TAG reports: Volume 2, Number 3;
July, 1993
009 Superfund Site:Fences and Ditches; Meetings to address local concerns
Background of the recent meetings
Hercules Incorporated received a permit to deposit toxaphene waste in the borrow pit used
to construct Georgia Spur 25 highway. The permit specifically allowed Hercules to landfill
waste within the pit, no rights were granted to placement of waste in any surrounding
areas. However, at this time, toxaphene contamination has spread to nearly 20 acres of
adjacent land. The recent EPA Record of Decision requires Hercules to remove and landfill
toxaphene contaminated soils from the Nix road area. The ROD does not address
contamination on the East bank of the drainage ditch near the Altama Elementary School.
The legal process mandating the cleanup is lengthy. The cleanup will only come after court
proceedings and additional studies conducted by EPA and, possibly, ATSDR. The time is in
excess of two years.
Local civic groups feel that the ROD is defective in not addressing pollution of the
drainage ditch. Further, the groups charge that proposed long-term studies before cleaning
the neighborhood are mainly delaying tactics to justify inaction at the site. There is no
actual process for public response outside of the commentary period established under
CERCLA/SARA law. However, government groups did agree to an informal
"roundtable" discussion with the Glynn Environmental Coalition, to establish a
framework for dealing with issues at the dumpsite. Participating were the Environmental
Protection Agency, the Georgia Department of Environmental Protection, members of the
Glynn County Commission, the Glynn County Public Works, the Glynn County Board of Health,
and Hercules representatives. The ATSDR was invited, but chose not to attend.
The meeting took place on June 11, 1993, at the Historic Courthouse. Meeting Chairperson
was TAG grant advisor R. Kevin Pegg. The theme was "fences and ditches." The
following is not meant to be a verbatim account of the nearly two hour meeting. This
discussion is derived from notes and recollections of individual positions. The remarks
are the author's opinion of what was said and no attempt has been made to quote
participants. At the outset of the meeting the participants described their agency's
activity at the 009 landfill.
Overview of the meetings
The EPA affirmed that they are the lead agency involved in the cleanup effort, outlined
ongoing activities, and gave a timetable for future action at the site. Their position is
that the contamination on the streambank is not a threat since human activity in that area
occurs infrequently. The EPA plans more testing and may require remediation if higher
levels are found. The EPA stated that Hercules was the sole Responsible Party at the dump.
No action is planned against property holders with toxaphene contamination since the
original permitting only allowed Hercules to place toxaphene within the landfill cells.
The GaEPD indicated that, while the off-site contamination is in violation of the original
permit, the EPD does not currently have enforcement capabilities. Only recently has the
state legislature enacted law giving state agencies the power to develop regulations and
enforce compliance. Presently the guidelines are not established, so no action can be
dictated by the state. The Hercules representative reiterated the company's argument that
toxaphene levels found do not represent a health hazard. Hercules did affirm their desire
to move the process forward and is working with the EPA in that regard. The difficulty for
Hercules comes from past environmental litigation cases against other companies where
"good neighbor" actions were considered by the courts to imply guilt beyond the
company's legitimate responsibility. Hercules is concerned that moving faster than the
normal regulatory pace could result in additional complications that actually slow the
process down.
The Glynn County Commissioner attending indicated a desire to see the matter resolved in a
timely fashion that is fully protective of health in the neighborhoods. Likewise, the
county Public Works representative expressed an interest in being kept informed of
contamination of the drainage ditch. Public Works and the EPA need to coordinate better so
that affected areas can be handled in the proper fashion.
The County Engineer spoke at some length to the drainage upstream from the landfill. It
was made clear that storm drainage from the Mall parking areas will not increase flooding
around the site. However, the County was not well informed by the EPA of leaching between
the ditch and the landfill. Hydrogeologic data from the Remedial Investigation showing
that water flows from the landfill aquifer to the drainage ditch was apparently not
forwarded from EPA to County officials.
