ~~.

Mr. Naujoks: I have given him an opportunity to

explain. He has explained or attempted to explain.

A. Oh, no; I had no chance to explain.

1543 Q. Do you wish to explain?

A. You cited the fact that there was a certain esti-

mate as of December 1, 1938 for the Calumet Treatment

Plant, and that we had expended certain money and

still today there was an estimated future expenditure of

$723,920. Now, $610,000 of that is for a project for

taking some of the sewage from the Southwest Side

area over to the Calumet Treatment Plant. It is work

which could be omitted, but it probably will be desir-

able to do this work and take some of the load off the

1544

Southwest Plant, and it is in my estimate of future

work as of today.

On the North Side project, I have an item in here for

$200,000 for Golf and Glenview sewers, which was

omitted from the future work in the report to the

Court in 1938 because it is so-called non-essential work.

It has nothing to do with the diversion, but it is a sani-

tary improvement that will be carried out sometime

within the next year, I expect.

Another item which we deducted from the estimates

of essential sewage treatment work as in the report

to the Court in 1938 was something like $15,000,000 for

the construction of the South Side sewers. That is not |

essential sewage treatment work, because it doesn’t ef-

fect the diversion in any way, but it was in the original

$176,000,000 program. It hasn’t been done yet, but it

is things such as that that make estimates of 1940 differ

from estimates of 1930 or ’38.

The Master: Have you a tabulation, Mr. Naujoks,

of the differences in estimates?

Mr. Naujoks: Some of them, yes.

The Master: Because it would make it much easier,

I think, to follow them if you had a summary of them

and didn’t have to construct them by reading, perhaps,

25 or 30 pages of examination.

A: This brief says, “It was estimated that the cost

of said works will not exceed $9,000,000”, and the esti-

mated time—those are round figures. The actual esti-

mate of all the items of work were made three or four

months later. It came out $10,500,000. I am not sur-

prised at that difference.

Een we O: Ceaa oe as eee

1545 Ido not know the amount of air used at the North

Side Sewage Treatment Works when the plant was first

placed in service in 1928. I would say that an allowance

of 1.25 cubic feet of air per gallon of Sewage was about

right as of 1926 but not as of 1940. The plant was not

opened in 1926; it was placed in service in 1928 but it

was designed prior to the time it was built. I do not

know what the nitrates and nitrites were in the effluent

from the North Side plant.

1546 The Sanitary District is redeeming bonds at the rate

of about $5,000,000 per year right, now and if the as-

sessed valuations of property do not become lower, the

Sanitary District will come into bonding capacity to

the extert that bonds are redeemed. Right now the

surplus (difference between bonding capacity and out-

standing bonds) is something like $10,000,000. I do not

have the figures of the amount of money available for

operating purposes for the year 1939. I will get such

figures for the years 1939, 1940 and 1941.

1547 I will also produce the Sanitary District Budget

Repott for 1939 and 1940 ard an estimate of the Op-

erating revenue for 1941.

1548 Since more operating revenue, estimated at $6,000,-

000 in taxtés per year plus other income, was needed

when the Southwest Sice plant went into service, the

Sanitary District of Chicago, in 1939, requested the Illi-

nois Legislature to pass a pegged levy statute, author-

izing the Sanitary District to levy corporate taxes of

1549 $6,000,000 per year. The other income results from

sale of sludge ccnverted into fertilizer, sale of power,

etc. Since January, 1939, the Sanitary District has not

been able to generate sufficient power for its own needs

at the Lockport Power Plant and has had to purchase

additional power. In the 1940 Sanitary District budget,

there was an item of $1,000,000 for the purchase of pow-

| er. The Sanitary District is still under contract to fur-

1550 nish the City of Chicago with power. This is an indefi-

| nite con'ract as to time but it could be cancelled by _

\ either siae on proper notice. The Sanitary District pur-

chases power from the Public Service Company of

Northern Illinois and uses it for its own needs and sells

some to the City and the Park District.

In 1939, the Illinois Legislature passed a pegged levy

Statute, authorizing the Sanitary District of Chicago to

levy corporate taxes of $5,500,000 for the years 1940,

1551 1941, 1942 and 1943. Then, subsequent to the passage

of that Act, the Legislature amended ‘the revenue sec-

tion of the Sanitary District statute for another purpose

and recited the original tax rate. This inadve-tently

nullified the pegged levy act. Later, in 1940, the Legis-

lature passed an act authorizing a pegged levy of $5,-

000,000 for two years, 1940 and 1941. Under this act, the

corporate taxes of the Sanitary District cannot be less

than $5,900,000.

1552. The Master: Is the general purpose of this exami-

nation to show the resources of the Sanitary District?

Mr. Naujoks: Well, no. Among other things, yes, but

there are other purposes too. One purpose is to show

that they requested six million dollars which they have

to have for efficient operation of the Sanitary District,

and the State of Illinois cut them down to five mil-

lion dollars. In other words, they are a million short

on what they require for operating purposes.

The Master: Well, there is really no issue presented

here as to the insufficient resources at this time. They

have got abundant resources, haven’t they, today, for all

they are planning to do? That is the impression I re-

ceived from the previous testimony, and I would like

to be corrected if I am thinking wrong; but I got the im-

pression that with the money on hand and the money

1553 which they had authority to borrow and would, from

time to time, be able to borrow as they take up bonds,

that they are really in a strong financial position, and

the only reason they are claiming they need time is not

because they haven’t got money, but because they say

that it is physically impossible to get these contracts

let and these plants constructed. Now, I may be entire-

ly wrong in the impressions I have up to now, but it

might be useful to correct me now.

Mr. Naujoks: Yes, sir, I am going to. If the Master,

please, they have sufficient money for capital expendi-

tures for the completion and construction of the pro-

gram which they have outlined and require to provide

complete treatment which the Supreme Court imposes

on the district and the State of Illinois in the decree of

April 20, 1930, as amended, but they haven’t sufficient

funds for operating purposes. In other words, they can’t

use their bonding money for operating expenses, and for

that reason we contend—are going to contend—that

they aren’t operating a lot of the plants as efficiently,

and that one of the remedial measures would be for the

State to produce more money, amor: other things, as

Mr. Pearse testified this morning, so that they could

have more air at these aeration tanks, which would give

them a higher degree of B.O.D. removal.

See eee

1554 The Master: Well, has there been any testimony

before me to the effect that they can’t operate the plants

efficiently because they haven’t got enough money?

Mr. Naujoks: Yes, Mr. Pearse so testified this morn-

ing.

The Master: Well, I didn’t get that impression.

Mr. Clausen: No, you didn’t testify to that, did you,

Mr. Pearse? ; 7

The Master: I may not have followed what he said.

I didn’t understand that they were making any con-

tention that they couldn’t operate effectively now for

lack of money. ;

Mr. Naujoks: Well, we have a right to show that, if

that is the fact.

The Master: No such issue is raised by the pleadings,

as I recall, but I should think the first thing for you to

show is that they weren’t operating efficiently. Then, if

they wanted to explain their failure to operate effi-

ciently by claiming that they didn’t ave money enough, ;

they, you would come back and show that that was the |

fault of Illinois, if that needs any proof, because I hoatg)

have said offhand, after the Supreme Court’s decision

on Mr. McClennen’s report, that it is quite clear that

1555 the Supreme Court won’t accept as an excuse that

they haven’t got enough money, because the Supreme

Court said in 1935 that it was up to Illinois to give

them the money; and I don’t believe that the Supreme

Court would seriously consider now any defense claim

for relief based upon failure of money. Therefore, while

I don’t want to shut you off and will not in any way,

I am a little cloudy in my mind as to the importance

of testimony as to their financial resources, either (a)

p 36

they are adequate, as I thought they were, or (b) they

are inadequate and they can’t complain that they are

inadequate. Either from (a) standpoint or (b) stand-

point the testimnoy as to their financial resources

would be immaterial.

It would be, I think, material to show that their

plants aren’t being efficiently operated fully, but that

is not a question of financial resources as far as the fact

of efficiency is concerned; that doesn’t depend upon

financial resources. They are either efficientiy operated,

or they are not, and finances would only be a reason

for their being inefficiently operated, if they are ineffi-

ciently operated.

