/.y

i\'LCOKD COPY

FiteMat.<?0A> U-'i' ■UfoSU fcc-

ecology and- environment, 'iiic.CLOVERLEAF BUILDING 3, 6405 METCALF, OVERLAND PARK, KANSAS 66202, TEL. 913/432-9961

International Specialists in the Environment

MEMORANDUM

Paul Doherty, RPO

Patty Roberts, E & E/FIT ^

V v* "Sharon Martin, AFITOM

March 21, 1988

HRS Considerations and Recommendations for the Lehigh Cement Company Site, Mason City, Iowa.TDD #F-07-8611-21 PAN #FIA0181SASite IAD005288634 Project 001Superfund Contact: Pete Culver

A fully documented Hazard Ranking System (HRS) package was prepared for this site by the Ecology and Environment, Inc., Field Investigation Team (E & E/FIT) and submitted to the Region VII U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in June 1987. The HRS package was signed by the MITRE Corporation on September 21, 1987. The overall draft score vascalculated to be 57.90. The route score vas 100.00 for the ground water route, and the surface water route score was 5.82. The air route and the fire and explosion factor were not evaluated because these migration pathways were not a concern at this site. The direct contact route scored 37.50. The overall HRS score warrants inclusion of this site on the National Priorities List (NPL).

An observed release to ground water was documented by the FIT during the SI. The ground water score was based on high drinking water utilization of the shallow bedrock aquifer, the large quantity of wastes placed directly into the aquifer of concern (abandoned rock quarries), and the toxic properties of the metal components of the waste kiln dust. No observed release to surface water was documented at the Lehigh site. The surface water score was influenced by the fact that no targets were utilizing surface water within 3 miles downstream of the site. The surface water route score has little impact on the overall score for the site. The direct contact section was evaluated due to the potential for employees of the site to be in contact with the waste piles or the contaminated pond water.

TO:

FROM:

THRU:

DATE:

SUBJECT:

The major waste of concern at the Lehigh site is waste kiln dust generated by the manufacture of Portland cement. Based on records available, an estimated 136,000 tons of waste kiln dust has been produced. However, the company began operation in 1911 and the actual

i

30307976

Superfund

recycled paper

Lehigh Cement Company SiteHRS Considerations and RecommendationsPage 2

amount may be much higher. This plant continues to produce and deposit this by-product on site. Over the years, a large majority of this kiln dust has been disposed of in Area "C" Quarry, located northeast of the plant, and in various piles throughout the site. Vhen this kiln dust comes in contact with vater, it reacts to produce elevated pH which is the major concern at this site.

Sampling conducted by E & E/FIT in April 1987 shoved pH values of

the quarry ponds (Arch Pond, Area "Cn Pond, and Blue Vaters Pond) to average 11.24 pH units. Infusion of vater from these quarries has increased pH levels in the local ground vater as veil. The highest pH value detected in a ground vater sample vas 12.04 pH units. The kiln dust itself has a pH of 13.0, and also contains high levels of arsenic, chromium, lead, zinc, and sulfates. These compounds vere found at levels significantly above background.

The Iova Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) requested that Lehigh stop discharging the facility effluent into nearby Calmus Creek. Lehigh's remedy was an overland piping system that leads from Blue Vaters Pond to the Area "C" Pond. The FIT analytical results shoved a minimal detrimental threat to Calmus Creek. However, an increase of 0.5 pH units at the confluence of this creek and the Winnebago River was measured. It should be noted that Northwestern States Portland Cement Company, which is adjacent to Lehigh and shares a common tile drain outlet into Calmus Creek, is also a potential contaminant source.

Lehigh has taken other steps to eliminate contamination on and off site. Presently, kiln dust is being compacted and placed in the Vest Quarry, located vest of the plant. Also, future plans call for eliminating Blue Vaters Pond by backfilling and regrading the area. IDNR is monitoring ground vater and surface vater conditions at the Lehigh site. Though this is a state lead site, based on the results of the E & E/FIT site investigation and current site conditions, the FIT recommends the following, more assertive approach to accurately characterize conditions at the site.

o Continue monitoring on-site veils, with a possible addition of two or more monitoring wells east of Blue Vaters Pond and the Area "C" Pond. This should help determine a more accurate ground vater flov for the site and discern whether infiltration into Calmus Creek is occurring via ground water.

o A more extensive analysis of the chemical properties of vater in the quarry ponds and local ground vater should be conducted to assess whether high pH levels will stabilize and decrease through natural processes or whether a chemical stabilization program should be implemented.

Lehigh Cement Company SiteHRS Consideations and RecommendationsPage 3

o An assessment should be made of the quarry ponds to assure controlof the water level under extreme weather conditions, such as flooding.

o the leaking weldment in the overflow line connecting the Blue

Vaters Pond and Area "C" Pond should be repaired.

o Surface water migration from the site to Calmus Creek shouldcontinue to be closely monitored. Samples should also be taken in the culvert area between Blue Vaters Pond and the tile drain outlet to assess whether contaminants from Blue Vaters Pond are migrating to CalmUs Creek.

o The feasibility of draining the quarry ponds to diminish ground

water intrusion, then backfilling the pit with a low permeable material, and grading the cap to facilitate surface runoff should be investigated.

o IDNR should focus its inspections on the Vest Quarry area. Thisshould help to adequately assess whether compaction of waste kiln dust is a successful remedial measure for the Lehigh site and for other Portland cement facilities as well.