The County Board of Health representative spoke to progress in obtaining medical records
of exposed residents. Also, the Unit is attempting to get ATSDR actively involved in
determining the nature and extent of the hazard to workers and residents.
The Drainage Ditch
The ditch that drains the landfill flows past the Altama Elementary School. At its
closest point the ditch is just feet from windows on the south side of the school. Stream
sediments have tested positive in the past. Several places along the east bank of the
drainage are contaminated as high as 1.5 parts per million.
Some schoolboard members identify the contaminated areas opposite the landfill as part of
the Altama Elementary school. However, County officials are reluctant to claim ownership
of the property. Apparently the county maintains some drainage ditches actually owned by
developments. Resolution of the drainage ditch contamination may be hampered by these
jurisdictional problems. Four possible remedies were discussed at the meeting.
No Action. Hercules and the EPA favor no action. The argument is that minimal human
activity occurs in the contaminated areas and the health threat to children is difficult
to prove. Since the ditch is of major concern to parents of Altama school children, and
the community, the No Action option is likely to remain divisive for the 70+ years of the
dump's lifespan.
Removal of the ditch soils for burial at the landfill. This action would be
extremely expensive and difficult to implement. Removing the soils would release into the
stream much of the toxaphene present on the streambanks. This may necessitate filtering or
otherwise remediating the water. Also, the soil contamination occurs over 8 feet deep in
some areas, requiring large amounts of material to be excavated.
Removing the ditch by diverting the flow to nearby drainage streams and filling in the
old streambed. County officials rejected this option for two reasons. The county
engineer expressed concern that the excess water diverted to other streams may cause
flooding in low areas downstream. Second, the County Public Works representative objected
since the water in the ditch feeds into the marsh farther south. Dewatering the ditch may
have an impact on the wetlands. Installation of a culvert. A length of pipe of sufficient
diameter to allow flow could be installed along the existing streambed. The opening would
be upstream of the landfill and would extend past the elementary school beneath Altama
avenue. The pipe would be covered with clean fill dirt creating a "greenway"
where the existing open ditch now runs. The county engineer indicated that, since the
structure would be non-load bearing, the culvert could be made out of relatively
inexpensive materials. The toxaphene that is presently exposed on the ground around the
stream would be buried. The dredging spoil piles that currently line the schoolyard might
also be used as fill. The culvert option eliminates the need for weed control activity
that might distribute toxaphene to the schoolyard. It also reduces water exchange between
the surficial aquifer and the open streambed; an important consideration for the in situ
stabilization required under the ROD.
Ironically, the installation of a culvert may be difficult for environmental groups to
accept. Conversion of the aquatic habitat to terrestrial will impact plant, insect, bird
and small mammal populations that use the ditch. There will be considerable species
displacement from converting the streambed to a greenway.
Both the EPA and the GaEPD thought the culvert option might be a workable solution that
was fully protective of human health. Neither agency could think of any precedents for
this action. All groups agreed to continue a dialog on the stream.
Neighborhood Contamination
During the summer of 1992 contamination was found above the action levels in the yards
of private residences along Nix lane. This is a violation of Hercules original Georgia
state landfill permit, as well as NEPA legislation, CERCLA/SARA, and many other laws.
Although not technically a county government issue, a number of local leaders have
publicly and privately expressed repugnance over the violations and slow cleanup efforts.
The GaEPD has no current standards that would dictate cleanup action. The EPA ROD does
require Hercules to cleanup the yards. However, the EPA action may take more than two
additional years to implement due to the lengthy legal process occurring between selection
of the treatment option and the actual work. Acceleration can only occur for three
reasons: 1) Emergency treatment due to immediate threat to the public; 2) An Interim
Action based on potential chronic effects of cumulative exposure, or discovery of much
higher levels than believed to occur; 3) Willingness by Hercules to remediate prior to
court order.
