page 347 |
Previous | 1 of 5 | Next |
|
|
Loading content ...
39 SOIL AND GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION AT WOOD PRESERVING PLANTS John Ball, Professor Civil Engineering Department The University of Alabama University, Alabama 35486 INTRODUCTION This study is based on four individual sites selected from among several dozen wood preserving plant investigations performed since the effective date of the RCRA regulations [1]. It has been observed that all wood preserving plants investigated can be separated into facilities that have operated with process water surface impoundments and those that have not. Most of the surface impoundments were installed in the early 1970's in response to suggestions from state regulatory agencies who objected to direct discharges or for the purpose of keeping abreast of industry changes. Almost all plants investigated that have had surface impoundments have indicated some groundwater contamination from preservatives. The degree of the problem, however, has ranged from localized conditions at a single monitor well indicating one or more dissolved constituents of a preservative to relatively large areas and to significant depths of free preservative contamination. THE STUDY Four plants having significant contamination were selected for discussion based on the availability of information, type of preservative, and other factors such as extent of contamination, soil type, etc. These facilities shall be referred to as Plants A, B, C, and D. Table I presents a summary of several facility characteristics for each of the plants. Plants A, B, and C began operating prior to 1940 with Plant D starting up in 1973. The older plants began with creosote as the only preservative followed by pentachlorophenol in the 1960's at Plants B and C. The use of the preservative CCA (copper, chromium, arsenic) was started in the 1970's at Plant C. Plant D began operating with creosote and CCA preservatives from initial startup. Although Plants C and D treat with CCA, little contamination has been detected from release of this water soluble preservative. The significant contamination has been from the oil soluble creosote and pentachlorophenol. Except for Plant B, the surface impoundments began operation between 1972 and 1974. The Plant B pond was constructed in 1974, but an existing drainage canal was used to handle process water from the start of operations. Prior to the early 1970's, process water from Plants A and C was discharged Table I. Facility Characteristics Plant A Plant B Plant C Plant D Plant Startup 1937 1926 1928 1973 Lagoon Startup 1974 1926 1972 1973 Preservative Creosote Creosote Creosote Creosote Penta» Penta" CCAb CCAb Number of Cylinders 3 3 4 3 Source of Contamination 1-Ditch 1-Pond 1-Canal 1-Pond 1-Pond 2-Ponds Total Surface Acres of Source 1.5 1 1 0.5 Total Volume of Source, Cubic Yards 1700 3600 4700 1600 •Pentachlorophenol bCopper, Chromium, Arsenic. 347
Object Description
Purdue Identification Number | ETRIWC198639 |
Title | Soil and groundwater contamination at wood preserving plants |
Author | Ball, John (John E.) |
Date of Original | 1986 |
Conference Title | Proceedings of the 41st Industrial Waste Conference |
Conference Front Matter (copy and paste) | http://e-archives.lib.purdue.edu/u?/engext,37786 |
Extent of Original | p. 347-351 |
Collection Title | Engineering Technical Reports Collection, Purdue University |
Repository | Purdue University Libraries |
Rights Statement | Digital object copyright Purdue University. All rights reserved. |
Language | eng |
Type (DCMI) | text |
Format | JP2 |
Date Digitized | 2009-07-13 |
Capture Device | Fujitsu fi-5650C |
Capture Details | ScandAll 21 |
Resolution | 300 ppi |
Color Depth | 8 bit |
Description
Title | page 347 |
Collection Title | Engineering Technical Reports Collection, Purdue University |
Repository | Purdue University Libraries |
Rights Statement | Digital copyright Purdue University. All rights reserved. |
Language | eng |
Type (DCMI) | text |
Format | JP2 |
Capture Device | Fujitsu fi-5650C |
Capture Details | ScandAll 21 |
Transcript | 39 SOIL AND GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION AT WOOD PRESERVING PLANTS John Ball, Professor Civil Engineering Department The University of Alabama University, Alabama 35486 INTRODUCTION This study is based on four individual sites selected from among several dozen wood preserving plant investigations performed since the effective date of the RCRA regulations [1]. It has been observed that all wood preserving plants investigated can be separated into facilities that have operated with process water surface impoundments and those that have not. Most of the surface impoundments were installed in the early 1970's in response to suggestions from state regulatory agencies who objected to direct discharges or for the purpose of keeping abreast of industry changes. Almost all plants investigated that have had surface impoundments have indicated some groundwater contamination from preservatives. The degree of the problem, however, has ranged from localized conditions at a single monitor well indicating one or more dissolved constituents of a preservative to relatively large areas and to significant depths of free preservative contamination. THE STUDY Four plants having significant contamination were selected for discussion based on the availability of information, type of preservative, and other factors such as extent of contamination, soil type, etc. These facilities shall be referred to as Plants A, B, C, and D. Table I presents a summary of several facility characteristics for each of the plants. Plants A, B, and C began operating prior to 1940 with Plant D starting up in 1973. The older plants began with creosote as the only preservative followed by pentachlorophenol in the 1960's at Plants B and C. The use of the preservative CCA (copper, chromium, arsenic) was started in the 1970's at Plant C. Plant D began operating with creosote and CCA preservatives from initial startup. Although Plants C and D treat with CCA, little contamination has been detected from release of this water soluble preservative. The significant contamination has been from the oil soluble creosote and pentachlorophenol. Except for Plant B, the surface impoundments began operation between 1972 and 1974. The Plant B pond was constructed in 1974, but an existing drainage canal was used to handle process water from the start of operations. Prior to the early 1970's, process water from Plants A and C was discharged Table I. Facility Characteristics Plant A Plant B Plant C Plant D Plant Startup 1937 1926 1928 1973 Lagoon Startup 1974 1926 1972 1973 Preservative Creosote Creosote Creosote Creosote Penta» Penta" CCAb CCAb Number of Cylinders 3 3 4 3 Source of Contamination 1-Ditch 1-Pond 1-Canal 1-Pond 1-Pond 2-Ponds Total Surface Acres of Source 1.5 1 1 0.5 Total Volume of Source, Cubic Yards 1700 3600 4700 1600 •Pentachlorophenol bCopper, Chromium, Arsenic. 347 |
Resolution | 300 ppi |
Color Depth | 8 bit |
Tags
Comments
Post a Comment for page 347