Central Chemical Corp.

History of Central Chemical Corp.
In important ways, the circumstances surrounding Thomas’s entry into the fertilizer business were not propitious. First, Thomas began business near the end of a half-century-long relocation of the fertilizer industry’s center. Though fertilizer use continued to increase in the Mid-Atlantic states and elsewhere during the period from 1870 to 1920, the manufacture of fertilizer began to shift to the Southern states in the late nineteenth century. By 1902, Charleston had replaced Baltimore as the fertilizer capital of the country. The Mid-Atlantic states’ share of total fertilizer use decreased from 34% in 1880 to 14% in 1920. By contrast, in 1920 the South-Atlantic states used about 50% of all fertilizers consumed in the U.S. Thus, Hagerstown could no longer enjoy proximity to the major centers of fertilizer-material production, and, while previously situated between the two highest-fertilizer-use regions of the country, it now found itself on the northern edge of a region that now dwarfed all others.

Second, Thomas’s decision to continue in the practice (apparently favored by Hagerstown companies) of making fertilizer primarily from bone and organic materials came at the start of a rapid increase in the demand for mixed fertilizers, but also at the beginning of a precipitous decline in the use of bone and bone products as a source of phosphorous in fertilizers. With the growing use of potash and phosphate rock, consumption of mixed fertilizers grew from 46% of the total in 1880 to around 70% in 1920. During the period from 1890 to 1910, when Thomas was focusing on his presumably unmixed “dissolved bone” fertilizers, mixed fertilizers were capturing market share.

Furthermore, the period from 1880 to 1920 is also characterized by the decreasing use of organic materials in general. Though organic materials provided about 91% of the total nitrogen in 1900, by 1917 the total nitrogen contribution from organics had dropped to 46.5%. With regard to phosphates, bone meal, dissolved bones and boneblack, and phosphoro-guano use peaked in 1890, but their use dropped to a negligible amount by 1910 as the use of superphosphates from phosphate rock increased dramatically..

Third, even as Thomas had begun his business trading fertilizer for livestock from relatively distant places, the fertilizer industry was increasingly turning to local distribution. Though mid-nineteenth-century fertilizer plants typically were situated in East Coast harbor cities, twentieth-century plants were dispersed to be closer to areas of consumption.

Finally, even though the name “Thomas’ Dissolved Bone” suggests that Thomas produced his own superphosphates initially, the use of bone in the production of superphosphates was on its way out as described above. For all practical purposes, then, Thomas had set his business on the track of the second, smaller type of fertilizer company, which only mixed fertilizer and did not produce superphosphates. For the next 90 years, even when Central Chemical had affiliates across the nation, it would remain in this “smaller” category – relying on large suppliers for its materials. For reasons noted above, this was not a problem at the turn of the century vis-à-vis the larger companies. Starting in the 1890s, however, many agricultural societies began to advocate home mixing of fertilizer materials by farmers. Throughout the first half of the twentieth century, the fertilizer industry fought this effort successfully by insisting on the value of industrial mixing processes and the farmer’s comparative disadvantages in mixing.

Though in its early years, Central Chemical advertised itself as “Exporters – Manufacturers – Importers,” by the 1970s it had become little more than a middle-man between larger suppliers and farmers. It did not import its own materials, but purchased granulated materials from suppliers. There is no evidence that Central Chemical was exporting products out of the country anymore. And its manufacturing capacity consisted of mixing pre-processed granulated materials in various proportions. At this point, its consulting capacity became equally important to its factory processes.

Though Central Chemical and its subsidiaries were taking in a combined $25 million in sales by the late 1970s, an employee remembers that there was always a sense of trouble on the horizon. The vulnerability of a company that adds very little value to its product and relies entirely on contracts with larger suppliers requires no explanation. It appears that not long after Central Chemical became a bulk blender, its large suppliers began pushing their advantages. In the early 70s, Central Chemical’s supplier, Agrico Chemical Company, put pressure on Central Chemical to enter into a long-term contract. When Central Chemical refused, Agrico withheld di-ammonium phosphate and granular triple super phosphate at a time of national shortage in these materials. Central Chemical responded by filing an antitrust lawsuit against Agrico in federal court. For most of the next decade much of the time, resources, and energy of what was still a closely-held corporation would be consumed in this litigation. Ultimately the lawsuit proved unsuccessful.