Final Report Site Investigation

Lehigh Portland Cement Company

Mason City, IowaTDD #F-07-8611-32 PAN #FIA0181SA

Site #Z03 Project #001 Prepared by*: E & E/FIT for Region VII

EPATask Leader: Patty Roberts

Superfund Contact: Pete CulverDate: March 21, 1988

TABLE OP CONTENTS

Section Page

1 INTRODUCTION................................................. 1-1

2 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION............... 2-1

3 PHYSICAL SETTING................. ........................... 3-1

3.1 CLIMATOLOGY.............................. 3-1

3.2 TOPOGRAPHY AND DRAINAGE....... ......................... 3-1

3.3 STRATIGRAPHY.................. 3-2

3.4 GROUND WATER......... 3-5

4 SITE BACKGROUND............... 4-1

4.1 SITE HISTORY............... 4-2

4.2 CONTACTS................ 4-2

4.3 PAST INVESTIGATIONS.................... 4-2

5 FIELD ACTIVITIES......... 5-1

5.1 E & E/FIT FIELD INVESTIGATION........................... 5-1

5.1.1 Kiln Dust and Sediment Sampling................. 5-1

5.1.2 Water Sampling................................... 5-4

5.2 OTHER FIELD INFORMATION............ 5-8

6 ANALYTICAL DATA............................ 6-1

6.1 KILN DUST AND SEDIMENT SAMPLES........ ................. 6-1

6.1.1 Kiln Dust Samples.............. .............. 6-1

6.1.2 Sediment Samples........... 6-3

6.2 WATER SAMPLES.......................... 6-4

6.2.1 Surface Water Samples............................ 6-4

6.2.2 Ground Water Samples............................. 6-6

ii

7 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS........................................ 7-1

7.1 ATTRIBUTION............................................. 7-1

7.2 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS........................... 7-4

8 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS....... 8-1

9 REFERENCES................................................... 9-1

APPENDICES

Appendix Page

A Technical Directive Document (TDD) for Lehigh Portland

Cement Company Site....................... A-l

B EPA Site Inspection Form 2070-13............ B-l

C Site Contacts and Property Owners............................ C-l

D Data Transmittal for the E & E/FIT Site Investigation....... D-l

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

1 Site Location Map............................................ 2-2

2 Stratigraphic Column...................... 3-4

3 Generalized Vest-to-East Lithostratigraphic Cross-Section.... 3-6

4 Kiln Dust Sediment Sample Map................................ 5-2

5 Surface Vater Sample Map............... 5-5

6 Ground Vater Sample Map...................................... 5-6

iii

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1 Summary of Soli/Sediment Samples Collected at the Lehigh

Portland Cement Company Site, April 28-30, 1987........... 5-3

2 Summary of Water Samples Collected at the Lehigh Portland

Cement Company Site, April 28-30, 1987.................... 5-7

3 Monitoring Veil Information.................................. 5-8

4 Total Metal Analysis, Sulfate, and pH Units for

Soil/Sediment Samples, April 28-30, 1987................ . 6-2

5 Total Metal Analysis, Sulfate, and pH Units for Surface

Water Samples, April 28-30, 1987.......................... 6-7

6 Total Metal Analysis, Sulfate, and pH Units for Ground

Water Samples, April 28-30, 1987.......................... 6-10

7 Dissolved Metal Analysis for Ground Water Samples,

April 28-30, 1987................... ...................... 6-11

iv

SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION

Lehigh Portland Cement Company (Lehigh) owns and operates a

Portland cement processing facility, which is located on the north side

of Mason City, Iowa. The facility has been in operation since 1911. A

by-product of its manufacturing process is waste kiln dust, which has

been placed in piles throughout the facility. A large quantity of this

waste kiln dust has been disposed of in abandoned quarries on the

property.

On April 22, 1987* the Ecology and Environment Field Investigation

(E & E/FIT) was tasked by the Region VlT U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) under Technical Directive Document (TDD) #F-07-8611-32 to

conduct a site investigation (SI) of the Lehigh site. Field work was

performed concurrently with the Northwestern States Portland Cement

Company (NVSPCC) SI . Field activities consisted of soil/sediment,

surface water, and ground water sampling. The objective of the site

investigation was to determine whether hazardous wastes or constituents

at the site have been or are likely to be released into the environment.

This site is a State of Iowa lead site, though EPA requested that

the FIT prepare the work plan and perform the field work. The work plan

for Lehigh was reviewed and approved by the Iowa Department of Natural

Resources (IDNR) before field work was performed. The final report, as

well as the analytical data, will also be reviewed by IDNR.

This report describes the site investigation work that was

conducted the week of April 27, 1987, and provides a summary of the

analytical results of the samples collected during this field

investigation*

1-1

SECTION 2: SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION

The Lehigh site is located at 700 25th Street on the north side o£

Mason City, Cerro Gordo, Iowa. The site is situated in the N 1/2 of

Section 33 and the N 1/2 of Section 32, Township 79 North, Range 20

West, Mason City, Iowa Quadrangle (Figure 1). The site's southern side

borders Calmus Creek; Lehigh's eastern boundary borders Interstate 65.

The facility is located in an urban area and a small residential

neighborhood is located approximately 1.5 miles north. The Lime Creek

Nature Center is approximately one mile northeast of the site. The

Northwestern States Portland Cement Company site (NVSPCC), a similar

facility, is immediately south of the Lehigh site. Calmus Creek flows

between these two cement manufacturers with the Winnebago River located

north and east of both facilities.

