Transcript of Record — Wisconsin v. Illinois
Supreme Court brief1930
Ask Donna
What actually matters in this document.
Text
Be
RARE
IN THE
Supreme Court of the United States
October Term, HO ey /75¥
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,
Complainant,
v.
STATE OF ILLINOIS and THE SANITARY
DISTRICT OF CHICAGO,
No.8
Original
Defendants.
STATE OF NEW YORK,
Complainant,
v.
STATE OF ILLINOIS and THE SANITARY
DISTRICT OF CHICAGO,
No. 4
Defendants,
JOINT ABSTRACT OF RECORD
VOLUME I
TESTIMONY
Filed April 30, 1941
_ ‘The Gilman Press — Madison, Wis.
IN THE
Supreme Court of the United States
October Term, ‘940
STATE OF WISCONSIN, STATE OF
MINNESOTA, STATE OF OHIO and
STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA,
Complainants, No. 2
DISTRICT OF CHICAGO,
Defendants.
STATE OF MICHIGAN,
Complainant,
Vv.
STATE OF ILLINOIS and THE SANITARY
DISTRICT OF CHICAGO,
No. 3
v. | Original
STATF OF ILLINOIS and THE SANITARY )
| Original
Defendants.
STATE OF NEW YORK,
Complainant,
Vv. Nn. 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 and 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 the record which inad-
vertently may have been omitted from this Abstract of
Record.
This Joint Abstract in narrative form of the testi-
mony of the witnesses is not in chronological order nor
arranged in accordance with the transcript of the Rec-
ord, but is grouped according to the nature and charac-
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.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART I
EXHIBITS
Exhibits of Illinois
Record Page Case Page
State of Illinois Exhibits
5—Base map of Sanitary District showing channels,
sewers, and sewer treatment works (Record page 8) 242
6—Tabulation showing completed work as of Decem-
ber 3, W068. ..... isnt occlinasibsiplansbleeinitneemnlptreedtbeainons 25
7—Tabulation showing expenditures Dec. 1, 1938 to
UNS 0s RIN: coc re tiancsciestesenctinsaiaesiinnittunnntontiieneraanbavl 26-29
1539-1540
9—Estimate of cost of future work after June I,
DEY: iclicssinorcbieceeiacul $sachcaiadinionse rath lanapacect te saseeiniiieseeneaelionices $2-33
1540-1541
1592
10—Future construction program as of June 1, 1940 1541
10 A,B,C—Future construction program 1936-1940 ........ 36-40
3856-3860
10 D,E,F—Bring down to date, data on Exhibits 10
1l—Flow in main drainage channel, yearly averages,
RE anarchic sniscinininceernscoenimnansiocntnbacy mensbed bvcaagtnse 54
12—Flow in main drainage channel, monthly averages
lc RS seating iad election ie 55-58
18—Flow in main drainage channel, monthly averages
Boe Fearnley, LOND sas caeneece nv eenecseessnnnscserenancesnnsnemencnnes 62
127-130
14—PWA_ Review Board report, pages 15-17, 44-47,
Apts OR, SOS nieces RODE Sati teco tenn eee 73-83
15—Supplemental report of Sanitary District filed May
28, 1934, specificully Page 4 ................... 84-92
16—Report on additions by Engr. Dept., Sanitary Dis-
trict of Chicago, dated April 16, 1940 .............. 95-110
17—Copy of report of PWA Review Board to Joshua
D’Esposito, May 3, 1940 ..............---..-cccccecsecsessseescesees 112-117
195
13
17
17
Record Page Case Page
18—Letter from Joshua D’Esposito transmitting copy
of PWA Review Board Report... 118-119
19 A.B.C—Certificates from county clerk of Cook County
showing assessed values in Sanitary District in 1937,
UQSR, UDB nanan ccceceecceccscscsecveesedeceenseneneennesensanenesensenenens 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 ...................- 152-156
1436
1440
22—West Side Works—flow, B.O.D. and suspended sol-
ids, UGBU-Mary 19D... nencseesccescneecsnensnnsssnnesnntnnnnnnnnnnne 158-168
1890
1440
1442
23—Southwest Wor!s—flow, B.O.D., D.O., and suspended
solids, May 1939May, 190 .... 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 IR _eenseanae-omcneesire ae fer 3633 |
25—Flow at Treatment Works in million gallons daily
from 1928-May, 1940 .........-.-.sesseeseessnesenseneennessnennnennnnens 186
25 A—Showing total average for THO... 3638
26—Graphic illustration of dry solids removed from
sewage in tons per day 1929May, IHO .......0- 183
188
1456
27—North Side Works, summary of results of operation,
yearly averages 1929-May, 19100... 221-223
1446
27 A—Total summary for 190 2642
28—Calumet Works, summary of results of operation,
yearly averages 1936-May, 10 ssn 224-225
28 A—Total summary for PHO 0...
iii
Record Page Case Page
29—West Side Works, summary of results of operation,
yearly averages 1931-May, 1940 00
29 A—Total summary for 1940 2. Sakiates
$1-36—Results of analysis and chart dissolved oxygen
and oxygen demands at six stations on the Chicago
River, monthly averages, Jan. 1938-June, 1940 ........
37—Main channel at Lockport, B.O.D., dissolved oxy-
gen, temp. of water, discharge, 1926-1940 ...............
87 A—Results through Dec. 14D ooo ccccseceseenseeeeee
40—Planned flow and actual discharge of water from
main channel at Lockport for 1938, 1989, 1940...