All of this came at the same time that local, state, federal regulators were investigating the Hagerstown plant for its pesticide-disposal practices. In the 1970s the State of Maryland ordered two separate cleanups of the site; the EPA was just getting started.

Ultimately the push to eliminate the middle man that drove the switch to bulk blending began to turn on the blenders themselves. The larger companies and farmers wised up, and realized that they could both save money by dealing directly with each other. Farmers began buying direct-application materials from the same suppliers used by Central Chemical. By the early 1980s, Central Chemical’s network of fertilizer blenders had contracted substantially. Blending operations like those of the Hagerstown plant could no longer make the case for themselves. Crushed under the weight of increasingly serious environmental liability for its mid-century disposal practices, the Central Chemical Corporation contracted its operations substantially. The Hagerstown plant ceased operations in 1984 and the office headquarters moved from the old Thomas building to an office outside Hagerstown.


Translate

Thursday, October 15, 2015

Central Chemical (Hagerstown)



Central Chemical (Hagerstown)

MITCHELL AVE
The Central Chemical Superfund site is located on 19 acres in the community of Hagerstown, Maryland in Washington County. An electrical substation owned by the City of Hagerstown is located in the northeast corner of the property. A new subdivision is located to the northeast of the site near the substation. From the early 1930's until the mid-1980's, the chemical plant at the site functioned as a blender of agricultural pesticides and fertilizers. Raw pesticides manufactured at other locations were blended with inert materials to produce commercial-grade products using air and hammer mills and wetting agents. Production ended in the 1980's and the old buildings were demolished during the Spring/Summer of 2005. Waste materials from the manufacturing processes, including waste generated during the cleaning of the processing equipment, were disposed in an on-site depression. Contaminants found in site soil, groundwater, surface water, and/or sediment, as well as in the tissue of fish caught downstream of the Site, include arsenic, lead, benzene, aldrin, chlordane, DDD, DDE, DDT, dieldrin, and methoxychlor.
HAZARDOUS RANKING SCORE   50 / 100A score of 28.5 or higher (out of 100) qualifies a site for the Superfund National Priority List

HAZARDOUS RANKING SCORE

50 / 100


Please go to:    http://www.toxicsites.us/site.php?epa_id=MDD00306

Posted by at No comments:

State Aware of Central Chemical Ground Water Contamination in 1962

Ken Buckler is the editor of WashCo Chronicle

Originally published in WashCo Chronicle, republished with author permission.

Author: Ken Buckler
Submitted: October 09, 2015 

HAGERSTOWN, MD - Historical documents have surfaced which reveal that the State of Maryland was aware of ground water pollution at the Central Chemical superfund site in 1962.

According to the official history of the site from the EPA's "Record of Decision", the State of Maryland received complaints from nearby residents regarding the air quality surrounding Central Chemical. Air quality samples were taken, and the concentration was deemed not to pose a hazard at that time by the state health department. No mention whatsoever is made of the State of Maryland's knowledge of ground water pollution under the Central Chemical facility.

However, new documents reveal that the State of Maryland was aware of ground water pollution at Central Chemical due to a water quality study performed in 1958. The well in question, named Wa-Bi 19, was located on the Central Chemical property off Mitchell Ave. in Hagerstown.