The site area covers approximately 150 acres and consists of a

cement manufacturing plant and associated buildings, and four abandoned

limestone quarries and tailing piles. The abandoned quarries on the

Lehigh property ares Blue Waters Pond, Arch Pond, West Quarry Pond, and

the Area "Cw Pond. A fifth pond, known at the plant as Cooling Waters

Pond, is located west of the plant (Figure 1). This pond provides

cooling water to the plant's rotary kiln and accepts warm water returned

from the plant. The abandoned quarries are filled with water.

Unreclaimed waste kiln dust has been disposed of in the northern quarry

(Area "C" Pond). Several piles surround the perimeter of this pond as

well as the West Quarry Pond. Waste kiln dust has been placed in piles

at various other locations as well. Some of the piles have been graded

and revegetation has been attempted.

2-1

WASTE SITE TRACKING NO.: IA0161 PREPARED BY: C. WILUAMS

T” ECOLOGY & ENVIRONMENT FIT MAR. 1086 SOURCE: USOS 7.5' MASON CITY, I A. QUAD, i960

2-2 FIGURE t SITE LOCATION

'***-> ♦

SECTION 3: PHYSICAL SETTING

3.1 CLIMATOLOGY

The total annual precipitation of Cerro Gordo County is estimated

at 31 inches (Ref. 1). The maximum 1-day rainfall in Mason City, Iova,

was 6.3 inches, recorded on August 22, 1954. Mason city experiences

high intensity, short duration storms. The average annual snowfall is

estimated at 37 inches with the greatest depth recorded at 27 inches.

3.2 TOPOGRAPHY AND DRAINAGE

Mason City is situated on relatively flat topography. The

potential relief at the Lehigh site is also relatively flat to gently

sloping (less than 3 percent) toward the south-southeast. The nearest

surface water is Calmus Creek. Calmus Creek flows through the western

portion of Lehigh and borders the southeastern edge, then empties into

the Winnebago River approximately 3,000 feet southeast of the Lehigh

property. The four abandoned quarries at the site have all received

water from ground water seepage and/or surface water runoff. Most

surface water runoff is conducted through a series of storm sewers.

Most of the western runoff is discharged into Cooling Waters Pond, which

is a dammed section of Calmus Creek (Figure 1). The greatest portion of

the eastern runoff is routed via a buried culvert into the Iowa

Department of Transportation (IDOT) tile drain outlet that runs under

25th Street (Ref. 1). In the past, during high rainfall, overflow from

Blue Waters Pond has exited through this buried culvert along the

southeast boundary of Lehigh and into the IDOT tile drain, which, in

turn, discharges into Calmus Creek (Figure 1). Currently, a weir placed

in the southeast corner of Blue Waters Pond controls water elevation.

3-1

No surface water intakes are utilized within three miles downstream of

the site on either Calmus Creek or the Winnebago River. However, the

Winnebago River is used for recreation, particularly sport fishing, and

its confluence with Calmus Creek is used heavily for recreational

purposes as well.

3.3 STRATIGRAPHY

The Lehigh facility is situated on soils classified as principally

belonging to the Rockton Soil Series and the Donnan and Bassett Soil

series (Ref. 2). The Rockton Soil Series consists of well drained,

moderately permeable soils formed on ridge crests, on sides of stream

benches, and on uplands. These soils consist of loamy sediments

overlying limestone bedrock. The slope ranges from 0 to 9 percent. The

soil is most often sandy to silty loam (Ref. 2).

Cerro Gordo County is in the northern part of the Iowan Basin where

the sedimentary rocks of Cambrian through Devonian-age dip southward at

9 to 14 feet per mile. The stratigraphic units present in Cerro Gordo

County are in ascending order: consolidated sedimentary rocks of

Precambrian, Cambrian, Ordovician, Devonian, and Mississippian age; and

unconsolidated sand, gravel, and clay of Quaternary-age (Ref. 3).

The lithostratigraphic log obtained from Mason City test borings

provides site-specific geologic information. This test boring is

located in Section 33 T97N, R20W on the property of the NWSPCC site,

which borders the Lehigh Portland Cement Company on the south.

The boring log indicates that Devonian-age strata (310 to 345

million years) underlie the Lehigh site to a depth of 300 feet. The

Devonian-aged strata are represented by the Upper Cedar Valley Formation

from a depth interval of 0 to 100 feet. The Upper Cedar Valley

Formation outcrops in Mason City (Section 33, T97N, R20N) and consists

3-2

of dolomite with a few shales partings and thin beds of prominently

laminated limestones interbedded with the dolomite (Figure 2, Ref. 4).

the Upper Cedar Valley Formation is underlain conformably by the

Cedar Valley Formation to an approximate depth of 285 feet. The

Devonian, Cedar Valley Formation is hydrologically continuous with the

Upper Cedar Valley Formation and consists predominantly of a brown to

gray, fine grained dolomite with some interbedded limestones (Ref. 4).

The Cedar Valley Formation is the primary unit quarried for raw

materials by the Lehigh Portland Cement Company.