40 A—Main Channel discharge at Lockport by monthly
averages for 1938, 1989, 1940 oo cceccecscecsseesneeees
41—Graph—profiles of water surface in Chicago River
SORE SRN SONI “Sassnnsictstvsensivecucatechneleipttiesensibren Winie
42—Chart—daily discharge at Lockport for 1939, 1940
43—Chart—Main channel half hourly discharge at Lock-
port on 15th of month, 1939, 1940
44—North Side Works—Supplements! table flow, B.O.D.,
D.O. and suspended solids showing June and July
including material shown in Exhibit 20
45—Calumet Works—supplemental table including June
and July, 1940 (flow, B.O.D., D.O. and axnaeang
46—West Side Works—supplemental table of flow,
B.O.D., D.O. and suspended solids including June
and July, 1940 ... 1441-1442
47—Southwest Works—supplemental table of flow,
B.O.D., D.O. and suspended solids through July
and August,
47 A—Southwest Works flow—1940 ...
iv
Record Page Case Page
48—Amount of air used in the various plants of the
Sanitary District, average for year cubic feet per
gallon of sewage 1QBO-1940 -.....------n-e-cneeesereeennersereneens 1450-1451
49—Estimated sewage flow, sewage treated and un-
treate!, 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
OUD ROOD nanan cnennnnannncnrennncernen ener
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
BI iileieceeerterarniern accent 1472-1473
1638
52 A—Retyped copy showing complete figures for 1940 3664
1638
54—Record of sludge and grit at sewage Treatment
Works, tons per month—1939-1940 .....---------------r 1483-1484
1486-1487
1638
54 A—Retyped copy including all additional figures 3664
58—Photograph showing disturbance of surface sludge
caused by ship passing in Sanitary Canal .........------ 2137
59—Enlargement of Exhibit 58 ....------o--c-cv-ceessnceorenssensenssonens
109
109
112
185
110
157
112
114
v
‘Record Page Case Page
60—Estimates of B.O.D. and dissolved oxygen sources
and conditions from Lake Michigan to Lockport,
—June, 1938-1944 3528
3761-3767
3940
4034-4062
60 A—Revised compilation of Exhibit 60 —...................... 4034-4062
61—Estimates of B.O.D. and dissolved oxygen sources
and conditions from Lake Michigan to Lockport,
June, July, August, 1938-1944 2... eesesseeneeseeeees $529
3761-3767
3940
4034-4062
$755
61 A—Revised compilation of Exhibit 61 ........................ 4034-4062
62—Diversion from Lake Michigan—monthly discharge
for 1988, 1989, 1940 .............. 3673
Gayton Exhibit
1—Affidavit of Loran D. Gayton, Engineer in Depart-
ment of Public Works, Chicago ..................-.00-000 3538-3545
Mohliman Exhibits
1—Determination of Chlorine Demand—Main Channel
erg, Te EER See ROC ee 1820
2268
2—Report: “Chlorination in Sewage Treatment”,
Amer. Pub. Health Assn. neeonesisipieaonee 1826
2917
8—“Reduction of Biochemical Oxygen Demand by
Chlorination”—Reprint ..............-----.0-0-0-++ 2412
4—Blue print showing cross section of drainage canal
at Lockport 2425
5—Record of Chlorination, 1939 at Morton Grove and
Glenview Woks ............c.cc.ccccses-s 2433
6—Table and graph showing analysis of sludge of
BOY. DR, TOO cries iin nena 2445
336
8—Photostat of editorial by Mohiman in Sewage
Works Journal
9—Translation and photostat: Imhoff’s Handbook on
Sewage Disposal -
10 A, B, C, D & E: Volatile Suspended Solids Dis
charged to Channel from various sources, 1939 to
1940 :
1l—Analysis of Howson Exhibit 10, Sources of Oxygen
for prevention of comp!aints at Brandon Pool ......
12—Discussion of Howson Exhibit 11, means of re-
ducing B.O.D. load to CAMA 2a enenenennnensnenseenenenenenensers
13—Extension of Mohiman Exhibit 10 showing 1939-
1948 =
18 A—Extension of Mohlman Exhibit 10 showing 1936-
Ee ee a ee
14—a—Basis for estimating additional diversion needed
in summer
b—Analysis at Lockport of diversion 1940
c—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
16—Letter dated Nov. 28, 1940 showing scheme of sam-
pling and amalyses ----------v----e-renrrrr™ :
17—Summary and condusions of a report on the
flushing experiment. Jan 13, 1941. (Booklet form)
2445
3311
a
Vii :
Record Page Case Page
18—a—Dissolved oxygen and B.O.D. at Lockport, Jan.
cect ith a 4015 249
b—Total discharge at Lockport, Jan. 1938 to 1941
c—Dissolved oxygen and oxygen demand at Sum-
mit, Jan. 1988 to 1941
d—Dissolved oxygen and oxygen demand at Lock-
port, Jan. 1938 to 1941
19—Sewage disposal and stream pollution and sludge
disposal 4000-4009 249
20—Table showing results of analysis for dissolved oxy-
gen and B.O.D. at Lockport for January, 1941 ........ 4464 249
Muehlberger Exhibits
1—General orders on dusts, fumes, vapors and gases.
Issued by Industrial Commission of Wisconsin ........ 2799 300
Pearse Exhibits
1—Record of air used, Sanitary District of Chicago,
cubic feet per gallon of sewage, 1928-1940 ................. 1665 126
1—Weight and volume of sludge discharged to main
channel July 1939-Aug. 1940 (Rec. 2523) ................ 2522 158
2—Southwest Intercepting Sewer System, number of
sewers connected and estimated dry weather flow,
June, 1930-May 1940 2539 161
3—Calumet Sewage Works, record of air used Jan. 1939-
Aug. 1940 2564-2568 164-165
4—Division of flow—West-Southwest Works May 1939-
Aug. 1940 2734 176
4 A—Revised table showing figures from May 1939-
Dec. 1940 3670 186
12—Sanitary District of Chicago estimates of B.O.D. and
dissolved oxygen Lake Michigan to Lockport, June
1938-1943
13—Sanitary District of Chicago estimates of B.O.D. and
dissolved oxygen Lake Michigan to Lockport, June,
July and August, 1938-1943
15 A & B—Memo on lagooning
16—Weighted averages, Major Works, 1940
Viii
Record Page Case Page
Ramey Exhibits
1—Average time of flow, Damen Ave. to Brandon Road
Dam . pe te) ST acaeeavcepsinetserninomrrnserees 2219
2—Average time of flow, Damen Ave. to Brandon Road
ie 2 ssacsderesasecnseninbeianneeenensn beossanecremnaoenintbarneterann 2219
3—Blue print of Brandon Road Pool showing loca-
tion of cross-section and drift of current—Dec. 9,
1940 $844
3846
3851
4—Blue print of cross section of Brandon Pool sound-
ings, Dec. 9, 1940 ...-------------- Rislatnk Steno Cereal MOEN 3845
3848
3851
EXHIBITS
Exhibits of Master
Andrew Exhibits
1—Photograph: Aerial view of Brandon Pool and Locks 1496
1499
6—Map of Brandon Road POO] .nensceseeeoesoesesensensnesnsenseneness 3846
EXHIBITS
Exhibits of Wisconsin et al.