Well, you proceed. I just thought I would think aloud

a little bit and perhaps help myself and perhaps help

you.

1555

1558 The population increment for 10 years’ growth

(1930 to 1940) in the Calumet area used by the Sani-

tary District in the reports te the Supreme Court was

45.6 per cent. The population increment for the years

1559 1930 to 1940 on the North Side area is not in the

record. These increments were on a statement submit-

ted to Mr. Naujoks originally and he did not want me

to use them so I left them out when I testified.

The Master: In the Sanitary District’s reports to the

Supreme Court, or in the statements and testimony

given in previous hearings, certain estimates were

made as to expected population increase in certain

districts.

Mr. Naujoks: Right.

The Master: Now, those estimates are not shown

by anything in the record of this hearing, or anything

1569 on file in the Supreme Court so far, is, that correct?

Mr. Naujoks: I believe that is right. That is correct.

The Master: They are not on file so far.

Mr. Naujoks: Let me explain it this way: The actual

figures reported to the Supreme Court for the future,

for the ten-year period 1930 to 1940, as to population

growth by districts in the Sanitary District, have bee

filed with the Supreme Court.

The figures I wish to put in the record now are the

percentage population increase which are not in the

record anywhere as percentages.

The Master: Well, could ey not be figured out by

anyone who read the figures}that are in the record?

I mean, couldn’t I see m what percentages there

were if I took the time to figure them out?

Mr. Naujoks’ That is right. It would take time.

The Master: Couldn’t you figure it oui for me ina

brief and I could ask opposing counsel to admit either

that they were right or say where they were wrong.

That, I think, would save us time, because if your basic

figures are in the record already and this is just a mat-

1561 ter of calculation from that, you could do the calcu-

lating in your brief and make your argument upon it,

and, of course, I can take judicial notice of the 1940

census figures and you can put them in your brief, and

then your opponents will either have to challenge the

correctness of your figures or admit them. If they chal-_

lenge the correctness of them, I suppose I would have -

to figure them out myself, anyhow.

Mr. Naujoks: I thought it would be simpler to put

them in this way and then we would have them.

A: I would rather put these figures in from my own

census estimates, the ones I have been working from.

I think they are right.

Mr. Naujoks: We can get together on this.

A: Suppose I tabulate the thing.

The Master: Your purpose, I take it, is to show that

they assume that there would be increases in the pop-

ulation which the last census would show has not

taken place.

Mr: Naujoks: Yes, that is right. Now, that has an

effect, among other things, upon—

The Master: Upon the program.

Mr. Naujoks: Upon the remedial measures, too; upon

the amount that they can treat, and things of that

type.

1562 In the semi-annual report to the Supreme Court, the

“percentage of sewage treatment at the North Side and

Calumet plants used in the tables in those reports was

given as 85 per cent. This 85 per cent was an estimate

of the treatment of the total sewage on the whole area

on an annual average basis, although on the sewage

actually going through the North Side Plant the treat-

ment was better than 90 per cent. The percentage of

sewage treatment used for the West Side plant in the

1563 reports to the Court was 33 per cent although the,

sewage that actually passed through the West Side

plant was treated to an extent better than 50 per cent

(actually 53 per cent). I cannot make a close esti-

mate of the amount of sewage from the West Side

area which was untreated during 1939. The relation

1567

between the 53 per cent and the 33 per cent was my

best estimate. The sewage that was untreated on the

North Side and Calumet areas through the years to

1938 was that sewage which might be termed street

wash and waste not carried to the treatment plants,

and, also, some sewage which was not intercepted on

those areas.

1564 The difference between the 85 per cent used in the

reports to the Court and the 90 per cent actual treat-

ment of the sewage which went through the plants was

intended to cover the storm flow of sewage and other

sewage which got into the channels untreated. None

of the wastes of the Corn Products Company passed

through a treatment plant of the Sanitary District,

1565 but the process under which these wastes were re-

claimed was discovered by Sanitary District chemists

while experimenting on a method to treat the Corn

Products wastes. In the reports to the Supreme Court,

the statement was made that these wastes have been

greatly reduced as a result of certain experimental

work initiated by the Sanitary District. The reports

to the Court do not show that the Sanitary District

treated those wastes but that there was a reduction in

the amount of Corn Products wastes. In the petition

to the Supreme Court, filed by the State of Illinois, in

1940, the percentage of treatment estimated for the

1566 North Side, Calumet and Southwest Side plants was

estimated at 85 per cent and the population estimates

were based on the 1930 census.

The maximum figure of 7,325 c.f.s. shown for dis-

charge from the Lockport tower House at four o’clock

on February 15, 1939, is about 1,600 cfs. higher than

any other figure on that chart and is apparently due

to the filling of the lock during that half hour. Other

differences on this chart (Illinois Exhibit No. 43) are

not so great. We set a certain figure for the average

low water flow and the half hourly figures vary from

that average if there happens to be a lockage, although

a lockage does not change the daily average very much.

The figures also vary if there happens to be a necessity

to run off storm flow. We allow something like a 10

per cent variation between maximum and minimum,

or between night and day flow, for the convenience of

1568 the operators at the Lockport Power Plant. The var-

iation in the record of March 15, 1939 appears to me

as if it was caused by rainfall run-off. The variation

between 1,900 c.f.s. and 3,200 c.f.s. on January 15, 1939

was probably to obtain more power during the night

hours. The one night reading 4,800 c.f.s., though, was

obvicusly caused by a lockage. The heavy flows dur-

ing March must have been due to run-off of precipi-

tation.

HORACE P. RAMEY—-Cross Examination.

1571 Mr. Clausen: The Sanitary District of Chicago is

authorized by statute to levy an annual corporate

(operating) tax of fifteen cents (15c) on each one hun-

dred dollars of assessed valuation of the taxable prop-

erty within its corporate limits. (Chap. 42, Sec. 12,

Para. 332, page 1335, Illinois Revised Statutes 1939,

State Bar Assn. Ed.)

a Vee ee eee eee.

The assessed valuation of the property within the

Sanitary District declined from approximately $4,400,-

000,000 in 1928 to approximately $2,400,000,000 in 1939,

so that the curporate tax levied in 1928 of approximate-

ly $6,500,000 declined to approximately $3,800,000 in

1939.

1572 In view of the increased operating cost due to bring-

ing into operation new treatment facilities, the regular

session of the 6lst General Assembly in 1939 amended

the Sanitary District Act and authorized the Sanitary

District to levy a tax not to exceed $5,500,000 for cor-

porate purposes for the years 1940 to 1943, inclusive.

This was known as the “Pegged Levy Act”.

Unfortunately, at the same session of the legislature,

that is, in 1939, at the closing day, after the passage of

the Pegged Levy Act, the legislature again amended the

same section of the Sanitary District Act for other

purposes and inadvertently omitted reference to the

pegged levy provisions, and this wasn’t discovered

until after adjournment. Our Supreme Court has held

that the last amendment controlled, so it nullified the

pegged levy provisions so that the Sanitary District

was again restricted to the fifteen-cent rate, which

would probably reduce it to about $3,600,000.

The Governor of Illinois called a special session of the

legislature to correct this situation, to meet on April

30, 1940, and™limited the call to such purpose, to a

pegged levy of $5,000,000 for the years 1940 to 1943,

inclusive. House Bill No. 19, accordingly, was presented

to the General Assembly with an emergency clause

_ 1573 and was passed by both houses and approved by the

Governor on May 31, 1$40, as found in the Illinois

Revised Statutes, 1940 Supplement State Bar Associa-

tion Edition, Chapter 43, Paragraph 332, page 23.

The Master: Mr. Clausen, how did the assessments

go down by years prior to ’39? Have you got informa-

tion, or could you have that made up for me? You

stated that the assessments went down from $4,400,-

000,000 in 1928 to $2,400,000,000 in 1939,and I would

like, if possible, to have a statement of the assessments

by years from ’28 to ’39, to show whether this decline

had not taken place, to some extent at least, in the

years prior to ’39.