1) Acute toxicity. The EPA defers to the ATSDR for emergency treatment options. At
a separate meeting on the subject (held at St.Simons Island on June 25) the ATSDR
indicated that acute poisoning is not shown from toxaphene exposure in the neighborhood.
However, the ATSDR was not able to give details on the procedure used to reach their
opinion since they have no defined policy applying to acute exposure determination. The
EPA defines acute toxaphene exposure in the manual Recognition and Management of Pesticide
Poisonings. The EPA states that acute exposure from toxaphene results in the sudden onset
of convulsions without prior symptoms of headache, nausea or dizziness (paraphrased from
pages 19-20, EPA-540/9-88-001). The ATSDR apparently did not look for case reports
matching this profile before reaching their conclusions.
2) Higher levels of toxaphene or chronic exposure. An Interim Action based on new
evidence of high concentrations of toxaphene or chronic illness faces similar bureaucratic
difficulties from EPA and ATSDR. The EPA indicated they were not planning any additional
studies in 1993. Consequently, it will be at least a year before a serious examination of
the occurrence of toxaphene outside of the landfill is conducted. In a review letter dated
June 22, 1993, the ATSDR dismissed 12 case histories of potentially chronically exposed
residents provided by Glynn County Board of Health. The ATSDR argues that the information
provided was "inconclusive," however, the ATSDR findings are highly biased. The
ATSDR bases their conclusions only on toxaphene exposure through drinking water at less
than 1 part per billion; not the high parts per million levels found in the yards of
exposed residents. Further, in discussions regarding risk the ATSDR completely ignores its
own toxicological profile that states: "Data suggests that subsets of the human
population may be unusually susceptible to the toxic effects of toxaphene. These [people]
include pregnant women, their fetuses, nursing babies, young children, people with
neurologic diseases, and individuals with protein-deficient diets. Others at increased
risk include people with hepatic [liver], cardiac [heart], renal [kidney] or respiratory
disease" (TP-90-26, page 71). There was no apparent attempt by the ATSDR to determine
if any of the case histories provided fit these categories of increased risk. At the
separate meeting ATSDR representatives proposed to study a study design, not an actual
health survey. Neither the ATSDR nor the EPA has a defined policy on chronic exposure.
The ATSDR did suggest involving the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. OSHA
normally only examines work related exposure, however in this case the toxaphene in the
neighborhood is from transport activity and may qualify for investigation. Department of
Transportation rules on toxic waste may also have been violated by transport loss of
toxaphene contaminated waste. The DOT might be requested to investigate.
3) Agreement by EPA and Hercules. The best opportunity for an early cleanup of the
contaminated neighborhood is a decision by Hercules and the EPA to accelerate studies for
this one area. Hopefully, with the encouragement of local civic leaders, the EPA can find
legal means of moving forward that minimizes potential additional liability to Hercules,
Inc.
Definitions:
 | ATSDR- Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Lead agency for human exposure. |
| CERCLA/SARA- Comprehensive Environmental Recovery, Compensation and Liability Act/Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act. The Superfund legislation governing clean up of National Priority List sites. |
| EPA- Environmental Protection Agency. |
| GaEPD- Georgia Environmental Protection Department. Lead Agency for the state. |
| Hercules- Hercules, Incorporated. The local plant owning the landfill. |
| ROD- Record of Decision, the "rod." The legal instrument outlining cleanup methods at the dumpsite. |
Acknowledgments: Special thanks to these individuals for participating in the meeting:
Dave Antic, Hercules
Virginia Gunn, Glynn County Commission
Jimmy Horton, Glynn County Public Works
Mike Laney, GaEPD
Ray Richard, Glynn County Engineer
Jan Simmons, GaEPD
Dr. Brooks Taylor, County Public Health
Betty Winter, EPA
LINKS:
Jump to top of page
visit TAG Advisor R. K. Pegg's Homepage
Return to TAG table of Contents