The Devonian age Wapsipinicon Formation disconformably underlies

the Cedar Valley Formation and is found in the core interval of 285 to

300 feet. Two general lithologies dominate this distinctive,

lithologically variable rock unit: dolomite, argillaceous or shaley to

varying degrees (commonly silty to sandy); and calcareous or dolomitic

shale (generally silty or sandy). The Wapsipinicon Formation

unconformably overlies the Ordovician-age (425 to 500 million years)

Maquoketa Formation. The Devonian strata occurring in Cerro Gordo

County may also include the Lime Creek and Shell Rock formations. These

formations, however, are discontinuous and do not appear to exist in the

immediate vicinity of the Lehigh site.

The Maquoketa Formation . consists of a thick bed of bluish—gray,

clay shale interbedded with dolomite and limestone. The sediments of

the upper Maquoketa Formation in the Lehigh area consist of cherty

carbonates. The Maquoketa Formation acts as an aquiclude,

hydrologically separating the Devonian-age sediments from the underlying

Cambrian-Ordovician strata. These strata are represented by the St.

Peter Sandstone, the Jordan Sandstone (which includes the upper part of

the St. Lawrence Formation), and the lower part of the Prairie du Chien

Formation (Ref. 3).

3-3

S'(ygT^

L-

->Q0

»«I0

•10

! T~77TJ

>••0

*100

*N0

ito

•NO

•IT9

•MO

• MO

•MO

'/ . /• v1

££■

/-~

/ V

/ /

>— /

/ // ./_ /

•<rr~TT7

GENERAL LITHOLOGY

UPPER CEDAR VALLEY FORMATION

Dolomite With A Few Shale Partings;

Thin Beds Of Laminated Limestone

CEDAR VALLEY FORMATION

Predominantly A Brown To Gray Fine-Grained Dolomite;

Lithographic Limestones Are At Several Horizons

HYDROLOGICCHARACTERISTICS

WAPSIPINICON FORMATION Dolomite, Limestone, Shale

MAQUOKETA FORMATION Dolomite, Shale________

AQUIFER

AQUIFER

AQUIFER

CONFINING BED

EXPLANATION

EErt,nation*

(OiiUJy .promtnenily

•— | snoi* partings eigiHocteus

— i sfyioliiic■ ’ J rwggy, ■'•Hi coioie spar void fill or toor potass

i^mostono.dtnu, tupiimogropruc* pr«eeiottd or mtracioiiie

| ■■ _..J doiomific limn tana t ■- ■ < coioiic dolomite »•«*■ ■ J sandy

a <nh

LEHIGHPORTLAND CEMENT CO.

MASON CITY, IOWA

VERTICAL SCALE (1 Inch - 46 feet)

WASTE SITE TRACKING NO.: IA0181 PREPARED BY: C. WILLIAMS

ECOLOGY & ENVIRONMENT FIT DEC. 1987 SOURCE: SEE REF. 4

FIGURE 2: STRATIGRAPHIC COLUMN

3-4

A generalized vest-to-east lithostratigraphic cross-section

depicting the subsurface geology through north-central Iova and the

Lehigh site area is shown in Figure 3.

3.4 GROUND WATER

Ground water is the major source of potable water throughout Cerro

Gordo County. The majority of wells in the county are used for domestic

and stock supplies, but the largest withdrawal of water is for municipal

and industrial supplies. Irrigation is not a significant water use,

though some water is used for garden and golf course maintenance.

The aquifers utilized at the Lehigh and NWSPCC sites, and the Mason

City area are the Devonian limestones and dolomites, of the upper Cedar

Valley and Cedar Valley formations, and the Ordovician, St. Peter

Sandstone, and Cambrian Jordan Sandstone (Ref. 3 and 5). The deepest

aquifers, the Jordan and the St. Peter sandstones, are the principal

Water-bearing units in the area and underlie all of Cerro Gordo County.

Significant amounts of water, however, are withdrawn from these sources

only in the Mason City area. Wells producing from the Jordan aquifer

are greater than 1,200 feet in depth and produce as much as 1,200

gallons per minute (gpm). Yields from the St. Peter Sandstone are

highly variable and range from 30 to 200 gpm. The St. Peter Sandstone

ranges from 800 to 850 feet deep in the Mason City area (Ref. 3).

The Devonian limestones and dolomites are the shallowest dependable

source of water supply in the study area. It is composed of the Upper

Cedar Valley and Cedar Valley formations, which are located in the first

300 feet of the geologic succession (Figure 2). This structure is

unevenly jointed and produces water at a rate of 120 gpm to as much as

200 gpm. At the Lehigh and NWSPCC sites, the Devonian bedrock is

locally exposed and the static level observed in the Lehigh on-site

monitoring wells is from four to nine feet below the ground surface

(Ref. 6). Therefore, when wastes were disposed directly into the

3-5

LEHIGH PORTLAND CEMENT COMPANY MASON CITY, IOWA

WASTE SITE TRACKING NO.: IA0181 ECOLOGY & ENVIRONMENT FIT MAR. 1988PREPARED BY: C. WILLIAMS SOURCE: REF. 4

FIGURE 3: GENERALIZED WEST-TO-EAST LITHOSTRATIGRAPHIC CROSS-SECTION

3-6

quarries, the distance from waste to ground water level was minimal,

potentially contaminating the ground water at the facilities and in the

vicinity. Depiths to the water table increase further south into Mason

City because bedrock dips toward the south. Ground water flow at the

Lehigh site is south-southeast, and at NWSPCC toward the

north-northeast.