Mr. Clausen: Oh, yes. I will furnish that. That was

during the depression period.

The Master: It was a gradual decline, I imagine.

If you have the file—

Mr. Clausen: Yes.

Mr. Naujoks: If the Master please, I think the record

Should also show that the valuations as given hege are

not at the true value, but that they are debased to 37

per cent in accordance with the rule adopted by the

local assessors and the Board of Equalization.

The Master: All assessments in this area are based

1574 upon 30 per cent of full value? |

Mr. Naujoks: They are bebased to that figure.

Mr. Clausen: I think I can put in those assessed

valuations by the County Clerk. Remember those cer-

tified copies, whatever it was. I will put them in as

exhibits.

Mr. Naujoks: Yes, but I just wanted the records tc

show those were the debased figures, not the true

value.

bidet bad

ab dnadanie VAN ie FM

acd, eh

The Master: Approved by the State Board of Equal-

ization. .

Mr. Naujoks: That is right.

The Master: Which is authorized by law to fix the

true valuations of which assessments shall be made, is

that correct?

Mr. Naujoks: I am not’ certain we will agree with

that. At any rate, the Board of Equalization ap-

proves it.

The Master: I assume there must be a legal basis

for it.

Mr. Clausen: There is.

Q: Mr. Ramey, will you explain the differences in

your estimates of construction cost as presented to the

Special Master in these cases in 1929 and again in

1933, and the figures on cost of work completed and

1575 estimates of cost for future work as presented by you

at the present hearings?

A: In the hearings in 1929, certain estimates were

presented to the court, and on those figures the condi-

tion of the construction program on April 21, 1930,

was as follows:

Work completed $ 81,917,603

Work under contract 11,473,683

Future work 176,166,000

Total: $269,557,286

That was the total program.

In the report to the Supreme Court of January 1,

1933, page 11, the statement was made:

“In the semi-annual report to the Court of Janu-

ary 1, 1932, pages 9 to 10, attention was called to

1576

the fact that contracts were being let at prices far

below those estimated in the program submitted

to the Supreme Court. The total saving in this

"espect to date has amounted to $5,330,000. That

n some twenty contracts, works estimated in

we original program to cost $19,834,000, had been

les for $14,514,000. This has been due in large

measure to contracts being let during the business

depression. A part of it is due to the inevitable

change in plan certain te happen in a project of

this magnitude.

“In order that the work already accomplished

may appear more accurately in relation to the

future work to be done, a revised estimate is sub-

mitted herewith in which proper account has been

taken of reasonably reduced construction cost

which probably will prevail up to the end of 1938,

and in which more definite information as io the

amount of sewage to be treated at the various

plants has been given due consideration.”

S a result of that, the total of $14,662,375 was sub-

tracted from the total program, that figure being made

up of the $,330,000 of savings on contracts let and

$9,332,375 reduction by re-estimate.

In the report to the Supreme Court of July 1, 1933,

page 2, the statement was made that because of the

adoption of the incineration process the figure of

$9,775,000 was eliminated. An amount of $6,000,000 was

eliminated from the estimate for miscellaneous plants

and sewers. That appears on page 3 of this same report

of July 1, 1933.

On page 11 of the report to the Supreme Court of

1577 July 1, 1933, a total of $17,000,000 is eliminated from

Spe ere on, ™

r eed” bate So SHON,

the program because of the combination of the West

Side and Southwest Side Plants on the one area, and

on that same page a reduction of $965,844 because of

re-estimate of the program. These figures make a total

of $33,740,844 eliminated as reported to the court on

July 1, 1933.

In the report to. the Supreme Court of January 1,

1935, page 13, because the PWA Review Board had

recommended that the Southwest Intercepting Sewer

and the Southwest Treatment Plant be built at less

capacity than had been originally estimated, a figure

of $7,525,000 was eliminated.

‘In the report to the Supreme Court of July 1, 1935,

page 11, an item of $2,463,000 is eliminated because

/ of Savings on contracts let, and a figure of $1,073,000

~ eliminated by a re-estimate of the program. Those two

, figures total $3,536,000 eliminated in the report of |

~ July 1, 1935. | .

In the report to the court of January 1, 1936, page

16, is this statement:

“After the execution of the latest agreement with

the Public Works Administration dated September

21, 1935, estimates on the entire future construc-

tion program were revised and reduced by $7,736,-

000. The principal items entering into this reduc-

tion were $1,500,000 of contingency items elim-

inated from estimates on Calumet and West Side

Treatment Plants; $4,636,000 taken from the West-

Southwest Treatment Plant estimate, figuring ulti-

mate capacity at 1,000 m.g.d. instead of 1,200

~ m.g.d. as previously done: alsc for omission of

power recovery plant; $701,000 saved on letting

of contracts one and four of the Southwest Side

”

1579

Intercepting Sewer, and $499,000 cut from the esti-

mate of cost of the proposed South Side Sewers.”

In the report to the Supreme Court of July 1, 1936,

page 10, there is a reduction in the program of $401,000

because of re-estimating.

In the report to the Supreme Court of July 1, 1937,

page 9, there is a reduction in the estimate of future

work of $1,514,000, the major part of which is made up

of an item of $950,000 eliminated from the estimate of

miscellaneous plants and sewers.

In the report to the Supreme Court of July 1, 1937,

pages 10 and 11, is this statement:

“At this time, eighteen months in advance of the

date of the ultimate reduction in the diversion of

water from Lake Michigan under the decree of

the court of April 2¥, 1930, it is proper to submit

a revised estimate of the cost of the essential con-

struction work remaining to be performed. The

original program outlined in 1938 contained many

items which have been materially altered during

the course of the past nine years. It also contained

_ Some items which, in the light of present-day

knowledge of the art of sewage treatment and of

the growth of the community, could have been

omitted.

“In 1928, near the close of an era of prosperity

and a period of rapid growth of the community,

certain items were included as essential items

which now are known to be not essential. This

change in conditions has been brought about partly

by natural causes and partly because of the recent

prolonged depression. Items were included for a

number of sewers in outlying sections suburban

1580

1581

to Chicago which are not yet necessary and proba-

bly wiil not be needed till after 1940, because there

has been little building in these communities for

the past six years, and there is no prospect for a

revival of building in the near future. For this

reason the following sewers can now be eliminated

from the program:

“The Calumet area, the Westerly Section of the

Blue Island Intereepting Sewer, $510,000; Califor-

nia Avenue-Oak Forest Sewer, $1,000,000; the Ev-

ergreen Park Sewer, $580,000.

“On the North Side: the Howard Street Sewer,

$2,000,000; the North Shore Intercepting Sewer,

$550,000. Those figures total $4,640,000;

“The extension of the North Side Sewage Treat-

ment Plant, estimated to cost $1,200,000, probably

will not be required until 1945 or later. The less-

ening of the period of detention of the sewage in

the tanks for aeration has greatly increased the

capacity of this portion of the plant. Thus, with

the addition of more final settling tanks now under

construction, this plant will have sufficient capa-

_ city for the next few years.

“The contingent item for miscellaneous plants

and sewers reduced to a million dollars at the time

of the last semi-annual report to.the court can

now be eliminated. The item of $15,000,000 for

South Side sewers and an item of $1,100,000 for

that portion of the Racine Avenue Pumping Sta-

tion required to handle the discharge of these

sewers must be deferred until some future time

because of financial necessity. The postponement

of this work will not affect the reduction in diver]

sion of water from Lake Michigan. The proposed

-new South Side Sewers comprise a very important

Sanitary improvement, but their construction

:' would not bring any additional sewage under

treatment. The items eliminated from the pro-

gram of essential construction work at this time

and postponed until some future date have been

estimated to cost $22,94(),000."¥ “

In a subsequent report to the Court of July 1, 1938,

page 7, it can be noticed that tae construction program

was reduced $380,000 by re-estimate; and on J anuary l,

1939, page 9, of the report to the Supreme Court, a

similar reduction of $2,497,000. )

All these reductions mentioned total $94,932,219. Sub-" |

tracting that figure from the total as submitted at the

1928 hearings leaves a total on J anuary 1, 1939 of $174,-

625,000. In the repoft to the Supreme Court of J anuary

1, 1939, the total program figures $174,255,000, a differ-

ence of $370,000, which has apparently been lost some-

where in my rough check-up of these estimates.

