1. IDEM FIELD HEARING Renewal of ASU Operating Permit December 15 th, 2015 Protect Our Ground Water and the Indian Creek Watershed STOP!

2. INDIANA 50 TH STATE IN TERMS OF CLEAN WATER  Indiana dumped more than 17-million pounds of pollutants into its waterways in 2012 – more tonnage than any other state  This caused the state to fall to fifteenth-worst in the nation when considering the toxicity of the chemicals released

3. GROUNDWATER ISSUES – A USA PROBLEM We all are responsible to address these problems.

4. INDIANA STATE SYMBOLS  Indiana State River – Wabash River  Indiana State Song – “On the Banks of the Wabash, Far Away,” by Paul Dresser  Indiana State Beverage - Water

5. WHY ARE WE AGAINST THE PERMIT RENEWAL FOR ASU?  ASU plant is in a residential area  Plant not meant to be permanent  Indian creek runs dry periodically in the summer and winter  Negative environmental impact  Anti Degradation  Questions about effluent discharge

6. RESIDENTIAL AREA

8. NOT MEANT TO BE PERMANENT  March 29, 1966 – Agreement to abandon and connect to West Lafayette sanitary sewer system (when available)  December 19, 1973 – Agreement to incorporate into any government district that may be formed  Mid-1980’s – Provision to abandon facility when alternative municipal facility is available included in all correspondence

9. Should we not look to alternatives NOW rather than risk further harm to our environment by improper location.

10. PROBLEM OF EFFLUENT DILUTION

11. N Bridge S

12. NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE AREA  ASU maintenance issues result in major fish kill in 2013  Current creek erosion affecting the wildlife and homeowners  Permeable ground directly over major water source (Teays Aquifer)

13.  No anti-degradation study done prior to IDEM awarding expansion permit.  ASU accepts lower limits for pollutants in effluent instead, but no proof that OLD technology can provide these limits.  What happens if they cannot be reached in expanded plant?  Should not other more modern technologies be considered or, even better, not approve expansion and operating permit until other options can be explored.

14. QUESTIONS REGARDING EFFLUENT DISCHARGE  Doubling of low flow from previous 0.05fps to 0.1fps in pending permit. Should be 0 flow.  What about effluent limitation for mercury? Required by other processing plants.  Indian Creek is rated for full body contact recreational use capable of supporting well-balanced warm water aquatic community (327 IAC 2-1 ). How can this requirement be maintained with the increase in pollutants flowing into a dry creek bed?

15. ADDITIONAL CONCERNS

16. THANK YOU. PICE: PROTECT INDIAN CREEK AND ENVIRONS GO! Make our waterways safe. We depend on YOU!