State of Wisconsin Exhibits
4—Tests of air made in the vicinity of Joliet and Lock-
port along the Illinois Waterway ...-.------------ 2639-2646
2650
2648
2722-2724
15—Report of tests and analyses of water, air and
scum at Brandon Road POO! .....------------- 3103
16—Photo, enlargement of Opponent’s Exhibit 8 show-
ing section of Sanitary District Canal taken from
South Bank of canal at US.H. 45 bridge, Sept. 24,
1940, at 1:40 P.M. ..------cccnn-----eeseeeserssserereresennnnenonoerrnennnet 3386
70
70
78
78
81
78
80
81
249
250
79
536
537
537
537
503
484
ix
Record Page Case Page
Enslow Exhibit
1—Chlorination in sewage disposal—discussion of the
report of the A.P.H.A. 2912-2917
Howson Exhibits
1—Diagram illustrating effect of flushing test at Bran-
don Pool 3875-77
2—Diagram illustrating effect of lowered pool level at
Brandon Pool 3884-3888
$891
3—Effect of lowering Brandon Pool one foot on ton-
nage carried through Pool 3889-3891
4—Effect of lowering Brandon Pool on B.O.D. and
volatile solids 3893
3910
5—Analysis of Mohlman’s Exhibit 17 to determine
effect of lowering Brandon Pool level .................... 3911-3915
8—Chart showing use of water per capita .................... 2814-2822
9—Orders and reports relative to metering of Chicago
water supply 2822-2825
10—Sources of oxygen for prevention of complaints
from Brandon Pool. ...... 2825-2832
11—Means of reducing B.O.D. load to canal
413
375
379-381
381
381-382
383
389
389-390
343
343
a
x
Record Page Case Page
12—Estimated cost of measures to remedy conditions
complained of at .Brandon Pool 2833-2840 343-340
2845 345
2862 346
2870 347
$217 347
$221-3222 349
$230 353
$254 363
$273 372
2946 423
$220 348
$357 182
13—Sources of B.O.D. of canal at Lockport ..............- 2852 345
$229-3230 $52
$254 363
$332 181
$372 184
. $375 184
14—Estimates of B.O.D. and dissolved oxygen .......-...----- $230-3231 352-353
363
3260 366
3348 182
3332 181
$875 184
McNally Exhibits
1—Physiological Response to Hydrogen Sulphide, ex-
cerpt from article in Am. Jour. of Public Health .... 2687 498
2—Odor intensities for various concentrations of H2S ..2689-2690 499
xi
Record Page Case Page
PART I
WITNESSES
Witnesses of Illinois
Adams, Charles L.
Direct examination 228-233 336
Calvert, C. K.
Direct examination ......... 2609-2634 263-272
Cross-examination 3161-3191 272-279
3193-3197 279-280
Examination by the Master $192-3193 279
3204-3205 282
Redirect examination 3198-3204 280-282
Recross examination 3205 262
Carlson, Anton Julius
Direct examination 2873-2895 282-286
Examination by the Master 2897-2904 286-287
Cross-examination 2971-2979 288-289
Redirect examination 2983-2984 290-291
2987 292
Recross-examination 2988-2990 292-293
Ivy, Dr. Andrew Conway
Direct examination 3032-3047 304-312
Cross-examination 3048-3054 $13-316
(Master) 3065 $22
Redirect examination 3077-3078 326
Recross-examination 3078 $26-327
McGuigan, Hugh Alister .
Direct examination 3079-3086 $27-329
Cross-examination 3087-3089 330
(Master) 3095-3096 332-333
Mohiman, Dr. Floyd W.
Direct examination .. 234-283 193-204
1420-1426 205-206
Cross-examination ES oo lecmueorret 1819-1879 206-217
Redirect exammimation meme crn 3278-3309 228-232
3589-3627 233-240
Examination by the Master..." $310-3312 232
3530 233
Muehlberger, Dr. Clarence Ww
Direct examimation ...--.-.es--cxo-cnnceesrseeeeeeeee 2786-2807 302
Cross-examimation ...-------s--ccceeeseseseessseeeeeeeneeteserer reer 2808 $02
Examination by the Master -...------------ .2809-2811 303-304
Pearse, Langdon
Direct examination .........-.--- EINE coat cnn eee 131-227 87-106
1433-1493 106-117
3313-3341 179-181
3633-3770 185-187
Cross-exammimation ..----ennncsenceeeseeeeceeresensneneter en 1629-1692 118-132
1699-1726 134-140
1728-1800 140-157
2520-2550 157-162
2555-2597 162-173
2606 175
2730-2755 175-178
$343-3385 181-185
4033-4057 189-190
4065-4078 191-192
The Master’s EXRMMINALION ..------nn-enneneeeeereer ene 1692-1698 132-135
2598-2601 173-174
2757-2759 178-179
4058-4065 190
Explanation requested by the Master ......-----s-0eseseere" 4199-4200 192
4499 192
Ramey, Horace P.
Direct examimation n-ne 9-180 1-20
1409-1418 21-25
26-65
Crose-examMiMatiOm n-ne ence
xiii
The Master’s examination
Redirect examination
Recross-examination
Schwob, C. E.
Direct examination
3870-3871
2136-2142
Cross-examination
2143
PART I
Witness of Master
Andrew, C. R.
Direct examination (by the Master)
1496-1510
Cross-examination
1516-1518
1521-1523
2031-2041
1510-1513
Examination by the Master
1513-1515
1519-1520
1523-1524
1524
2043-2051
2052-2056
2057-2058
2727-2728
Examination
3581-3588
3781-8802
3810
3817
3802-3810
3811
3819-3821
249-252
253
254
255-256
252
253
254
254
255
256-257
257
258
258
258-259
259-262
262
268
262
263
263
2635-2637
Hume onererasinr cee 2637
Direct examimation nce nn 1888-1898
2214-2216
Examination by the Master -......- .1898-1900
2254-2256
2262
2266
Cross-examination _ ......-- 2250-2254
2257-2262
2263-2266
2267-2295
Elims, Joseph W.
Direct examination ........-------- ..2086-2097
Cross-examination 0. ns 2296-2331
Master (Question) -. 2328-2329
Enslow, Linn H.
Direct examination .... .1968-2028
2070-2085
Recalled by the Master ......----s----ssssssrssssrrns 2098-2100
Question by the Master ......-.- inicaunenecbotebetows 2954
Crross-examimation ......ce-ce---eceeeeeessnssescereereneeeete 2907-2947
Redirect examination -....-.-+------ «2947-2964
$213-3216
Enzer, Dr. Norbert
Direct examimatiom ......------ceeee--eemeersseeee en 2145-2153
Cross-xammimatiom —....-...--s-eseseeeeeeeeeeeeeessstn ee 2153-2157
2158-2159
(Master) -sscosssoccceessssssrnteeeesnererernee 2159-2167
2167-2173
Redirect examimation —.....-.----- rn 2173-2174
2176
Recross-examimation ....----cnnsoeeeeeenerssste ne 2175
2176-2177
Gute, Dr. Edwin B.