Now, yesterday I was asked why the Calumet pro-

ject when reported to the court January 1, 1939, that

there was $302,000 of future work, and in these hear-

ings we stated that between December 1, 1938 and '

1582 June 1, 1930 we had spent $626,869, or $324,869 more |

than the estimated future work as reported to the court

on January 1, 1939, and reported the future work as

of June 1, 1940 was $723,920, or a total of $1,048,789 if

added to the program. 5

The explanation for that is that some of the items

which were eliminated, or deferred, as mentioned in

the report to the court of July 1, 1937, have now be.n

replaced. We are undertaking to do some of those

iterns. Most of them as WPA projects. The Calumet |

project, for instance—one item which was deferred was ?

ai Te ox Os eee

the Evergreen Park sewer. We have been doing that.

Also, a part of that contingent item of $1,500,000 on the

_ Calumet Treatment Plant and West Side Treatment

Plant—severai items of work on that plant are now

being done as WPA projects. “The same statement can

apply to the North Side Treatment Works.

In the report to the court of 1937 we took $2,000,000

out of the estimate because of a postponement of con-

struction of the Howard Street Sewer. We now plan

to build a portion of that sewer. This portion is known

as the Golf and Glen View Sewers. That is $200,000

worth of work as submitted in these hearings. Also

certain of the additions to the North Side Plant which

we had planned in 1937 to defer because of financial

' 1583 needs, we are now doing as WPA projects.

1584

Another question was asked about why we furnished

the representatives of the State with a figure of $9,000,-

000 for the extension of the West Side Plant in No-

vember, 1939, and in April, 1940 gave an estimate for

$10,550,000 plus.

Well, one item that is in the April, 1940 figures and

not in the November, 1939 figures is $440,000 for fertil-

izer,plant; ard the other difference is made up because

of a Wetailed estimate made on the sludge drying plant

which*wwe didn’t have back in 1939. That figure of

$9,000,000 was a round preliminary estimate.

‘The difference between the figures compiled in No-

vember, 1939 and April, 1940 would not be $1,580,000

but would be $1,980,000; because the estimate for the

fertilizer plant is in the figure of $10,554,900. The

figure for total future contracts is $10,554,900. The

total for the 10 contracts in force is $415,000, the grant

total being $10,969,900. Of the figure of approximately

$74,000,000, spent on the construction program from

April 21, 1930 to the end of 1939, all of the funds were

1585 furnished by The Sanitary District of Chicago, except

$16,692,000, which came as a grant from the Public

_Works Administration.

Referring to Illinois Exhibit 43, entitled: “Main

Channel Half Hour Discharge at Lockport on the 15th

Day of Each Month for the Year 1939,” the figures for

flow include the water which goes through the wheels

of the Lockport Power House; includes lockage, leak-

age, flow over the dam, and, also, about 35 c.f.s. which

is taken from the Canal above Lockport by the Texas

Company, and some other industrial plants and re-

turned to the Canal below the Power House. Approxi-

mately 90 per cent, or a trifle more, of the total flow

is passed through the water wheels of the Lockport

Power House.

1586 The difference in flow between the daylight hours

and during the night hours is due to the power genera-

tion at night but the variation between day flow and

the night flow is not 100 per cent. The changes in flow

during certain hours of the day indicate that the flow

is varied for power purposes but other things are more

important than power. Whenever it is necessary to run

1587 off flood water, this takes precedence; also, lockage

takes precedence over power. In July, 1940, for in-

stance, there is not very much difference. Right now

we are operating with a flow around 2,800 c.f.s. average

low flow and we permit the operators, at the Power

House to increase the flow to 3300 or 3400 c.f.s. during

the night.

Shas au sick PSEA

PRI: aa ee Or Pee Se aT ees he: re a Fi ok OT ig gh

Pw Kalbe Ph RNs Ms GLA iS ba) Od. tats EAP ASS SON ith ARR Gey Sabimtaate BY Migs IOS Cay

Pe ides 2s

Goat a

MA Bel ee Oh ee Oe ae’ Le

ict Viaiih De, Wd

a A ee

we WD Ks Sess

Referring to January 15, 1939, at 9:30 P. M. on Ex-

hibit No. 43, the discharge is 3259 c.f.s.; at 10:30 P. M.,

the figure is 4852 c.f.s. This difference represents water

1588 used for lockage. Then from 10:30 P. M. to 6: 30 A. M.,

the flow averaged 3270 c.f.s., and during the day hours

thereafter, the average was approximately 1900 c.f.s.

The reason for that was that 1900 c.f.s. was used for

generation of power throughout the day and 3260 c.f.s.

throughout the night.

1589. The Sanitary District of Chicago owns and operates

the Lockport Power House. There are seven water

turbines installed in this plant; five of these turbines

will use 1667 c.f.s. each; then, there are two new units

which will use more water but offhand, I don’t recall

the maximum discharge capacity of those units. I will

check this up and furnish the figures. The total dis-

charge capacity of all the units in the power house is

well above 10,000 cfs. If the diversion should be

increased to 5000 c.f.s., a goodly portion of the addi-

tional 3500 c.f.s. would run through the water wheels

at Lockport and be used for the development of ‘power.

1590 In 1938 the power generated at Lockport was about

130,000,000 kilowatt hours; in 1939 it was about 70,000,-

000 kilowatt hours; that power is worth about 5 of a

cent per kilowatt hour.

1591 The figures on Illinois Exhibit No. 42 are figures of

discharge from the end of the Channel at Lockport,

and as an average they will represent flow through the

channel, but the flow can be Stopped absolutely at

Lockport for a few minutes without interfering with

the flow of the Chicago River. Where a minimum dis-

charge of 456 c.f.s. is shown on this exhibit as a half-

hour reading of discharge, the low reading is probably

due to the fact that the transmission line from the

power house had failed, or something of that nature.

These figures of discharge from the end of the Channel

represent flow through the Channel only as averages

of long periods of time. In these figures can be found

maximum discharges as high as 19,000 c.f.s. yet it is

a physical impossibility to flow that amount of water

through the channel.

1592 It would be unsafe to reduce the flow in the Chi-

cago River to 323 c.f.s. at any time but it would not

be unsafe to reduce the instantaneous discharge at

Lockport to such a figure for only a few minutes.

In Illinois Exhibit No. 9, the estimated expenditure

on the Chicago River Controlling Works was listed at

$200,000. A contract for this work was awarded for

$119,710. The construction will cost $15,000 or $20,000

more than this because of engineering costs and other

overhead. The engineer’s estimate on this contract was

about $160,000 and the low bid was $119,710.

1593 As of December 1, 1938, the available funds of the

Sanitary District unpledged for construction costs was |

a very small amount. On January 2, 1939, the Sani-

tary District had a debt incurring capacity of $122,-

961,672; outstanding bonds amounted to $117,484,390.

There is a difference of about $5,000,000 in these figures

but the contract obligations were approximately $3,-

000,000 so that left about $2,000,090 of debt incurring

capacity. At that time, the Sanitary District did not

have sufficient funds to complete the entire construc-

tion program.

——

In the report to the Supreme Court of J anuary 1,

1939, on page 9, the future work was estimated at

$14,000,000; the cash on hand in the PWA accounts

was $3,700,000, leaving essential work to the extent

of more than $10,000,000 te be financed from other

sources and the Sanitary District then had about

$3,000,000 resources for this.

1594 The State of Illinois did not contribute any money

towards the construction of works by the Sanitary

District. The Sanitary District did not make applica-

tion to the State of Illinois to provide such funds.

The population equivalent of the Corn Products

wastes was included in all the tables referring to actval

sewage treatment in service in the semi-annual reports

of the Sanitary District to the Supreme Court.

1595 The change in flow through the Drainage Canal

from daylight hours to night hours changes the slope

in the Canal very slightly, something like an inch and

a half, or possibly 2 inches. It is certainly not a fact

that this difference would be measured in feet and not

in inches.