Mason City's sole source of potable water is supplied by seven

municipal wells (Ref. 7). These wells, and the Lehigh and NWSPCC

on-site wells, are completed in the Jordan Sandstone and are uncased

below 725 feet. All seven municipal wells are also uncased in the upper

Devonian (limestone) strata. Therefore, the municipal wells receive

water from the Devonian aquifer as well as the deeper Ordovician/Cam­

brian aquifers. The city water is a blend of water from each well, and

the demand for water necessitates the use of at least five of seven

wells. The Mason City Public Water Supply supplies the water needs of a

population of 30,144 (Ref. 8).

Several other ground water wells provide potentially contaminated

drinking water. NWSPCC and Lehigh both have several wells that are used

for drinking and industrial purposes. NWSPCC wells are to the south,

within one-half mile of Lehigh's ponds. The closest Lehigh well is less

than one-quarter mile due west of the ponds. In 1986 NWSPCC employed

220 people and Lehigh had 122 employees (Ref. 8). A subdivision located

one mile north of the site uses water from shallow ground water wells

developed in the Devonian aquifer. This subdivision includes homes on

both sides of the Winnebago River, and has about 300 residents (Ref. 9,

Figure 1).

3-7

SECTION 4: SITE BACKGROUND

4.1 SITE HISTORY

The Lehigh Portland Cement Company (Lehigh) has been in operation

since 1911 and is an active facility. Lehigh is a cement processing

plant and manufactures a hydraulic cement, a process which generates

large quantities of waste kiln dust. During the manufacturing of

Portland cement raw materials such as limestone and shale are quarried

then crushed, dried, and mixed in the correct proportions. This mixture

is ground to a fine powder then burned in a sloping rotary kiln

maintained at a temperature of about 1500°F to form a glassy "clinker."

The "clinker" is crushed, a small amount of gypsum is added, and the

mixture is reground to form cement. Cement kiln dust is the waste

produced from the heating process of the raw materials. Collection is

difficult because it is entrained in large volumes of hot exhaust gases

and it often contains unacceptably high concentrations of alkalies

(sodium and potassium) which make it unsuitable for return to the

cement-making process (Ref. 10). At Lehigh, the unreclaimed waste kiln

dust is placed in piles throughout the facility and a large quantity has

been disposed of into the northern quarry (Area "C" Pond).

The chemical composition of kiln dust is determined by the

composition of the raw materials and the conditions the dust particles

have encountered in the kiln. The major constituents of this hydraulic

cement are calcium oxide (lime), aluminum, silica, and iron oxide.

Magnesium oxide, sodium, potassium, and sulfates are also present.

Trace quantities of chromium, lead, zinc, and Other metals may be

present depending oh the source of raw materials used to manufacture the

cement (Ref. 10). Vaste kiln dust contains fine particles of cement

4-1

composed of these constituents and fossil fuel combustion products.

Vaste kiln dust has highly corrosive properties and produces large

quantities of hydroxides when combined with water. At the Lehigh site,

the vaste kiln dust has a pH value of 13.0 units. Corrosivity is

characterized by a pH that is equal to or greater than 12.5 units.

Cement kiln dust vaste has been designated a special study waste under

the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Section 3001

(b)(3)(A)(iii).

Ken Blum, plant manager of the Lehigh site, reported that a minimum

of 136,000 tons of vaste kiln dust has been disposed of on site since

1981. No records are available for the 70 years before 1981.

Consequently, the actual amount of vaste disposed of on site is much

greater than 136,000 tons and probably approaches an estimated total of

one million tons (Ref. 11).

4.2 CONTACTS

Ken Blum (plant manager) and Gail Meyer (plant engineer) are the

on-site contacts. Calvin Wolter of the Iova Department of Natural

Resources (IDNR) was also present during the E & E/FIT investigation as

an observer for the state. The addresses for the site contacts are

included in Appendix C.

4.3 PAST INVESTIGATIONS

The site was first identified in 1981 during a routine

hydrochemical test on the Blue Waters Pond (Ref. 12). The results of

the test indicated that the pond water was highly alkaline. In August

1984, the State of Iova (Iova Department of Natural Resources) conducted

a Comprehensive Work/Quality Assurance project on Calmus Creek, which is

located approximately 1,000 feet south and dovngradient from the Blue

Waters Pond. This investigation found that surface water contamination

was directly related to the Lehigh facility. According to this report,

4-2

highly alkaline discharge of the Blue Waters Pond into nearby Calmus

Creek via the tile drain outlet southeast of the plant is believed to

have contaminated Calmus Creek. The Blue Waters Pond overflows during

heavy rainfall (two IDOT drains flow into Blue Waters Pond from the

adjacent highway)* The Arch Pond immediately vest of the Blue Waters

Pond would contribute an unknown quantity of runoff from the eastern

half of the plant. The discharged water had a recorded pH of 11.4,

total dissolved solids of 4,700 mg/1, including 2,000 mg/1 potassium,

and 829 mg/1 sulfates. Chromium and other hazardous substances were not

analyzed during this IDNR investigation (Ref. 12). The biological

quality of Calmus Creek was found to have deteriorated from effluents

from Lehigh and NWSPCC sites. Because of the deterioration of the

chemical balance in Calmus Creek and the quarry ponds, the number and

variety of fish and benthic organisms were found to be substantially

reduced downstream of the tile drain outlet. Calmus Creek also

discharges into the Winnebago River, approximately 1,500 feet from the

tile drain outlet. As a result of this study, Lehigh was required to

eliminate the discharge into Calmus Creek.