In the 1962 bulletin, "Bulletin 24 - The Water Resources of Allegheny and Washington Counties", the following is stated:
The analysis of water from well Wa-Bi 19 (318 feet deep and cased to 38 feet) indicates chemical contamination of the ground water at that site.
This raises the question - why did the State of Maryland fail to act when finding evidence of chemical contamination? Any action taken by the State of Maryland would undoubtedly have been included in the EPA's Record of Decision - but this information is noticeably absent. Further water quality testing was not performed until 1976, when DDT was found in the Antietam Creek. This means that for eighteen years, the ground water contamination would be ignored by the State of Maryland. Even once identified, the State of Maryland only instructed Central Chemical to cover the lagoon and potential sinkhole to prevent surface runoff - no actions were taken to address ground water contamination.

Hagerstown and Washington County residents need to start asking for answers. The contamination at Central Chemical was unchecked, unmitigated for far too long. It's time for the State of Maryland to start answering questions. The problem was identified early on, why was no action taken?

Additionally - did the State of Maryland even notify the City of Hagerstown or the Washington County Health Department of the contaminated ground water?

Additional stories will be posted as information becomes available

Excerpt from EPA Record of Decision 2009

Excerpt from EPA Record of Decision 2009
Excerpt from Bulletin 24 - The Water Resources of Allegheny and Washington Counties


Posted by at No comments:

Thursday, September 24, 2015

September 22, 2015 | Mayor & Council Meeting-Central Chemical






Posted by at No comments:

Wednesday, September 23, 2015

Hagerstown chemical site cleanup could start in 2017 - Herald Mail Media: Local News

Hagerstown chemical site cleanup could start in 2017 - Herald Mail Media: Local News

  • Video (1)


Posted: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 9:28 pm | Updated: 11:30 pm, Tue Sep 22, 2015.

Work to contain contamination at the Central Chemical Superfund site along Mitchell Avenue in Hagerstown could start in 2017 and will probably take at least a year to complete, a federal environmental official told the Hagerstown City Council on Tuesday.

The project will involve mixing contaminants in a former lagoon at the old fertilizer and pesticide plant site with a concrete material that will also contain ash and carbon, said Robert Wallace, remedial project manager for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
The idea of mixing the contaminants with the concrete material is to create a solid mass. A synthetic cap will then be placed over the old lagoon, Wallace said.

The 19-acre site was home to Central Chemical Corp., which blended agricultural pesticides and fertilizers from the 1930s to the 1980s. Raw pesticides manufactured elsewhere were mixed at the site with inert materials to produce commercial-grade products.
Contaminants found in the soil, groundwater, surface water and sediment, as well as in the tissue of fish caught downstream from the site, include arsenic, lead, benzene, aldrin, chlordane, DDD, DDE, DDT, dieldrin, and methoxychlor, according to the EPA.

In 1997, it was placed on a list for the federal Superfund program, which is designed to address abandoned hazardous materials sites.

Wallace provided the council and Mayor David S. Gysberts with an update on the cleanup during a work session Tuesday afternoon.
He presented a picture of what the site would look like once the work is completed that showed an elevated area where the lagoon is situated.
Council members asked how the site could be used in the future.
Gysberts said he thinks the property has been zoned as professional office/mixed use, which Wallace said would be a good use for the site.
Councilman Martin E. Brubaker asked if anything could be placed on the lagoon after the project is completed.
Wallace said he did not think so, but noted it would be safe to walk on.
But groundwater testing at the site found significant contamination, he told the council.
Apart from drinking water at the site or bathing in it, Wallace said he does not think the groundwater contamination poses a threat to the public.
Officials at the meeting pointed out that the city gets its drinking water from sources that include the Potomac River.
Wallace said that the project has presented challenges, including the determination that groundwater flows from all directions at the site.
"You couldn't have picked a worse place" for such an operation, he said.
There are about 2,100 wells in a five-mile radius around the site, Wallace said.
To determine how groundwater flows from the location, dye was injected into sinkholes on the property that provide access to groundwater, Wallace said.
Dye has appeared in water four miles east and west of the site, in Antietam Creek two miles away and at the Fountain Head Country Club, he said.
But Wallace said just because dye showed up those locations doesn't mean there is contamination. Work will continue to determine if there is contamination at the sites where the dye surfaced, he said.
EPA officials were commended for their work on the project.
"It's taken way too long, but I guess that's the way science goes," Gysberts said.
No taxpayer funding will be used for the work. Sixteen companies have reached a $14.3 million settlement with the EPA and the state to clean up the site.
Work to contain contamination at the Central Chemical Superfund site along Mitchell Avenue in 
Hagerstown could start in 2017 and will probably take at least a year to complete, a federal environmental official told the Hagerstown City Council on Tuesday.