Direct Examimation ccs 2209-2210
& 8
431
437438
436-437
441-442
444
446
439-441
442-444
445-446
446-458
454-458
458-474
473
392-408
408-412
412418
425
413
423-429
429-431
538-541
541-543
543-544
544-548
548-550
550-552
552
552
552-553
565
ee
xv
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-examination ................... -.-...--- 1953-1966 340-342
Examination by the Master 2854-2860 345
Redirect examimation .............2.......-.:ccsseee-eceeeeeseeeeeeeeeeeeeee 3259-3260 366
$273-3276 372-373
Recross-examination $263-3272 368-372
3913-3931 389-392
Jenkins, Robert C.
I I icici ccsicicsheniscevenvtenothtibicmsincenbanepisnntceboesia 2639-2648 536-537
Cross-examination 2724-2727 537-538
Krumbiegel, Dr. Edward Richard
Direct Examination 2178-2180
Cross-examination 2180-2186
2186-2189
(Master) 2190-2196
2196-2197
Redirect examination : 2198
2200
(Master) 2200-2201
2202
Recross-examination 2203-2204
2204-2208
McNally, Dr. William D.
Direct examination 2659-2679
Cross-examination ou 495-501
Redirect examination 501
502
Recross-examination 501
Moore, Dr. Josiah
Direct examination ion 530-532
Examination by the Master 532
532-533
534-535
Cross-examination 532
533-534
535
Redirect examination 535-536
xvi
Record Page Case Page
Nichols, Dr. M. Starr
Direct examination $100-3117 502-506
(Master) $117-3119 506-507
$119 507
(Master) $120 508
$121 508
(Master) .-.---cccsssessssececeenssssonsnensennnees 8123-3126 508-509
$128-3!36 510-512
Cross-examination 3137-3147 513-515
(Master) .....-.---recccssss-ssseeeesesensnsseeeeenen 3148-3150 516-517
3150-3152 517-518
(Recalled) . 3208-3210 519-520
Redirect examination -.. $154 518
(Master) ...3155-3156 518-519
$211 520-521
Recross-examination — .......----- 3157-3158 519
$211 521
Perkins, Dr. James Eliab
Direct examination. ...........------------- 2465-2471 521-526
Cross examination ..........---.------ 2473-2483 526-528
2484-2489 529-530
(Master) ......---- 2491 530
Warrick, Louis F.
Direct examination .........-. 2100 475-477
2119-2120 477-478
$386 484
Examination by the Master ......-.-.---------nsr 2110-2112 477
2236-2239 480-481
2245-2248 483-484
Cross-examimation — «....---.---.-------- 2226-2232 478-479
Redirect examimation ......-...-----------seeee ere 2233-2236 479-480
Recross-examimation ....-------c----n-ce-seerseersseeseeenesettn eee 2240-2244 481-482
xVii
Record Page Case Page
PART I
WITNESSES OF ILLINOIS
Medical and Lay Witnesses at Joliet, Illinois
Altenhoff, Mrs. Ray e 1233-1237 677-678
Anderson, Mrs. Ella 666-673
Argondalis, James 1272-1277
PI: PIII: sais iaheseinkticscckcivierspvincat onan dioaecpspnbdiniaiasere eos mainbiods 612-615
Bach, Rev. Constantine 373-377
Bautino, Elizabeth 1315-1317
Beck, Peter 1217-1223
eR a UI IS ac ctuncsicinsiaensnneccsdgaciecalpebconbdoeastaiins baat 927-932
RR RES RET OE RS RRC ER PE eg A RROD EN 1174-1179
Bianchi, Mrs. Elma ............. 998-1002
CUS: RN siasentshincactcinectuineseccntnsrecusshepnntibcindiasnceioninpndenbl 401418
Blood, Willard G.. ................:.:..--0000+- 1072-1075
Boles, Dr. Donald 1318-1326
EE ae CE RRC 698-702
BI RINE aiacgnectotnickeesssovctantdyeoecatrcis dined abechietesancaagetis 1265-1269
Booklund, Mrs. Beulah .. 905-917
Boswell, Otto 814-817
at IN hha ei dickicdcksncg dub asacavonecebsagd tnedbtlactiasdiligh <tdisanonsaieen cased 688-693
Burnette, Sister .................... 1118-1127
IEG URNS, UNIO | acc5ia. cicrisrsncactaycocOetadanenpabiabinacanbysnahstinaneats 849-851
Bush, Mrs. Marie ... 331-357
Calamaris, Thomas 607-609
RING MMIII Bla icopssinatastceccnecheasanstvicinandinkebtines . 859-868
Calosis, Dr. Richard eoseeeeeeee-. 1003-1009
Cattaneo, Peter ... sibiesihdeslgneiinduice 640-649
Cervellotti, Mrs. Laura os 717-721
Cheadle, Bruce D. japcieiestasodniipcbemneioca 420-439
Christmann, Adam .......... sactanendaegapeniansasalleaseaiad 622-633
RUINS RUIN ci clas crc chaccnsbadaabenshepelaaneupsoennicbenalical 1254-1259
NI =< MEIN sescssiesinharcinetcancntnnxntaivananyericunecieppisebonamicnonnanceenstih 1207-1210
Colvon, Mrs. Evelyn 1065-1067
Conlen, Mrs. John 1260-1265
Costello, Leo . 596-606
Costello, Michael ....... : 677-681
RII, TININD Bi stcci en coxa inte fices poten csivnis neces vepmahenstucicsiuabnentiog 1076-1082
Crespi, Mrs. Josephine ... 706-708
Curtiss, Dr. Charles 547-591
NCI, PRUs. AMINED a cscilasbire bvesiastavinembibnavsoiccntsindboebvetes 1227-1230
IIA: HU UUIIIIID IE Sick uhkcinstecesacecqusisinntecantcanuseunbpeacacres 768-801
Deprat, Ben ... 1062-1064
Dolorita, Sister 1145-1147
Donna, Charles .... 852-855
SNOT 5 CIID. Ilo | Ri vatiinchuitsscicsiesenseedbanbebiiaiac nabs 360-368 576-577
Downey, Rosa ...- 1281-1283 682
Elfder, Mrs. Anna 1232-1233
Erickson, Lydia 650-654
Evangelisten, Sister 1188-1198
Faulkner, Dr. George 933-956
Fox, R. A. 756-797
Frederick, Dr. Louis J 442465
Garavolia, Mrs. Louise 845-848
George, Sister Mary... 1211-1214
Grassle, Herman C 506-516
Griggs, Leon ........-- 1058-1061
Hanson, Nellie Patterson hii 702-705
Harper, Mrs. Gertrude... 1184-1188
Heggie, Janet - 1341-1347
Heinzel, Stephen J. 617-621
Hicks, Mrs. Rosalie . ‘ 1022-1027
Hilda, Sister 1109-1117
Himes, Helen 1312-1315
Hollis, Loretta ..........-.----- 1326-1338
Hortense, Sister .......-..-- 1133-1140
Huberta, Sister ..... 1128-1132
Imfeld, Peter -.......---- 1278-1280
Irmengard, Sister 1155-1158
Jeffrey, Mrs. John ........ 1163-1169
Jones, George T 290-306
Joseph, Sister Alma 1203-1206