To eliminate overflow from Blue Waters Pond a weir was placed in

the southeast corner to control water elevation; dikes were constructed

to separate Arch Pond, Area "C" Pond, and Blue Waters Pond; and an

above-ground piping system was installed which pumps water from Blue

Waters Pond into the Area "C" Pond. Also, Lehigh proposed the

construction of a lined ditch to channel the surface runoff collected by

the IDOT drain system from the adjacent highway (on Lehigh property)

back into the IDOT tile drain located southeast of the Blue Waters

Pond.

Lehigh's long-term goal is to eliminate Blue Waters Pond by

backfilling and regrading the area. Lehigh retained a private

engineering firm in 1985 to conduct a hydrogeological investigation of

the site. The engineering firm installed three on-site monitoring wells

to characterize the chemistry of the ground water and its flow

4-3

parameters. Monitoring and sampling of these wells has shown that Arch

Pond is hydrologically connected to Blue Waters Pond. The study also

found significant elevations in pH and in the levels of potassium,

sodium, silicon, sulfates, total dissolved solids (TDS), and total

organic carbon (TOC). Since this finding, compacted waste kiln dust is

being disposed of into the Vest Quarry, which is clay-lined.

It should be noted that during the April 28, 1987, site investi­

gation, the above-ground piping system was leaking in several locations

between Area "C" Pond and Blue Waters Pond. Also, water has still been

observed returning back to Blue Waters Pond via seepage in the two dikes

used to contain Area "C" Pond and by ground water flow through joints in

the intervening bedrock.

4-4

SECTION 5: FIELD ACTIVITIES

5.1 E & E/FIT FIELD INVESTIGATION

The E & E/FIT conducted initial field activities at the Lehigh

Portland Cement Company site from April 28 through 30, 1987. Team

members were Kenna Roberson, Karen Koth, Patty Roberts, Jim Hale, and

David Zimmermann. Calvin Wolter of the IDNR accompanied the FIT. Field

work included on-site soil/sediment, surface water, and ground water

sampling. The sample number for this activity was IK940. Off-site

sampling was conducted to establish background levels and help determine

whether contamination is migrating off site.

5.1.1. Kiln Dust and Sediment Sampling

Ten sediment samples, plus one duplicate sample, were collected at

the Lehigh site. Locations of these samples are shown on Figure 4 and

are summarized in Table 1. Three samples of waste kiln dust were

collected on site including a sample of freshly deposited kiln dust at

the West Quarry Pond (009). These samples were collected to

characterize the properties and components of the on-site waste. The

remaining seven samples were sediment samples taken at a depth of 0 to 2

inches. The seven sediment samples include one sediment sample at

Calmus Creek and one sediment sample at the Winnebago River. These

samples also served as background sample locations. Downgradient

sediment samples were collected at the tile drain outlet and below the

confluence of Calmus Creek and the Winnebago River. The remaining

sediment samples were collected around the banks of the quarry ponds.

5-1

FIGURE 4: KILN DUST-SEDIMENT SAMPLE

5-2

Table 1Summary of Kiln Dust Sediment Samples Collected

Lehigh Portland Cement Company Site Mason City, Iowa

April 28 to 30, 1987 Sample Series 1K940

Sample Number/Map Designation

Sample Location Depth(inches)

00 IB Calmus Creek — upgradient 0-2

002B Winnebago River — upgradient 0-2

003 Tile Drain into Calmus Creek 0-2

004 Belov Confluence of Calmus Creek and

Winnebago River

0-2

005 Blue Waters Pond 0-2

005D Duplicate of 005 0-2

006* Area "C" Pond 0-12

007* West Quarry Pond 0-18

008 Arch Pond 0-2

009* West Quarry Pond 0-4

010 Arch Pond 0-4

*Waste kiln dust (sample 009 vas fresh waste kiln dust).

B ■ Background samples

Note: All samples were analyzed for sulfates, total metals, and pH

units. Sample IK940010 vas also analyzed for cyanide. Sample numbers IK940011 through IK940014 were not used. See Figure 3 for sample locations.

All off-site samples were grab samples and all on-site samples

consisted of six aliquots, except for the fresh kiln dust sample

IK940009, which vas also a grab sample. Composite samples were

collected in plastic bags and were thoroughly mixed before transferring

the contents directly into an eight-ounce sample container. The grab

samples vere placed directly into an eight-ounce EPA approved container *

Sulfates, total metals, and pH analysis was requested. Sample 010 vas

requested to undergo only analysis for cyanide.

5-3

5.1.2 Vater Sampling

Eighteen vater samples were collected, including seven ground water

samples and nine surface water samples. One ground vater sample field

blank was prepared and one duplicate surface water sample was also

collected. The locations of vater samples are shown on Figures 5 and 6

and are summarized in Table 2. Table 2 also shows the results of the

field measurements.

Host of the surface vater samples were taken at corresponding

sediment sample locations (Tables 1 and 2). It should also be noted

that background sediment and surface vater samples for Lehigh and the

adjacent facility (NVSPCC) were collected at the same locations (Calmus

Creek and the Winnebago River).

Off-site samples (015 through 018) were grab samples and on-site

samples (019 through 023) consisted of six aliquots placed directly into

a one-liter cubitainer. The FIT noted that samples 019, 020, and 021

had a red-orange color and pH readings from 11.19 to 11.29 (Table 2).