1595

1596 In the reports to the Court, copies of which were

furnished to representatives of the complainant lake

States, the exact status of the sewage treatment con-

struction program was reported, and it must have been

obvious from those reports that the program as con-

templated at the time of the decree of the Court would

not be completed in its entirety by December 1, 1938.

No particular reference was made to the statement in

the supplementary report to the Court on May 23, 1940,

page 6, “The defendants further respectfully represent

that this change in the sequence of procedure recom-

mended by the Engineering Board of Review and by

the defendants will not retard but, in the opinion of

the defendants and in that of the Engineering Board

of Review, will improve conditions and expedite the

performance of the decree”. This is a true statement

because the change in sequence of proeedure did ac-

tually expedite the work and more work was done

because of that change than would have been done

if the change had not been made.

1597 As the difference between. “would expedite the

work”, and “would expedite the performance of the ‘

decree”, I assume that the construction of these works

was in performance of the decree. o-

1598 One place where it should have been obvious to

the Court or to the opposing lake states that the Sani-

tary District would not be able to fully complete the

sewage treatment construction program by 1938 is in

the report to the Court of January 1, 1937, page 9,

where there is an estimate of $64,000,000 of future

work, and this paragraph:

ib anna eneees

“Funds remaining unexpended from the amounts

obtained under the agreement of September ‘21,

1935 with the Federal Emergency Administration

of Public Works are definitely allocated to projects

in this future work estimated to cost $23,445,000.

Approximately $2,500,000 of funds obtained from

1599 the P. W. A. are not now definitéTy~allocated but

may be used for some of this future work. This

leaves work estimated at $38,213,000 to be financed

from other sources.”

and at that time the Sanitary District had no funds for

construction work. I think it should have been appar-

ent to the Court and to the opposing lake states that

the entire seWage treatment construction program er

couldn’t then be completed in accordance with the Su-

preme Court decree, as amended.

We did not at that time make any request of the

State of Illinois to furnish the funds. We were doing

all the work which was physically possible for an or-

ganization such as the Sanitary District to do. We

were doing constructicn work at that time at the rate

of about $15,000,000 per year. I do not know what the

resources of the State of Illinois were at that period.

Q: Now, Mr. Ramey, when was the decision made

1600 not to complete the West Side Sewage Treatment

Plant in accordance with the decree, and by whom was

that decision made?

The Master: I would like to ask counsel if the Su-

preme Court hasn’t in effect decided that no adequate

excuse has keen shown by the State of Illinois for not

completing these works, and I would also like to ask

counsel if the order of reference to me does not extend

to any inquiry on, that subject.

Mr. Clausen: Not only that, the decree doesn’t pro-

vide anything with respect to construction work.

The Master: It is simply provided that the diversion

should be cut down to the rates indicated.

Mr. Clausen: That is right.

The Master: Now, as I read the opinion of the Su-

preme Court last April, it is a finding, a declaration by

the Supreme Court that no adequate excuse has been

shown by the State of Illinois, and in the reference

to me there is no provision that I should consider testi-

mony as to whether there was an adequate excuse or

whether there was not, and whether more money

should have been provided or whether it should not,

whether the Sanitary District should have been able

to carry on a larger program than it did or whether

~ it should not. There is nothing in the order of refer-

1601 ence that I see that directs me to inquire into those

matters, and my impression would have been that the

Supreme Court has reached a determination already

that no adequate excuse has been shown and that the ~

only point left open to me is, as stated in the order

of reference, whether there is any menace to health,

and, if so, what could be done about it. I may be mis-

taken in my impressions. As I have repeatedly said, I

don’t want to shut counsel off from any proof they

desire to make, within very broad limits, but if counsel

for Illinois themselves do not take exceptions to the

view that I have stated, I should not think that counsel

for the opposing states would undertake to extend -

the scope of the inquiry.

Mr. Cohan: Just as a matter of record, doesn’t the

record as it stands now contain a voluminous amount

of facts and figures put in by the State of Illinois?

The Master: Yes, I think it does. No objection, I

think, however, was made to the introduction of those

facts and figures.

Mr. Cohan: I am not quite sure about that. I think

at the very beginning there was.

The Master: There was a general reservation.

Mr. Naujoks: That is right. We agreed to reserve

our objections and later go over the transcript and file

1602 formal motions to strike and so forth.

Mr. Clausen: Imight say a lot of that was furnished

at your request, however.

Mr. Wallenstein: Not only that, it goes to the ques- .

fe, tion of whether: or not there could be any other amel-

iorating means or remedies to clear this condition, the

third point in your order of reference.

The Master: Well, proceed, gentlemen.

The amount of rainfall necessary to cause storm

water in sewers of the Sanitary District to by-pass to

the Sanitary Canal depends on circumstances. Most

of the sewers are designed to handle 50 per cent in

excess of the 1960 dry weather flow. That means

“ actually that-they will carry about twice the average

dry weather flow as of today, but some of the sewers,

in particular, those near the River in the Loop district,

are designed to take twice the dry Weather flow. They

wil} take all the storm flow except that from major

storms. A lot depends on the condition of the ground

and on how the rain falls. If the ground is frozen and

there is ice on the ground and a4warm rain occurs in

1603 the winter, the sewers wilh by-pass to the River with

very littie rainfall. With a dry summer condition, much

more rainfall is required. The average concentration

i time of the average drainage area in Chicago is about

| three hours, but the concentration tim in the Loop

district is about 20 minutes. I do not know how many

hours a year on an average storm water will overflow

from the sewers into the Chicago River.

? ‘

PLY BRO?

aes

1604 Mr. Pearse can give better information with refer-

ence to the untreated or partially treated sewage from

the Indiana communities which finds its way into the

Calumet River. :

I am not familiar with the use of chlorine as an

agency for the prevention or reduction of odors and

for sterilizing bacteria. E

We provided aeration chambers, or cascades, at the_» - |

outfall sewer of the Southwest Side Plant to introduce

additional oxygen into the effluent. I believe that simi-

lar cascades were provided at certain places in the

1605 North Side Plant for the same purpose. The purpose

of this is to help stabilize the B.O.D. in the effluent

which is discharged into the Canal. If water is ower

over the dam it would pick up more oxygen than if

it flows through water wheels. Water passing through

water wheels has not as much chance of picking up

oxygen as it has if flowing over an open dam. Flow

1606 over an open dam would add some oxygen to the

water. I have made no figures on the amount of oxy- |

gen which could be introduce into water at Lockport

if this water was passed over aeration cascades. A large

percentage of the dry weather flow from the West

Side Imhoff tanks could be put through the Southwest

Treatment Plant for a short detention period. This

should reduce the B.O.D. in the effluent which is dis-

charged into the Canal. We have made sorhe figures

along this line. It would take about a year to con-

struct a sewer between these plants to effect such

treatment. No contracts have been let for such a

' sewer but preliminary plans have been drawn.

1607 All the contracts for the completion of the West-

Southwest project have not been let. The plans and

specifications have not all been drawn. We are work-

ing on them. We plan to build the same type of aera-

tion tanks that are now in service at the Southwest

Side Plant and possibly the same type of final settling

tanks.. We have let contracts for three blowers with

a much larger capacity than the present blowers. The

new sludge drying plant will not be much different

from the plant now in service, although many things

in it will be modified but there will be no entirely new

1608 idea in this plant. We are planning the construction

of the additional facilities in a manner to prevent any

interruption in the operating of the present facilities,

There was a break down due to the cracking of a

pipe in the sludge line from the North Side Treatment

Works to the Southwest Side Treatment Plant on J uly

6, 1940. This happened on Saturday morning and was

not fixed until late Monday.

If all of the sludge of the Sanitary District not made

into fertilizer or placed on spoil banks should be dis-

posed of on land, it would ameliorate conditions in the

Canal but it would make a mess somewhere else wher-

ever that sludge was lagooned.

1609 Dr. Mohlman can give better information than I can

regarding the chlorinating of sludge in order to pre-

vent odors.