Jovita, Sister Mary . 1180-1184
Keigher, Mary Virginia ‘ 1069-1071
Kennedy, Dr. Raymond J. . 1148-1151
Kerwin, William .........-------- 693-697
Koehl, Catherine ..........-.---------- 1303-1308
Lawler, Mrs. Catherine 723-727
Lavazza, Peter ....-.------0 1052-1055
Lennon, Dr. Robert W 526-538
Logan, Mrs. Stella 1170-1172
Louise, Sister Emma 1197-1202
Low, Frances ...... 1239-1245
Marietta, Anna 752-755
Martin, Mrs. Robert W. ioe 610-612
McCormick, Mrs. Florence .......-----------evesersenreersererrerree” 1032-1036
McGarry, Miss Mary ... 662-664
McGinnes, Jr., Dr. Philip C. 963-980
Melitta, Sister -.........- 1153-1155
Misichia, Dr. Cosmo .. 1037-1047
Mitchell, Mrs. Robert 655-660
Mohr, Harry ....--------c--ce-cccccereeeees seer 869-870
Momper, Mary Elizabeth ...... 1198-1197
Muentnick, Mrs. Gertrude ........ 709-715
Nichols, J. G. ..-.-- 1801-1302
O'Daniel, Mrs. Jesse 1298-1300
Record Page eae
61 Pei
670-671
phebeal
af
Ftaaalblbelees
xix
Record Page Case Page
Oiselle, Eward 1334-1337 690
Pascline, Sister 1141-1144 661-662
Pellino, John 728-745 621-622
Pesteris, Mrs. Lena 1028-1032 649
Peterson, Leona 1215-1216 675
Petronia, Sister 1159-1161 665
Polmonari, Mrs. Palma 829-833 629-630
Poole, Mrs. Vina 634-639 610
Powers, Ray 314-318 572-573
Raue, Harold 319-331 573-575
Renkenberger, Mrs. Opal 825-828 629
Renger, Mrs. Mellison 1245-1254 679
Residori, Arthur 802-813 626-627
Rooney, Dr. George W. 1283-1296 682-684
Ryan, Mrs. Martin 993-997 645
Saffold, Mrs. James 1050-1052 652
Sampson, Harry 307-313 571-572
Santini, Charles 684-687 615
Seeber, Mrs. Sophie 1224-1226 676
Shea, Raymond. ..................... 516-520 596-597
PIII NI ici csinhsecnc cares censebtcionsbliassimansonacignoniioetebseangekens 818-825 628
RS CIIUE: tainccnietetcesrrensncveitinentnsessvinisessnsbeidadibberednastatioasichiotes 390-400 580-581
ei SING, - SN UII scescncscesovnsosezeinsibehadedtbeieataannsetebuipivass 987-992 644-642
Steen, Dr. Earl R. 1015-1021 647-648
I COOI wvsnnsitnasoutcvadopinictnisitabeacuniicnindedeetendectiioosnmnintaaniiaige 834-841 630-631
Swanco, Mrs. Ray 746-751 622-623
Testim, Thomas J. 1357-1398 692-698
Ursuline, Sister saliiiadicne Aiea aoe 1099-1108 656-657
Velt, Rose ........... ‘ ‘ 1309-1311 685-686
Volgar, John = 1338-1340 691
NE, TE. TOMS asec csisccteccereeeneens .- 876-898 634-638
Wilcox, Dr. G. J. a 471-490 590-592
Woodruff, Dr. H. W. 496-505 593-594
Woodruff, Dr. Lewis W. ................ ; 521-526 597-598
BNE AS. dintesciguininicncrviiscnitaguibonipsoonicencaniasanatin ceca iligadainaes 377-389 578-580
Detweiller, Thomas H.
Master’s examination
Cross-examination
Goodell, Harry L.
Master’s examination
Cross-examination
Kerr, Dr. J. P.
Master’s examination ..
Moore, George Patrick
Master’s examination
Cross-examination
(Master)
(Master)
723-724
711-717
717
Part ONE
TECHNICAL AND SCIENTIFIC
EVIDENCE
IN THE
Supreme 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,
Complainant,
v. No. 3
STATE OF ILLINOIS and THE SANITARY Original
DISTRICT OF CHICAGO,
Defendants.
STATE OF NEW YORK,
Complainant,
Vv. No. 4
STATE OF ILLINOIS and THE SANITARY Original
DISTRICT OF CHICAGO,
Defendants.
JOINT ABSTRACT OF RECORD
VOLUME I
Page of
os HORACE P. RAMEY, duly sworn for Defendants,
Direct Examination by Mr. Clausen.
Reside Chicago, Illinois; graduated from high school,
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,
2
computer, instrument man, assistant engineer, resi-
dent engineer, division engineer, acting chief engineer
1922, assistant 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-
12 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,
3
17.5 miles long, to the Southwest. Treatment Works
for disposal. This treatment plant was placed in par-
tial service October 3, 1928 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
13 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.
14 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-
—
15
16
17
4
met industrial 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 from 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-
mum 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 activated sludge is set-
tled 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-
—
18
19
5
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
with 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 final
disposal to a spoil pile. The solids settled from the
20
21
6
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 machines 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 by 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
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
i
7
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,
22 1940. At the Southwest Plant, the sewage passes
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 5 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
23 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 sludge
concentration tanks is conditioned with ferric chloride
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.
25 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 Illinois 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.
30 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
31 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
scx SERRE REO ON IRE ane
—_—_—_—
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
41
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 treatment in the West-Southwest Plant.