The project will involve mixing contaminants in a former lagoon at the old fertilizer and pesticide plant site with a concrete material that will also contain ash and carbon, said Robert Wallace, remedial project manager for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

The idea of mixing the contaminants with the concrete material is to create a solid mass. A synthetic cap will then be placed over the old lagoon, Wallace said.

The 19-acre site was home to Central Chemical Corp., which blended agricultural pesticides and fertilizers from the 1930s to the 1980s. Raw pesticides manufactured elsewhere were mixed at the site with inert materials to produce commercial-grade products.

Contaminants found in the soil, groundwater, surface water and sediment, as well as in the tissue of fish caught downstream from the site, include arsenic, lead, benzene, aldrin, chlordane, DDD, DDE, DDT, dieldrin, and methoxychlor, according to the EPA.

 In 1997, it was placed on a list for the federal Superfund program, which is designed to address abandoned hazardous materials sites.
Wallace provided the council and Mayor David S. Gysberts with an update on the cleanup during a work session Tuesday afternoon.

He presented a picture of what the site would look like once the work is completed that showed an elevated area where the lagoon is situated.
Council members asked how the site could be used in the future.
Gysberts said he thinks the property has been zoned as professional office/mixed use, which Wallace said would be a good use for the site.

Martin E. Brubaker asked if anything could be placed on the lagoon after the project is completed.
Wallace said he did not think so, but noted it would be safe to walk on.

Groundwater testing at the site found significant contamination, he told the council.

But apart from drinking water at the site or bathing in it, Wallace said he does not think the groundwater contamination poses a threat to the public.
Officials at the meeting pointed out that the city gets its drinking water from sources that include the Potomac River.
Wallace said that the project has presented challenges, including the determination that groundwater flows from all directions at the site.

"You couldn't have picked a worse place" for such an operation, he said.

There are about 2,100 wells in a five-mile radius around the site, Wallace said.

To determine how groundwater flows from the location, dye was injected into sinkholes on the property that provide access to groundwater, Wallace said.

Dye has appeared in water four miles east and west of the site, in Antietam Creek two miles away and at the Fountain Head Country Club, he said.

But Wallace said just because dye showed up those locations doesn't mean there is contamination. Work will continue to determine if there is contamination at the sites where the dye surfaced, he said.
EPA officials were commended for their work on the project.

"It's taken way too long, but I guess that's the way science goes," Gysberts said.

No taxpayer funding will be used for the work. Sixteen companies have reached a $14.3 million settlement with the EPA and the state to clean up the site.
http://www.heraldmailmedia.com/news/local/hagerstown-chemical-site-cleanup-could-start-
in/article_6cc9126e-6192-11e5-87db-4faef9e5a7e4.html
Posted by at No comments:

A letter from a friend in reference to the Mayor's Meeting -Central Chemical

A friend shared this.



Hi Margie, 


Attached are a couple shots I took of new plume maps they show during the presentation before the mayor. One shows the dramatic geological strata and how the contamination follows some specific strata. In that graphic the long vertical lines are wells, and the colors that you see along the well paths are levels of contamination they founded various depths in those strata. Red indicating the highest orange yellow and so forth are lesser. I don't have a good sense of how far the distance is.
.
There was a guy there who seem to be a citizen videotaping the entire presentation. I didn't ask him who he was but for all we know it will appear on YouTube.
.
The other photo shows the plume seen from above, with colors to indicate degrees of contamination. Sorry that the photograph don't give a lot of clarity, it's the best l could do.
.
The mayor asked the EPA about the health effects of people exposed years ago. As well, one of the council members mentioned that she knew of cancer clusters of extremely rare forms of cancer among people living near the plant. But the EPA spokespeople didn't have any knowledge of that, they are not epidemiologists and that's outside their parameter of investigation.
.
So that's a glaring question, why hasn't the EPA investigated for health effects? The EPA's research goals seems more concerned about the health of fish than of humans.
Posted by at No comments:

Tuesday, September 1, 2015

Did anyone in your family live near Central Chemical or have worked there? - IMPORTANT INFORMATION - Please Read.