The budget report of the Sanitary District for 1940,

referring to the Glenview Sewage Treatment Works,

states: “During the warm months the practice of chlor-

inating the Imhoff tank effluent before application to

the trickling filters to prevent odors was continued”.

This same budget report, with reference to the Morton

Grove Plant, states: “The Imhoff tank effluent was

chlorinated during the warm months to prevent odor

nuisance”,

1610 At the Southwest Sewage Treatment Works, the

effluent that is used for condensing purposes is chlor-

inated to prevent the growth of algae in our condenser

tubes. |

The largest amount of sewage flow from the West

Side area which has been put through the Southwest

Side Plant for treatment appears in the monthly rec-

ords of operation of this plant.

I have not read the letter of Dr. Buswell, regarding

chemical process for supplemental treatment at the

West Side Treatment Works and have no comment to

make on it. I presume his statement was considered

by the PWA Review Board.

1611

1612 The report prepared in the Engineering Department

of the Sanitary District in April 1940 and submitted to

the PWA Review Board states, on page 9: that the efflu-

- ent from an Imhoff tank plant had a B.O.D. of 57 and

that the effluent from Imhoff tanks plus chemical pre-

cipitation had a B.O.D. of 36 and that the effluent from

B.O.D. in the effluent from the West Side Works should

be reduced from the present 57 to 36 by the addition

of chemical treatment this would ameliorate conditions

in the Sanitary Canal and Brandon Road Poo! but it

would not ameliorate conditions as much as installing

activated sludge and reducing the B.O.D. to 10. I do

not know about the other communities, state institu-

’

; “

ise

tions and industries above Joliet contributing to con-

ditions in the Canal and Brandon Road Pool, Dr. Mohl-

man has testified to these things.

1614 I stated that preliminary plans had been prepared

for the sewer from the West Side Plant ‘to the South-

west Side Plant. The approximate size of this sewer

has been determined but detail contract plans have

not yet been started. We expect to get started on

these detail plans so that contracts can be let dur-

ing the coming winter so that this sewer could be

1615 completed by the fall of 1941. I don’t recall] the esti-

mated cost of this sewer offhand. It is in the neigh-

borhood of $400,000. It is included in the item “Con-

duits, Tunnels,” etc., for future contracts under the*+

West-Southwest Side Sewage Treatment Plant, total-

ing $757,600.

If at the Southwest Side Plant the water now used

through the condensers should be passed over cas-

cade areas directly into the Canal the result would be

to stop the operation of the blower plant and genera-

tor plant. The use of municipal water for condens-

ing purposes would be too expensive. The use of

water from the Canal for this purpose would require

the construction of a large pumping plant. This would

be physically possible but not feasible.

1616 The effluent from the Southwest Side Treatment

Plant is used for condensing purposes. It is flowed

by gravity through the condensers and to the Canal.

If Canal water were used, it would be necessary to

pump that water from the Canal up in order to force

it through the condensers. The use of water from

the municipal water supply would be very costly.

All these things were considered when the Southwest

Side Plant was designed.

It would be possible to construct a sewer from the

West Side Plant to the Southwest Side Plant by the

summer of 1941 but this might slow up some other

things which are more important.

1617 The present capacity of the Southwest Plant is

large enough to care for a considerable portion of the

dry weather flow of the West Side Works. This con-

necting sewer is a part of our ultimate plans.

It has not yet been definitely decided whether the

effluent from the West Side Plant will be run into

the present aeration taxks Oninto the new battery of

aeration tanks, which if to be ‘constructed.

If the Brandon Roa Pool were restored to the

condition that existed prior to 1933, that is, if the

rapid section of the Des Plaines River were restored,

the water would be re-aerated more than at present.

1618 It would also be re-aerated flowing over the Jackson

Street dam, which, of course, would have to be re-

built. : 7

Dr. Mohlman can answer much better than I can

both as to the effect and the cost of chlorinating the

effluent of all the sewage treatment plants. Such chlor-

ination of treatment plant effluent would probably

ameliorate conditions in the Canal and Brandon Road

Pool. coats

If the entire water supply of the City of Chicago

should be metered, no doubt the water use would be

reduced. That would haye the effect of increasing the

pumping capacity and the aeration tank capacity of

the sewage treatment plants. It would have no effect

;

whatever on the sludge handling capacity because the

: same amount of solids would be in the sewage in any

case.

_ 1619 The water for domestic use is pumped directly

from Lake Michigan. The City of Chicago can take

any amount of this water it desires. The only incen-

tive to be economical in the use of water is the cost

of pumping it. I think about 60 to 70 per cent of the

water is metered but Mr. Pearse will furnish figures

on this matter. As I understand it, all the water used

by industries, hotels, and apartment buildings is me-

tered, but there is a considerable area in the residential

1620 districts where there are no meters as yet. If meter-

ing were made universal, it would reduce the amount

of water taken out of Lake Michigan for domestic

purposes. This would not increase the amount of water

available for the waterway. The Sanitary District can

divert 1500 c.f.s. annual average from the Lake Michi-

gan watershed, exclusive of domestic pumpage. Any

domestic pumpage is in addition +o this 1500 cfs. The

reduction in the quantity of domestic pumpage would

result in a little more treatment plant capacity, a lit-

tle more detention time in the aeration tanks, but I

1621 think the effect would be very slight. It would also

increase the capacity of the sewers. Chicago uses a

larger amount of water than any other City its size.

It uses a considerable amount of water per capita,

more per capita than Milwaukee. I think the figure

for Chicago is about 250 gallons per capita per day.

If all the City water in Chicago should be metered,

this would reduce the amount of water going through

the Lockport Power Plant slightly.

1622 It would be possible to provide aeration cascades

at Lockport or other places in the Sanitary Canal but

I don’t know as to the feasibility of this. There are

ways of adding oxygen, that is either air or oxygen,

without cascades. One way is in the manner in which

air is added to the aeration tanks, that is to blow air

into the water. A cascade is a little waterfall.

ra 1623 If all the sources of pollution above Joliet, includ-

ing the various communities, state institutions, pri-

vate industries, and the Sanitary District of Chicago,

¢ were eliminated by having all raw sewage treated

locally, this would ameliorate conditions in the Bran-

don Road Pool.

It would be possible to shut down the water wheels

at Lockport and provide cascades without interfer-

ing with navigation. The construction of such cas-

cades would probably cost more than introducing oxy-

gen into the water in some other manner. I have not

estimated the cost of such construction for use over

1624 a 2-year period. If it should be intended to construct

such cascades and destroy the power plant, it might

be cheaper to aerate the water in some other fashion,

by blowing air through it for instance. There are

no facilities for such procedure at present. Cascades

could be built along the Des Plaines River near the

present Stony Sluice Gates but at that point there

is available.less than 10 feet of fall compared to the

1625 38 feet of fall at the Lockport Power House. I do

not know what the cost would be for the construc-

tion of a cascade at‘the Stony Sluice Gates near Lock-

1626 port. If details are furnished of what is desired in

the way of cascades, I will make an estimate of cost

of constructing e.

The two new generators were installed in the Power

House at Lockport about 1935; one of them is used

regularly; sometimes two are used; in addition there

are five old units in this plant.

HORACE P. RAMEY—Cross Examination.

1803- Mr. Naujoks requested Ramey to figure the elapsed

1805 time for flow down the Sanitary Canal from Damen

Avenue to Summit, then to Lockport, and then to

Brandon Road Pool, under conditions as of January

1939, with a flow of 2911 c.f.s.; also, with a flow of

4227 c.f.s., under average conditions as existing in

June 1939; also, 7891 c.f.s., under conditions as of

January 1939.

Q: * * * * and also figure out the elapsed time of

flow down the canal and waterway through Brandon

Road Pool for each of the distances from Damen Ave-

nue to Summit, second, from Summit to Lockport, and,

1806 third, from Lockport to the outlet of the Brandon

Road Pool, with a flow of 19,064 cubic second feet

under average conditions existing in J une, 1939?

A: You mean, 19064?

'Q: Right. That is the maximum flow during that-

time.

A. Well, that can’t be done. You can’t flow that

quantity through the waterway.