The Sanitary District has available at present suffi-
cient resources to pay for approximately 90 per cent
of this construction work. On June 1, 1940, the Sanitary
District had cash, or equivalent, in its funds for 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-
—
10
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.
42 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.
43 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
44 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
45 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. At the
present time the Sanitary District has outstanding
46 $110,000,000 of bonds. The Sanitary District has ap-
&
—
47
11
proximately $6,000,000 in cash for construction at pres-
ent and in addition has an unencumbered debt incur-
ring capacity of about $5,000,000. This relates to future
construction of approximately $13,000,000 which will
take about 2-% years from now to complete. During
tnat period of 2-% 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 incineration 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 and 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
12
Plant has been approved by the “PWA Review Board”.
Practically all the construction work which the Sani-
tary District has done in the past six or seven years has
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
i ts were made on several processes of sewage
treatment, including chemical precipitation, activated
sludge, the Guggenheim p , 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
tal 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
to this PWA Board in April 1940, and this PWA Review
Board approved the recommendations made by the
Sanitary District engineering department, regarding
13
this report, and recommended that the Sanitary Dis-
trict proceed to construct facilities for giving final
treatment to West Side sewage by activated sludge, as
recommended in that report.
53 _I have prepared a table showing the flow in the Main
Drainage Channel of the Sanitary District, yearly av-
54 erages, 1930 to 1940. These records are in the semi-
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-
SD Sickest
61
62
14
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 Side 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 months of Jan-
uary to May, inclusive, 1940.
—
15
63 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 River 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 2-44 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 J uly 1940, bringing the
unused bonding 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.
67-
69
70
71
72
16
Discussion by the Master and Counsel.
The $5,000,000 of bonds sold by the Sanitary District,
June 27, 1940, were for the following purposes:
Calumet Project ................-:::s eres $ 150,000
North Side Project eine i, 250,000
Southwest Side Sewers ..............66.0 es 490,300
West-Southwest Sewage Treatment Works 3,909,700
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.
On May 16, 1940, The Sanitary District of Chicago
filed an application with the Public 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 order 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-
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,
17
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.
73 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 Illinois 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
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 to 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 Illinois Exhibit No.
16. This report appears in the record of these proceed-
ings, pages 95 to 110, inclusive.
111 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 1st indicate that May
1940 was the first time for the past three years that the
bonds outstanding were substantially less than the debt
—
19
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
124 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 than 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-
125 pacity and the outstanding bonds of practically $10,000,-
000, 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 July 1, 1940.
126 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 flow and figured there
would be normal rainfall whereas in the month of
June 1940, the rainfall was actually 1.31 inches, which
127
20
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 normal, the flow from
Lake Michigan, including the rainfall as diversion,
would have been about 1300 or 1400 c.f.s. The 1500 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 of 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.
The 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.
aa
21
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 month. 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 c.f.s. was
estimated for storm reserve, making a total of 2,800
cfs. It can be noticed that the actual average dry
weather flow, on days not affected by storm run-off,
was 2,430 c.f.s. It can be noticed that actual storm
22
run-off was 1,559 c.f.s. so it became necessary to flow
a total of 3,989 c.f.s. in that month. That was one month
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
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 cf.s. Then, in November, it was in-
creased from 2,800 c.f.s. to 2,900 c.fi.s. There was no
storm run-off in November and considerable 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 and the
inflow from the Des Plaines Valley amounts to about
1600 cf.s., or perhaps 1650, and when you consider
23
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 of 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 lake 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
words, 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, so we have
never felt that it was safe to operate the canal 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 into 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
10,000 c.f.s. through the Canal, which 10,000 c.f.s. may
come from an ordinarily heavy rain, a slope 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 ficw
_—_—
24
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 at $912,000. 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 c.f.s.
on September 1, 1927, shows the water surface at the
lake in Chicago at approximately the same elevation 9s
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,-
——————E7~*~
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 treatment 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.
RTE ONL ROTC AE EI AE OR NSERC INE IR AOE SOT APIS AE
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 J ustice of the United States
Supreme Court. I was also a witness in the previous
hearings before Special Master Edward F. McClennen.
1532 Ihave 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 costs 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,
$9,570,986; 1939, $4,177,748; a total of a little more than
$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
27
said works”, meaning complete sewage treatment facili-
ties at the West Side Works, “will not exceed $9,000,000,
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
28
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, 1930 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
areca: —
MBE SEL ILE SD MAE CL DEM LS ee
—
29
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 J une 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
30
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
LRM LU IEEE EAE TION POLL sagt :
31
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.
1544 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.
LEO L SON
32
)\(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 extent 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
Report for 1939 and 1940 and an estimate of the op-
erating revenue for 1941.
1548 Since more operating revenue, estimated at $6,000,-
000 in taxes per year plus other income, was needed
when the Southwest Side 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 converted into fertilizer, sale of power,
etc. Since January, 1939, the Sanitary District has not
been able to generate sufficient power for its own needs
33
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 contract as to time but it could be cancelled by
either side 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 inadvertently
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 $5,000,000.
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, among 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.
34
CORRES RE EIA LE BIS SRO LETRA ST EET RE —
35
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?
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 have money enough,
then you would come back and show that that was the
fault of Elinois, if that needs any proof, because I would
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)
8ST
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
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
to
1558 The population increment for 10 years’ growth
(1930 to 1940) in the Calumet area used by the Sani-
tary District in the reports to 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.
IS TPR MRL RANE TELNET LEE IE ILELI LEE SLOG III EN ILO _—
J ss o As PL TS
37
The Master: Now, those estimates are not shown
by anything in the record of this hearing, or anything
1560 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 been
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 they not be figured out by
anyone who read the figures that are in the record?
I mean, couldn’t I see myself what percentages there
were if I teok the time to figure them out?
Mr. Naujoks: That is right. It would take time.
The Master: Couldn’t you figure it out for me in a
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.
|
|
a sail illest atiie — a
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
ll
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, Calurret and Southwest Side plants was
estimated at 85 per cent and the population estimates
were based on the 1930 census.
1567 The maximum figure of 7,325 c.f.s. shown for dis-
charge from the Lockport Power House at four o’clock
on February 15, 1939, is about 1,600 c.f.s. higher than
— es
40
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
obviously 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.)
LE LPI LOOT ELD GEESE ASE LOO IEF neon
41
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 corporate 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 61st 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, 1940, as found in the Illinois
_ _ . toes <e as
—_ — + Pee Scant ne cupern aap,
42
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 here 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.
PWEDE NOEL OILY NEO EDO LL LOE LOE IM —
cS r EPTPRS.