Please read this if you lived near or worked at

Central Chemical Corp. in Hagerstown, MD

Or If any of your family members or friends

did! Major Medical Problems may have occurred

to you or a family member. Even if you don't

live there anymore but did. 

There is a web-site on Facebook called,"Central 

Chemical Hagerstown MD SuperFund Site" 

This site is collecting factual information.

If your family member or yourself have had major medical problems such as: Parkinson's disease, Diabeties 2, Cancer of any kind, Neurological Disorders, Asthma, Lung disorders, MS, Muscle disorders (not arthritis) Nerve disorders Leukemia and/or  rare 
medical problems or other major medical issues

They have found chemicals in the quarry that are the same chemicals that were used for Agent Orange. DDT, DDE, Arsenic, Lindane to name a few.
So many other chemicals as well.

Even Erin Brockovich wrote about Central Chemical Corporation in Hagerstown, Maryland. Remember the movie, Julia Roberts Played Erin 
Brockovich.

Information needed:

Name, age and sex. Dates of Possible Exposure. 

Location of Exposure (address, workplace). 

Diagnosis. Date of Diagnosis/Death (of a Family member you lost)

Please tell your friends too. 
Posted by at No comments:

Sunday, August 30, 2015

Superfund Site Cleanup LONG OVERDUE


Long Overdue

Posted: Saturday, August 29, 2015 10:00 pm |
Updated: 3:35 pm, Sun Aug 30, 2015.
The saga of the Central Chemical Superfund site is better than two decades old, and of course the poisons mixed at the site have been seeping into the ground for decades prior to that. But finally, maybe, an end could be in sight.
This month, the EPA reported that 16 companies have reached a $14.3 million settlement with the agency to cap contaminated soil at the site. “The settlement will fund a protective long-term solution to safely contain contaminated soils and waste on site,” EPA Regional Administrator Shawn M. Garvin said in a statement. “This remedy will protect the groundwater from further contamination by the wastes in the soil.”
That’s good, of course, except that it could be two more years before the actual cleanup work begins. Already, for the past 20 years — when Central Chemical was first named a Superfund site — the groundwater has been on its own. We understand that these things take time, but we wonder how many times the calendar must turn before a final solution is in place.
In the early ’90s, the community heard from former Central Chemical employees who said that they had seen chemicals and pesticides dumped into on-site lagoons and sink holes.
This would certainly seem to be the cause of some alarm. Yet five or so years drifted by before Central Chemical was declared a Superfund site, and even then not much was done to mitigate the contamination, which included arsenic, DDT and a number of other toxins.
Certainly there have been presidential administrations and congressional budget committees through the years for which environmental cleanups were not a top priority. But even so, it would seem that two decades is a long time to wait for neighbors of the site.
It also raises the question whether the work would have been performed sooner had this been a more affluent or politically connected section of town.More damning is that the EPA seems to believe that, even after the contaminated ground is capped, it will not be fit for unrestricted use for the foreseeable future. This would seem to speak to the seriousness of the contamination.
The EPA is a traditional whipping boy of enemies of big government, and we would agree that there are times when it has overstepped its bounds. But the Central Chemical site seems a classic example of why we need an EPA and why the EPA needs a Superfund program that can act with much more urgency.
Perhaps there are good reasons why this has taken so long, but it appears to be a pretty lackadaisical way to handle an emergency.
http://www.heraldmailmedia.com
http://www.heraldmailmedia.com/opinion/editorials/superfund-site-cleanup-long-overdue/article_e948382f-00ae-5bd4-a123-68e0c2a93dac.html
Posted by at No comments:

