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

Saturday, August 8, 2015

Department of the Environment

Department of the Environment

Facts About...
CENTRAL CHEMICAL NPL Site (MD-302)
The Central Chemical site occupies 19 acres in Hagerstown, Washington County, Maryland. The site is located on Mitchell Avenue, approximately 0.8 mile north of U.S. Highway 11.
Site History
From 1937 through 1984, the facility was a blender of agricultural pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers. Concentrated pesticides manufactured at other locations, were blended with inert materials to produce and package consumer grade products. In 1965, a fire destroyed the pesticide manufacturing building and operations ceased. From 1968 to 1984, the plant processed fertilizers and herbicides. The facility was later leased to various small businesses until 2003. The site is currently unoccupied.

Over the years, wind-blown powders from blending operations and product spills contaminated shallow soils throughout the property. In addition, bulk wastes and liquid wastes were disposed in several onsite areas. Contaminants of concern (COCs) at the site include the metals arsenic and lead, the pesticides DDT, DDD, DDE, chlordane, dieldrin, endrin, lindane, and alpha- and beta-BHC; and the volatile organic compounds benzene, chlorobenzene, chloroform, and 1,2- and 1,4-dichlorobenzene.
Elevated levels of DDT were first detected in sediments of Antietem Creek in 1976 by the United States Geological Survey and were traced back through sediment sampling in the surface water to the Central Chemical site. Consequently, the Maryland Water Resources Administration issued a Complaint and Order to Central Chemical, requiring a hydrologic investigation and cleanup to prevent release of DDT to surface water. Central Chemical again came to the attention of state regulators in 1987 when a former disposal lagoon for pesticides was unearthed during a trenching operation for a sewer line. Soil sampling revealed high COC concentrations. Consequently, the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) ordered Central Chemical to perform an investigation to characterize potential hazardous waste sources.

In August 1997, the Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs) entered into an Administrative Order of Consent with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to conduct the Remedial Investigation (RI)/ Feasibility Study (FS). On September 25, 1997 this site was listed on the National Priorities List (NPL). EPA approved the PRP Work Plan for the RI/FS of the Central Chemical in February 2003.
Environmental Investigations
Various consultants, the MDE, and the EPA performed hydrogeologic investigations at Central Chemical between 1977 and 1997. Results from these investigations indicated that surface and subsurface soil were extensively contaminated with pesticides and metals. Groundwater and surface water had also been impacted. In February 1997, the fence along the northern site boundary was extended an additional 15 feet to contain soils that exceeded Removal Action Levels. A toxicological risk evaluation of soil data by MDE indicated that the risks to human health and the environment were not significant outside the new fence boundary.

In April 2003, the Central Chemical Community Liaison Panel (CLP) consisting of Hagerstown community members, the PRP Group and their consultant (URS), EPA, and MDE held it’s initial meeting. The CLP meetings are held on an approximate quarterly basis.
RI fieldwork began in 2003 and was completed in 2004. The RI fieldwork focused on characterization of buildings, surface and subsurface soil, groundwater, storm water, and offsite surface water, sediment and groundwater. A draft RI Report was submitted to regulators in December 2004. Based on EPA and MDE comments, it was determined that a Supplemental Investigation of groundwater was necessary to delineate contaminants offsite and to obtain a better understanding of aquifer characteristics. In order to keep the RI/FS process moving, EPA and MDE split the delineation of the groundwater into a separate parallel Operable Unit (OU-2) from the RI/FS of onsite soils (OU-1). Fieldwork to delineate offsite groundwater was initiated in 2005 and has continued until November 2007.
Under EPA and MDE oversight, the PRP’s demolished the Central Chemical building structures between February 2005 and May 2005. Construction debris was recycled or disposed at Subtitle C or D facilities.
A draft Comprehensive RI Report was prepared by URS for regulator comment in December 2005. Based on EPA/MDE comments, the draft final RI Report was submitted to regulators in December 2006. Initial work on the FS was begun in 2005 and a draft FS was submitted to regulators in July 2007. A draft final FS revised to include a Solidification/Stabilization Alternative for the former lagoon landfill was submitted to regulators in February 2008.

Current Status

The Supplemental GW Investigation Report is expected in the summer of 2008. Preliminary results indicate that offsite migration of pesticides extends approximately one half mile to the northeast and one mile to the southwest. A thorough discussion of GW results will be presented in the compressive RI Report.
CLP Meetings were held in March and July of 2007 and January 2008. The next CLP meeting is tentatively scheduled for June 2008.
The projected completion of the Final Comprehensive RI Report summarizing all phases of the RI is expected in May 2008. The Final FS for the Central Chemical Site is expected in June 2008. The EPA plans to complete a Proposed Plan for Central Chemical onsite soils (OU-1) in August 2008 followed by the Record of Decision for OU-1 in late September 2008.
Contact
Kim Lemaster Maryland Department of the Environment (410) 537-3440 Federal Superfund Division


Site Repository: Washington County Free Library, Reference Department, 100 S. Potomac Street, Hagerstown, MD 21740
1800 Washington Boulevard | Baltimore, MD 21230-1718 | www.mde.state.md.us 410-537-3000 | 800-633-6101 | TTY Users: 800-735-2258


Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)