43
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
A
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
44
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
respect to date has amounted to $5,330,000. That
is on some twenty contracts, works estimated in
the original program to cost $19,834,000, had been
let 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 to 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-
1576 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 to the
amount of sewage to be treated at the various
plants has been given due consideration.”
As a result of that, the total of $14,662,375 was sub-
tracted from the total program, that figure being made
up of the $5,330,000 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
45
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 J anuary 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 J uly 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
1578 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: also for omission of
power recovery plant; $701,000 saved on letting
of contracts one and four of the Southwest Side
46
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
1579 date of the ultimate reduction in the diversion of
water from Lake Michigan under the decree of
the court of April 21, 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
F 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
4 the growth of the community, could have been
omitted.
“In 1928, near the close of an era of prosperity
j 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
47
to Chicago which are not yet necessary and proba-
bly will 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 Intercepting 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
48
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 $22,940,000.”
In a subsequent report to the Court of July 1, 1938,
page 7, it can be noticed that the construction program
was reduced $380,000 by re-estimate; and on January i,
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 January 1, 1939 of $174,-
625,000. In the report to the Supreme Court of January
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
j 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
added to the program.
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 been
replaced. We are undertaking to do some of those
items. Most of them as WPA projects. The Calumet
project, for instance—one item which was deferred was
3
E:
3
49
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—several 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.
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; and the other difference is made up because
of a detailed estimate made on the sludge drying plant
which we 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
1584 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
= wey 4 ea te NM LENNIE RNIN LEE AP LE NE
eee, . wesareiens .
50
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 cf.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 fiow
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.
iin etl
51
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 3200 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 c.f.s. 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-
LEA MD FT RL RET ARIE CI, TOTS Sl a ts
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 cfs. yet it is
a physical impossibility to flow that amount of water
through the channe!
1592 It would be unsafe to ~duce the flow in the Chi-
cago River to 325 c.f.s. xt aay time but it would not
be unsafe to reduce the instantaneous discharge at
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.
. ee , ee ee ee ee —«—«,~
In the report to the Supreme Court of January 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 to 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 actual
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
54
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 procedure 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.
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:
“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 definitely allocated but
wy be used for some of this future work. This
leaves work estimated at $38,213,000 to be financed
from other sources.”
CEO 5 AURIS NE FS PO TI : -
ae ~-* _—— —
55
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
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 construction 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 been 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
56
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,
j 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
1 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?
i 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.
57
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: I might say a lot of that was furnished
at your request, however.
Mr. Wallenstein: Not only that, it goes to the ques-
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
will 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 a warm rain occurs in
1603 the winter, the sewers will by-pass to the River with
very little rainfall. With a dry summer condition, much
more rainfall is required. The average concentration
time of the average drainage area in Chicago is about
three hours, but the concentration time 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.
. q
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.
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 flower
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 wouid add some oxygen to the
water. I have made no figures on the amount of oxy-
gen which could be introduced 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 some 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
59
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
1609
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 July
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.
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”.
4
a
60
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
1613 an activated sludge plant had a B.OLD. of 10. If the
B.OD. 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 Pool 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-
61
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.
: 62
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 tanks or into the new battery of
aeration tanks, which is to be constructed.
If the Brandon Road 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.
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.
If the entire water supply of the City of Chicago
should be metered, no doubt the water use would be
reduced. That would have the effect of increasing the
pumping capacity and the aeration tank capacity of
the sewage treatment plants. It would have no effect
en eet Tag kod ms a , - — - :
. KOR! — _ iil
7 ‘ ~ eel Pe
63
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 to this 1500 c.f.s. 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.
EO Pp FOOLER VIE ERE IES
64
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.
+ 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
3 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
CPR NOR EOE LET I RAIE HI .
. - meen — “ a a - _ _—
ee
65
the way of cascades, I will make an estimate of cost
of constructing same.
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 June, 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 A: 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?
1808 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.
OPoroO re
67
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 mechanical 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 blewer 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 taking bids within the next
two or three weeks on one construction job for a tun-
nel which 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 pres-
ent building without interference with the construc-
tion of the new building so that the new construc-
a an
68
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
oceans
69
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 vear 1940
are not yet completed but apparently they will be
about the same as for 1939, except that the current
generated at the Southwest Sewage 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 and
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.
7G
HORACE P. RAMEY-cCross 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.
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 eee ee
June 1939 7891 ” 40 i See
June 1939 8311 ” ae. Bs
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 ” ae
10000 ” ee elles
Lake Michigan Elevation—0.60
2221 The population increrments 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 .. (ova
West Side Project ...... - ici oes | eet
Southwest Side Project... «21.4 =”
_
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 cfs.
each, or a total of 4,300 cfs. 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 1930 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 (Lostor Gained)
Blue Island 115 .7 of one per cent
Calumet City 437 3.6 per cent
Cicero 2164 eee
Elmwood Park 2409 214 ”
Evanston ee: aa
Fores, Park mee Ee
Harvey 1460 91: ”
La Grange 313 31 ”
Maywood 754 #29 ”
Melrose Park iy ae ee
Oak Park ima 25."
Park Ridge 1606 154 ”
Wilmette lv 114 *
Winnetka 206 (#17 =”
— .
72
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 electricity developed during the 10-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.
2826 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 hissh 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
FER SRNERCE SRN MAES IE HNO Ny MR ee ? a
73
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 tne lagoon and the installa-
tion of a pump. This project will not be needed in
any case for a year. Its construction depends on de-
velopments as to the absolute need for it.
In connection with the Power developed 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.
_— CR sieciainin nieeniiiae =
74
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
Des Plaines River the District owns 1500 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
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
75
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
scraped 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 rainfall 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
it was proposed to lagoon all the sludge from this
Be:
76
plant. Mr. Pearse will furnish figures as to the amount
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 lagvon.
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.
77
Cross Examination.
The amount 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 losses.
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
——
78
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 ‘t 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. Ramey Exhibit No. 3 and Ramey Exhibit No. 4
were received in evidence.
3844 Is Ramey Exhibit No. 3.
3845 Is Ramey Exhibit No. 4.
3846 Ramey Exhibit No. 3 is a map of Brandon Road
Pool between McDonough Street, Joliet, and Brandon
nwo eae |
-———
Road Dam; showing at Station 38-+-91 a cross section
of the Brandon Road Pool, at which section current
meter measurements were made December 9, 1940.