Thursday, August 27, 2015

EPA website regarding ground water & Lindane By Tim Jordan


The OU-2 investigation to delineate contamination in the bedrock aquifer is ongoing. Groundwater at the Central Chemical Site (Site) is primarily contaminated with pesticides and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). The pesticide plumes, which are primarily composed of isomers of Lindane [also known as hexachlorohexane (HCH)] are much more extensive than the VOC plumes of benzene and chlorobenzene. The HCH pesticide plumes have migrated great distances from the Central Chemical Site in all directions. The lateral and vertical extents of groundwater contamination have not been completely delineated. Accordingly, the current OU-2 groundwater investigation includes five new on-Site wells and three new off-Site wells to investigate the lateral and vertical extent of contaminants. Some of these wells were drilled to depths up to 450 feet below grade. Preliminary results from the OU-2 investigation indicate that pesticide contamination is deeper and more widespread than previously thought.
http://www.epa.gov/reg3hwmd/npl/MDD003061447.htm
Site status: Sept. 2009

I have listed below what dangers Lindane. By Margie

Lindane

Lindane is an antiquated and toxic pesticide that was once used extensively worldwide. Despite a recent global ban on its agricultural use, the pesticide, a potent neurotoxin, is still used in shampoos and lotions in the U.S. to control headlice and scabies. California banned these pharmaceutical uses in 2001, and similar legislation is moving forward in Michigan.
Today, metabolites of the DDT-era pesticide are routinely found in human bodies. Data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reveal a lindane component, beta-HCH, in the blood of 62% of people tested. Infants are exposed through the placenta and breastmilk, and lindane residue contaminates common foods such as rice and potatoes.

Human Health Harms

Lindane's body burden is a significant concern given its effects on human health — especially the nervous system. Human exposure to lindane is linked to a number of health impacts:
  • Neurological Effects:  Humans exposed accidentally to high levels of lindane have experienced seizures, convulsions, vertigo, and abnormal EEG patterns (ATSDR).
  • Cancer: Lindane is associated with elevated risks of non Hodgkin's lymphoma, liver, and breast cancer (ATSDR). California's Proposition 65 lists lindane as a chemical known to cause cancer. 
  • Endocrine Disruption: Lindane has been reported to interfere the hormone levels of human males exposed to the insecticide (ATSDR). In labratory studies, lindane mimicks estrogen in female rats and mice (Beyond Pesticides Factsheet).
  • Reproductive Effects: Pregnant women who miscarried or had pre-term babies had higher levels of lindane as well as other organochlorine pesticides in their blood.  Lindane is also linked to reduced sperm counts, and decreased ovulation in animal studies (ATSDR).
  • Immunological Effects: Lindane is thought to impact the human immune system. Workers exposed to lindane experienced increased levels of antibodies in their blood (ATSDR).
  • Liver Toxicity:  Exposure to lindane is linked to increased levels of liver enzymes, increased liver weight and liver toxicity (ATSDR).

Environmental Contamination

Lindane is an organochlorine, a class of pesticides that are notorious for their toxicity, mobility, and persistence in the environment. The persistent chemical shows up more often than any other pesticide in the Arctic, contaminating traditional foods of indigenous communities in the region.

Lindane Alternatives

Alternatives are available and in use around the world for both agricultural and pharmaceutical uses of lindane. A 2009 report from the International POPs Elimination Network presents specific alternatives for common uses of lindane around the world.
Scientists report that lindane is currently among the least effective means to control lice and scabies. California's 2001 ban of lindane's pharmaceutical products has resulted in cleaner water and less risk to children from exposure to the chemical, with viable alternatives effectively controlling lice and scabies outbreaks, according to a recent article in Environmental Health Perspectives.
Resources for chemical-free lice treatment

Resources

Research & Chemical Factsheets

Analysis
News Archive
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)