Surface water samples were submitted for sulfates, total metals,

dissolved solids, and turbidity. Modifications Were made in the sample

collection procedures that were detailed in the work plan. Surface

water samples analyzed for sulfates were collected in one-liter

cubitainers instead of the usual 80-ounce jugs. This change in sampling

procedure was approved by the Region VII EPA Laboratory.

On-site ground vater samples were obtained from the three on-site

monitoring wells. Additional information on the three monitoring wells

is provided in Table 3. The standard procedure for purging a well

suggests bailing a minimum of three well volumes. The monitoring wells

at Lehigh have six-inch casings, which would have required bailing of

over 175 gallons of water from each well. To avoid problems created by

evacuating such high volumes of vater, the wells were purged until a

5-4

FIGURE 5: SURFACE-WATER SAMPLE MAP

5-5

FIGURE 6: GROUND-WATER SAMPLE MAP

5-6

Table 2Water Sample Summary

Lehigh Portland Cement Company Site Mason City, Iowa - Sample Series Number IK940

April 28 to 30, 1987

Sample Number/ Map Designation

Sample Type Field Parameters pH/Conduc tivity/°C

Sample Location

015B surface vater 7.84/550/13 Calmus Creek —

upgradient

016B surface vater 8.49/600/15 Winnebago River —

upgradient

017 surface vater 7.90/680/21 Tile drain into

Calmus Creek

018 surface vater 8.43/630/23 Belov confluence of

Calmus Creek and

Winnebago River

019 surface vater 11.23/7300/24 Blue Waters Pond

019D surface vater 11.23/7300/24 Duplicate of above

020 surface vater 11.19/7300/23 Area "C" Pond

021 surface vater 11.29/>7500/24 Arch Pond

022 surface vater 8.52/800/22 West Quarry Pond

023 surface vater 8.40/600/25 . Cooling Water Pond

027 ground vater 7.27/750/19 Lehigh Deep Well #1

028 ground vater 7.19/1200/9 Monitoring Well #1

029 ground vater 11.06/7500/7 Monitoring Well #2

030 ground vater 12.04/>7500/9 Monitoring Well #3

031F ground vater not measured Field Blank

032# ground vater 7.57/640/15 Lime Creek Nature

Center — NW of site

033# ground vater 7.39/750/10 M. Piippo Well —

North of site

034# ground vater 7.25/695/15 G. Willis Well —

North of site

B = Background samplesNote: Conductivity is reported in umhos/cm. Samples 024 through

026 were not used. Surface water samples were analyzed for sulfates, total and dissolved metals* and turbidity. Ground vater samples were analyzed for sulfates, total metals, and dissolved metals. Turbidity and suspended solids analysis were also requested for the field blank. A cyanide analysis was requested for sample 030. See Figures 5 and 6 for samplelocations. 5-7

constant pH and specific conductivity were measured. Following these

procedures, approximately one volume of water was purged from each well

using PVC bailers attached to 1/4-inch polypropylene line. New line was

used for each well and was labeled and bagged separately to be utilized

later during sampling. It should be noted that the water purged from

monitoring wells #3 and #2, which are 30.0 and 40.5 feet deep,

respectively, had a dark-red color and pH readings of 11.96 and 11.15.

After the wells were purged they were allowed to equilibrate for at

least 12 hours before sampling.

Ground water samples were submitted for sulfates and total and

dissolved metals analysis. Turbidity and suspended solids analysis were

also requested for the field blank. Cyanide analysis was requested for

sample 030. This analysis was added to the original work plan after

observing a red discoloration of the surface water and ground water at

the site. This modification was annotated on the field sheets. A

post-purging water level was recorded before sampling each well (Table

3). Ground water samples were retrieved with PVC bailers attached to

the designated line used the previous day for purging. Three background

drinking water wells also were sampled. The location of all three

private wells are north-northeast of the Lehigh plant and NVSPCC.

Sample 032 was taken from a drinking water well (depth unknown) at the

Lime Creek Nature Center. Ground water sample 033 was taken from a

98-foot well at the Marvin Piippo residence and sample 034 was collected

from a shallow well (depth unknown) at the George Villis residence

(Figure 6).

5.2 OTHER FIELD INFORMATION

All field activities were conducted in modified Level D personal

protection. Hard hats, nitrile gloves, saran-coated tyveks, and

waterproof steel-toed boots were worn during sampling of the monitoring

wells. Steel-toed boots, nitrile gloves, and protective overalls were

used for all additional sampling.

5-8

Table 3Monitoring Well Information

Lehigh Portland Cement Company Site April 28 to 30, 1987

MV #1 MV #2 MV #3

Veil Elevations 1118.20Ground Vater Elevation 1108.80Veil Depth 62.8Post Purging Vater Level 9.5

1125.45

1121.0042.04.5

1122.591117.60

30.05.0

Note: Veil elevations were reported by Iowa Department of NaturalResources. All measurements were recorded from the top of the yell casing and are reported in feet. All well casings are six inches in diameter.

(Ref. 6 and 13)

Standard EPA protocols vere followed during sample collection,

packaging, and transportation. All vater samples vere iced to 4°C for

transport. The field parameters pH, conductivity, and temperature vere

recorded and documented for all vater samples , (Table 2). The Orion

digital pH meter and the Y.S.I. Conductivity meter vere used to measure

pH and conductivity. A summary of the measured field parameters is

presented in Table 2. Samples for dissolved metals and total metals

vere preserved vith nitric acid (HNO^). Dissolved metals vere filtered

with a 0.45 micron Nalgene filter before preservation.. Selected on-site

locations vere documented in a photographic record. For analysis of

these photographs, see Lehigh Trip Report, dated July 20, 1987 (TDD

#F-07-8611-32)* A total of 29 samples vere returned vith the

Chain-of-Custody record and field sheets to the Region VII EPA

Laboratory on May 1, 1987. The property owners and addresses from vhich

these samples were taken are included as Appendix C.