This map is traced from Andrew Exhibit No. 6 and
another similar map. The distance from McDonough
Street to Brandon Road Dam is about 6200 feet, or
about a mile and a quarter. On this Exhibit is an ar-
row indicating the direction of the wind which was
3847 a moderate wind of about 14 miles per hour on De-
cember 9, 1940, slightly southwest, that is, this was
the velocity of the wind at Chicago on that day. This
Exhibit shows in a dotted line, beginning at McDon-
ough Street and extending south, the path of a rod
float, 15 feet long, placed vertically in the Channel
at McDonough Street. This float drifted to the wes-
terly bank of the pool at station 52+69. Another dotted
line, beginning at the center of the stream at station
52+69 indicates the path of another float tube, 10 feet
long, placed vertically in the water about the center
of the stream at station 52+69. This tube drifted to
the west bank of the pool at station 38+91, Obviously
the wind blowing against the top 10 to 15 inches of
these tubes immersed in the water 10 to 15 feet deep
offset the downstream effect of the current and caused
them to drift to the shore. The broken line on the
Exhibit, extending from McDonough Street to Bran-
don Road lock, is the approximate center line of the
stream or the sailing line. It is the line of the cur-
rent.
3848 The 15 foot float tube referred to is 15 feet long
below the water surface and an additional 15 inches
long above the water surface; the 10 foot float tube is 10
79
feet submerged with an additional 10 inches above the
water.
Ramey Exhibit No. 4 is a cross section of Brandon
Road Pool at Station 38+91. This Exhibit shows in
a full line the soundings of the Brandon Road Pool
at this cross section, as determined by the United
3849 States Engineers in 1939, that is, soundings made with
a 10-pound weight. This Exhibit shows in a dotted
line the soundings made December 9, 1940 with a 30-
pound weight on a current meter. The note on the
Exhibit says, “30-pound weight on current meter
stopped but would settle gradually into the sludge”.
The difference between the solid line and the broken
line indicates fill in the pool between 1939 and De-
cember 9, 1940. At other points on the cross section
are dots indicated by “X”, being points at which
current meter observations are made. These measure-
ments were in every case made at .4 of the depth of
the water measured down from the water surface,
3850 that is, .4 of the depth of the water at that point.
The total depth was measured from the water sur-
face down to the point where the current meter weight
stopped. It should be approximately the same result
as that obtained by the U. S. Engineers using a 10-
inch disc, with a 10-pound weight, which was allowed
to settle. In this case, the current meter had a 30-
pound weight and the point indicated on the Exhibit
is where the weight would stop but before it was
allowed to settle into the sludge. So the figures should
be about the same. These current meter measure-
ments were made at .4 of the depth below the sur-
face at various points across the stream. At two places
81
near the middle of the Stream, measurements were
made at .6 of the depth below the surface, as well as
at the .4 point. Averaging all these velocities and
applying the proper percentage of correction gives
an average velocity over this entire cross section of
3851 approximately .53 of a foot per second, which com-
pares with Mr. Andrew’s average of .55 of a foot per
second. The minimum velocity, as shown on Ramey
Exhibit No. 4, was .27 per second near the east bank.
The maximum velocity was 1.33 feet per second at
the .4 depth point near the center of the stream. Sta-
tion 450 on Ramey Exhibit No. 4 is near the Sailing
line shown on Ramey Exhibit No. 3. This is at a
point at which the nearest indicated velocity on Ra-
mey Exhibit No. 4 on the right hand side is 0.74 and
on the left hand side is an average of 1.01. We have
no velocity figures at the outlet of the gates from
Brandon Road Pool but I know that the velocity over
3852 the dam must have been very high. The velocities
of water in the Brandon Road Pool are probably a
third or a fourth of the velocities in the Main Channel
above Lockport under normal conditions.
I believe that this 10-day experimental flow did
not result in scouring out the Brandon Road Pool
because of the tremendous quantity of material scoured
out of the Main Channel above the Pool and not
scoured out as quickly as had been hoped. If all the
material above Lockport had been Scoured out within
the first five or six days of the test, leaving the water
going into the Pool during the last four days of the
test relatively clear, such water might have taken
more material out of Brandon Road Pool. The ten-
Ri ax me
82
dency towards the clearing up of the water at Lock-
port is shown in Mohlman’s report. Suspended solids
in the water during the latter days of the test were
diminishing at Lockport, whereas in the water com-
3853 ing out of Brandon Road Pool such solids were not
diminishing greatly. I think that this is one element
that was over estimated. I do not think that the
sludge that went into the upper end of the Pool car-
ried through the Pool as well, perhaps, as we had
hoped. However, when 21,000 tons of sludge were
carried from the Pool there was some beneficial ef-
fect on the system (from Chicago to Brandon Road
Dam) as a whole. This experiment has removed 21,-
000 tons of material that was previously between
these points and the situation between Chicago and
Brandon Road has been improved to that extent al-
though the situation in Brandon Road Pool is worse
than it was.
Cross Examination.
3854 I would say that as a result of this 10-day test,
the Chicago River and the Main Channel of the Sani-
tary District to McDonough Street Bridge should be
relatively clean and that lake water entering the Main
Channel will not have as much dissolved oxygen ab-
sorbed from it by sludge deposits in the Main Channel
in 1941, as well as the case in 1940, and assuming
that there is enough water to supply the oxygen de-
mand of the treatment plant effluent the lake water
would reach Brandon Road Pool in relatively better
condition in the summer of 1941 than in previous
PRESETS ‘ SFIS PAE OS as 7 att
83
summers. I would say that the worst sludge deposits
are now concentrated in an area about 5000 feet long
by 1400 feet wide, as compared to being spread over
a distance of 30 miles previously. I would hate to
say that there is no sludge in any part of the sys-
tem even now, although I think that the rest of the
system is relatively clean.
3855 As a result of this 10-day test, a considerable
amount of B.O.D. has been removed from the Canal
system from Chicago to Brandon Road and in my
opinion that is helpful.
Redirect Examination.
This statement is based, more or less, on the report
3856 of Dr. Mohlman, and when I say “relatively clean”,
I mean that some sludge has been removed from the
Main Channel but whether or not there is any more
and to what extent there is sludge in the Main Chan-
nel, I don’t presume to testify as to any exact figures
but I think what I have said is consistent with what
Mohlman’s report shows.
Recross Examination.
Illinois Exhibits Nos. 10-D, 10-E, and 10-F were
received in evidence. These exhibts bring down to
date the data shown on Illinois Exhibits Nos. 10-A,
10-B and 10-C. Said exhibits are shown, pages 3857
to 3860.
84
Examination by the M
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.