Q: Well, whatever the flow was down the canal.

A: Well, the flow through the canal —

Q: Under the maximum conditions, so that where

you had a flow of 19,064 at Lockport—

A: This table indicates that there was a discharge

from the end of the canal at Lockport of 19,064 cubic

feet per second.

Q: Yes.

A: That doesn’t indicate that there was a flow of

that much through the drainage canal.

Not all the way through, that is correct.

Because it is impossible.

That is right.

Well, now what is it you want?

What is the maximum capacity of the canal?

For continuous flow?

: For continuous flow.

1807 he Oh, somewhere around 11,000 c.f.s.

Q: Well, then we will take the maximum flow in |

March, 1939, with a flow of 9311 cubic second feet,

and will you give me the elapsed time of flow®down

the canal through Brandon Road Pool for the three :

distances from Damen Avenue to Summit, from Sum-

mit to Lockport, and from Lockport to the outlet of

Brandon Road Pool?

i608 The P.W.A. Review Board first notified the Sani-

tary District of its approval of the Sanitary District

report of April 1940, regarding the additional treat-

ment facilities for West Side sewage by the activated

sludge method on or about May 3, 1940. The amount

of money which will be spent for this future con-

struction work, including present contract obligations

is about $12,000,000,

Se ee es

1809 As to the progress on construction of this work,

we have let a contract for blower equipment, have

advertised one construction contract, are working on

plans for the substructure of the blower house and

incineration plant, are working on specifications for

the drying equipment, that is, the boilers and other

mechanical equipment which have to do with the

drying of sludge. We have considered it wise to place

the mechanica’ equipment under contract as quickly

as possible because it takes the longest time to fabri-

1810 cate and deliver such machinery. We have not yet

completed the final detail plans for all of the concrete

work. It will require up until the end of next sum-

mer (1941) for such plans. We draw up construc-

tion plans in sufficient detail for taking bids, then

after the work has been placed under contract and

as the contract is being carried out, we furnish more

detail construction plans. Such plans are required all

during the construction period. We hope to get the

substructure of the pump and blower house and of

the incineration building under contract by next spring

(1941) so that actual construction on the concrete

and masonry work can start as soon as the construc-

tion season opens. We are ing bids within the next

two ‘or three weeks on one construction job for a tun-

‘nel whith will .pass from the present sludge drying

building, southerly under the site of the future in-

cineration building to the track south of ‘the future

building, so that we can get sludge out of the pses-

ent building without interference with the construc-

tion of the new building. so that the new construc-

tion will not cause any interruption with the opera-

tion of the present plant.

1811 We began preparation of the actual contract plans

and specifications within three or four days after no-

tice of approval by the P.W.A. Review Board. We

had previously done a considerable amount of pre-

liminary work and of course much of the work was

in such shape that we could proceed at once on con-

tract plans. I doubt if much of the new work at the

Southwest Side Plant will be ready to place in service

by the end of 1941, so that by the end of 1941 we

will not be in a much better position with reference

to the treatment of the West Side sewage than we

are today.

1812 It was in 1934 that the P.W.A. Review Board sug-

gested that experiments be made to determine the

best method of supplementing the treatment of the

West Side sewage. These experiments were made

under the direction of Dr. Mohlman and men from the

Division of Operation.

1813 The contract price for electricity sold by the Sani-

tary District to the City of Chicago is 8-1/2 mills per

KW Hour, or 0.85 of a cent per KW Hour. The av-

erage price paid by the Sanitary District to the Public

Service Company of Northern Illinois for electricity

during the year 1939 was slightly less than 8 mills

per KW Hour. In 1939 the Sanitary District of Chi-

cago generated about 70,000,000 KW Hours of elec-

1814 tricity at Lockport; and about 7,000,000 KW Hours

at the Southwest Treatment Plant as a by-product

‘of the sludge drying process. The Sanitary District

also purchased about 133,000,000 KW Hours from the

Public Service Company in 1939. In this year (1939)

the Sanitary District used for its treatment plants,

etc., about 82,000,000 KW Hours of electricity; sold

the City of Chicago and the Park District about 123,-

000,000 KW Hours; absorbed a loss in transmission

and also current used by the Electrical Division in

distribution of 5,500,000 KW Hours. The three fig-

ures of use of the energy and the three figures of the

source of this electricity will balance at about 211,-

000,000 KW Hours. The figures for the year 1940

are not yet completed but apparently they will be

about the same as for 1939, except that the current

generated at the Southwest Sewagé Treatment Plant

will be about twice what it was in 1939 because there

was only six months operation in that year. |

1815 Regarding the request for elapsed time for flow

from Damen Avenue to the Brandon Road dam, I

will assume that average flow past any given point

is desired and will neglect the fact that the current

is faster in one part of the stream and slower in others.

We have made many flow tests in the Canal aad

most of this data was used in the original hearings in

1816 this case. We have made no flow tests recently to

determine the elapsed time of flow through the chan-

nel. We made flow tests throughout the years from

“1912 to 1926 but haven’t conducted any experiments

of that nature since. The elapsed time will be com-

1817 puted from data we have on hand. In such compu-

tations the fact that sludge may have been deposited

in the channels in some places will be ignored,

HORACE P. RAMEY—Cross Examination.

2217 I was asked to compute the time of flow in the

Chicago River and Main Channel from Damen Ave-

nue to Brandon Road under certain conditions. The

results can best be shown as an exhibit.

2218 Ramey Exhibits No. 1 and No. 2 were received in

evidence. Z

2219 Ramey Exhibit No. 1 shows:

Time of Flow

Damen Ave. to

Date Quantity Brandon Road Dam

January 1939 2910 c.f.s. 112. hrs. 31 min.

June 1939 4227 ” 81 i en

June 1939 a 40 eirare Day

June 1939 8311 ” St Re ai

Lake Michigan Elevation—1.15

Ramey Exhibit No. 2 shows:

Time of Flow

Damen Ave. to

Quantity - Brandon Road Dam

2200 c.f.s. 166 hrs. 8 min.

2800 ” > Wit ihe

10000 ” a. oo”

Lake Michigan Elevation—0.60

2221. ~=«‘The population increments used in the report to

the Supreme Court for the ten years, 1930 to 1940,

were

Calumet Project 45.6 per cent

North Side Project : 34.0 ”

West Side Project .. 86 ”

Southwest Side Project 214 ”

—

os 71

The total discharge capacity of all the water wheel

units in the Lockport Power House is 12,633 c.f.s. There

are two new units, installed in 1935, in this power

plant which have a discharge capacity of 2,150 c.f.s.

each, or a total of 4,300 c.f.s. There are five old units

in this power plant (three installed in 1908; one in

1911; and one about 1914) with a discharge capacity

of 1,667 c.f.s. each, or a total of 8,333 c.f.s.

2222- We do not have the 1940 population figures by

2223 districts on the various sewage treatment areas. All

that is now available is the newspaper statement show-

ing that the population of Illinois, as a whole, in-

creased 3.2 per cent from 1920 to 1940. Figures for

the City of Chicago show an increase of 8,118, or .2

of one per cent, in 10 years. The 1940 census figures

show that the following municipalities in Cook County

either gained or lost the following amounts from 1930

to 1940:

Per Cent

Municipality Lost Gained (Lost or Gained)

Blue Island 115 .7 of one per cent

Calumet City 437 2.6 per cent

Cicero 2164 32 6”

Elmwood Park 2409 214 ”

Evanston i7el 28 -”

Forest Park eee Sy eae

Harvey 1489 91 ”

La Grange ae. a

Maywood 34 \29 =”

Melrose Park i es Er

Oak* Park 1614 25 ”

Park Ridge 1606 154 ”

Wilmette 1739 114 ”

Winnetka ae. aa?

The 1940 census figure for Cook County shows an

increase of 67,208, or 1.7 per cent, from 1930 to 1940.

The Sanitary District is all within Cook County and

2224 is almost as large as Cook County. The population of

the Sanitary District for 1930 was 3,880,000. The popu-

lation for Cook County in 1930 was 3,982,123, and

for 1940, 4,049,331.

HORACE P. RAMEY—Cross Examination

3825 The eléctricity developed during the 19-day period

of the flow test in the Main Channel from Noon, De-

cember 2, to Noon, December 12, 1940, by reason of

the additional diversion of water, amounted to 2,516,-

570 kilowatt hours.

%826 This is the excess amount over what would have

been developed under ordinary conditions and if a

value of .5 of one cent per kilowatt hour is used this

additional power would be worth $12,500.

The sludge lagoon constructed within the past three

months at the West Side Sewage Treatment Works is

approximately 2800 feet long and 450 feet wide. The

levies around the lagoon are about 8 feet high and

there are several cross levies in the lagoon dividing

it into different pools so that one pool can be filled

3827 with sludge at a time. This lagoon will handle the

excess sludge from the West Side Imhoff tanks for

about one year, that is, the sludge produced by that

plant in addition to the amount of sludge which can

be handled on the present sand drying beds. No def-

inite plans have been made for additional lagoons for

‘handling sludge during 1942 but we have a tenta-

tive project for additional sludge lagoons west of the

Lyons-Summit Road Bridge. Such lagoons would in-

volve the construction of a pipe line from the West

Side Plant to the site of the lagoon and ¢he installa-

tion of a pump. This project will not be’ needed in

any case for a year. Its construction deper:ds on de-

velopments as to the absolute need for it.

In connection with the power developec! at Lock-

port during the 10-day test, the average head on the

water wheels during this test was approximately 30.4

feet compared to an average head of 39.0 feet prior

to that date. The water used by the two new units

3828 in the Lockport Power House during the 10-day test

was about 4500 c.f.s. for both units and the overall

efficiency of these units is approximately 86 per cent.

The remainder of the flow was used through the older

units at the Lockport Power House, all of which have

been in service for about 30 years. These old units

have an overall efficiency of from 68 to 70 per cent.

The use of these heads and these efficiencies will

show why the ‘increase in power does not vary di-

rectly with the increase in the flow. The Sanitary

District purchases power at the point of use in Chi-

cago for slightly less than .8 of one cent per kilowatt

hour. Since power from Lockport must be transmitted

to Chicago and is subject to line loss and other losses

before it gets to the point of use is one reason why

I have assigned a value of .5 of one cent per kilowatt

hour for the value of power at Lockport. The two

figures (.5 of one cent at Lockport and .8 of one cent

at Chicago, are really consistent.

H. P. RAMEY—The Master’s Examination

3829 The excess power developed during this 10-day

flow test probably save the Sanitary District from

buying a certain amount of power. The purchase

price of electricity to the Sanitary District has been

slightly less than eight mills per kilowatt hour but :

the District absorbs the losses in transmission and

distribution so that I believe the power which is

passed on to the City of Chicago at a price of 8-1/2

mills per kilowatt hour costs just about as much as

is received from the City for it. The delivery point

of power is at various points in Chicago and not at

Lockport.

3830 I will furnish for the record the figure of approxi-

mate cost of the sludge lagoon recently constructed.

We do not use any chlorine in such lagoons. Only

well digested sludge is placed in sludge lagoons and

there is not much if any odor to this sludge.

Mr. Pearse: The Sanitary District owns approxi-

mately 500 acres of land at the West-Southwest Side

Sewage Treatment Works but west of Harlem Avenue

along the Main Channel between this Channel and the fF

Des Plaines River the District owns 1590 to 2000 acres.

3831 A: That is the site of these future sludge lagoons

if we build them. This site of the future lagoons, if

built, is 3 to 4 miles southwest of the Southwest oo

Treatment Plant. This land is in a remote area be

tween the Des Plaines River and the Main Channel

and no people live within at least a quarter of a

mile of any of this land. The West Side and the South-

‘ west Side Plants are built in a neighborhood which

er.

is sparsely settled at present but which will probably

3832 build up. This site for the future sludge lagoons, if

built, is in a neighborhood which will never build up.

The sludge lagoon recently built is immediately west

of Battery B of the West Side Imhoff tanks and north

of Battery B of the southwest area tanks.

When a lagoon is filled with sludge it is put out of

further use for a long period of time, maybe 4 or 5

years. The sludge is pumped into a lagoon to a depth

3833 of about 6 feet and left to gradually decompose and

dry out. The sludge which is to be put into lagoons

is the same material which is placed on the sludge

drying beds. Lagoons are cheaper than sludge dry-

ing beds and are just a makeshift. The sludge drying

beds can be used over and over. They have sand

underneath and a system of drains so that water can

drain out of the sludge and there is a certain amount

of evaporation from the sludge. The sludge is moist,

perhaps 98 per cent moisture when it is placed on

the drying beds and in the course of a week or 10

days under favorable conditions it dries out to a mois-

ture content of about 80 per cent and then can be

_ Seraped off.

3834 In a lagoon there is no way for the water to drain

from the bottom but there is evaporation and a cer-

tain amount of settling of solids to the bottom but

there is also rainiall which probably offsets most of

the evaporation.

The capacity of the West Side Plant is about 470

million gallons per day but I made no computations

as to the acres of lagoons which would be needed if

‘t was proposed to lagoon all the sludge from this

plant. Mr. Pearse will furnish figures as to the amount P

of sludge which will be produced from 100 million

gallons per day of sewage.

3835 The present lagoon occupies about 30 acres. This

lagoon was constructed by scraping dirt out of the

body of the lagoon to build up a levy around it and

cross levies across the lagoon.

Cross Examination

3836 I do not know exactly how much the City of Chi-

cago still owes the Sanitary District for power fur-

nished. I think it is somewhere in the neighborhood

of $4,000,000. The Sanitary District has judgments for

_ practically all of this. The Sanitary District furnishes

about $700,000 worth of power per year and at the

present time is receiving from the City a little more

than the value of power being furnished. The judg-

ments are collectable when and as the City can pay

them and a good part of the money currently received

is on the payment of judgments. It will take a num-

ber of years before these judgments are all paid.

Examination by the Master.

3837 The accumulation of these judgments, approxi-

mately $4,000,000, started back about 1925. I think

the amount decreased slightly in 1940. Since 1933 I

know that the amount due the Sanitary District from

the City of Chicago for power has decreased materially

and in recent years the general tendency has been to

decrease the amount slightly.

Cross Examination.

The armount of judgments was greater in 1933 but

I cannot state how much.

3838 I think that the Sanitary District is breaking even

or practically even in purchasing power at .8 of one

cent per kilowatt hour and selling it to the City of

Chicago at 0.85 cent per kilowatt hour.

-Examination by the Master.

The difference between .5 of a cent per kilowatt

hour at Lockport and .8 of a cent in Chicago is what

3839 I allowed for costs of transmission and other losséé.

These figures are consistent.

3840 In connection with the 10-day flow test, I know

what. Mr. Andrew has testified to and my data checks

or practically checks what Andrew has furnished.

Redirect Examination.

The sludge lagoon built at the West Side Works is

for use next summer (1941). In this climate we do

not dispose of sludge from Imhoff tanks in the winter

time.

Examination by the Master.

The digestion of sludge either slows up or stops dur-

ing cold weather so that Imhoff tanks are designed

3841 with sufficient capacity to retain all the sludge that

a .

is settled out of the sewage over approximately a

4-month winter period and then with the return of

warmer weather in the spring that sludge will digest '

and it is not placed on sludge drying beds or in a

. lagoon until it has digested so this lagoon will not

be used until May, or perhaps June, 1941. At any

rate, about May 1941 this lagoon will afford a method

of disposal of sludge which has not previously been

3842 available. Mr. Pearse will furnish information as

to the quantity. Also as to the cost of these lagoons.

/ Redirect Examination.

This lagoon is only for the sludge from the West

Side Imhoff tanks. We do not propose to lagoon any

activated sludge.

In connection with the 10-day flow test, there was

considerable additional cost to the Sanitary District

for a large force of men, for work 24 hours per day,

under Dr. Mohlman, for an engineer and photogra-

pher, checking over conditions in the Illinois Valley

because of possible damages, and because of other

regular employees taken from their regular work.

Examination by the Master.

3843

This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.