5-9

SECTION 6: ANALYTICAL DATA

6.1 KILN DUST AND SEDIMENT SAMPLES

The ten kiln dust/sediment samples collected at the Lehigh site

vere analyzed for total metals, sulfates, and pH. Table 4 summarizes

sample results and sample locations are shown on Figure 3. It should be

noted that the pH analyses reported in Table 4 are from resampling done

by IDNR on August 4, 1987. IDNR recollected these samples because there

was a delay in analyzing the pH samples originally collected by FIT.

The complete data transmittal for kiln dust/sediment sample results is

presented as Appendix D.

6.1.1 Kiln Dust Samples

Three waste kiln dust samples were collected at the Lehigh site.

Two of the three samples were taken at the Vest Quarry; sample 009 was

freshly deposited kiln dust and sample 007 was compacted kiln dust. The

third kiln dust sample (006) was taken at the Area "C" Pond. The fresh

kiln dust sample showed the highest pH value, 13.0, and contained

elevated levels of metals and sulfate. Calcium was measured at 280,000

mg/kg; potassium at 72,000 mg/kg; aluminum at 18,000 mg/kg; and sulfates

at .670 mg/kg. Other heavy metal contaminants found in this kiln dust

sample included lead and zinc, measured at 100 to 140 mg/kg; chromium at

58 mg/kg; and arsenic and cadmium at 16.0 and 8.3 mg/kg, respectively.

The compacted kiln dust sample had an almost neutral pH of 7.6. In

comparison to the fresh kiln dust, this sample exhibited significantly

6-1

Table 4

Total Hetal Analysis, Sulfate, and pH Units

for Kiln Dust/Sediaent Samples

Lehigh Portland Ceaent Company Site, Mason City, Iowa

Sample Series IK940

E 4 E/FIT April 28-30, 1987

Saaple HUnber/Location

Compound

(mg/kg)

001(B)

Calmus

Creek

002(B)

Winnebago

River

003

Tile

Drain

004

Confluence

005 .

Blue

Waters

Pond

005D

Duplicate

006*

Area "C"

Pond

007*

West

Quarry

Pond

008

Arch

Pond

009*

West

Quarry

Pond

010

Arch

Pond

Aluminum 3,100 4,000 4,700 3,300 15,000 14,000 13,000 3,400 6,700 18,000 2,100

Arsenic u u u u 7.90 M u I 15.0 u 16.0 u

Cadmium 2.40 M 3.30 M 3.30 M 2.20 M 3.60 M 3.80 H 6.60 2.80 M 3.10 M 8.2 1.80 M

Calcium 13,000 71,000 110,000 140,000 170,000 170,000 250,000 24,000 170,000 280,000 55,000

Chromium 7.00 9.50 M 29.0 18.0 25.0 24.0 19.0 15.0 15.0 58.0 18.0

Lead 4.00 7.20 140 27.0 54.0 53.0 390 8.40 12.0 100 10.0

Potassium u 230 M 530 M 370 M 39,000 M 100,000 1,100 M 1,700 M 5,000 K 72,000 3,900 M

Zinc 26.0 38.0 140 47.0 120 120 830 40.0 39.0 140 47.0

Cyanide '-- — — ---- — — — — — — 0.1 M

Sulfate u .0009 .0007 u .00213 .00195 u<

.0050 .0019 .670 —

pH 7.6 7.4 7.6 7.5 9.2 9.4

cssassBeaeai

12.4-

CCCSBBOSBBBBB9BC

7.6 10.6 13.0 —

B = background u = compound was not detected

*Waste kiln dust (Sample IK940009 was fresh kiln dust) I = analysis attempted, but no results can be reported

M b compound was qualitatively identified at less than contract

required detection limits

Note: pH units are analyses from resampling conducted at Lehigh Portland Cement Company Bite by IDNR on August 4, 1987. Partial

data transmittal dated August 24, 1987 from EPA Region VII Laboratory also shows similar pH units and is enclosed in the

appendices. Compounds listed are with one or more detects.

lover concentrations of all metals and sulfate. The only exception was

arsenic, which was detected at a similar concentration to that of the

fresh sample (15.0 mg/kg).

The third sample, taken at Area "C" Pond, had an elevated pH of

12.4, which similar to that detected in the fresh kiln dust from the

Vest Quarry Pond. Also, when comparing this sample to the fresh kiln

dust it shoved similar calcium and cadmium concentrations but contained

significantly less potassium (only 1,100 mg/kg). Lead, zinc, and

chromium were detected at 3 to 5 times the levels found in the fresh

kiln dust. However, arsenic was undetected in the Area "C" sample but

was detected in both samples from the Vest Quarry.

6.1.2 Sediment Samples

Sediment samples were collected from the banks of Blue Vaters Pond

and from Arch Pond, which is an extension of Blue Vaters Pond. Sediment

samples from Blue Vaters Pond (005, 005D) displayed a lover pH (9.2 to

9.4) as compared to the pH of 10.6 found in the Arch Pond sediments

(008). Conversely, the samples from Blue Vaters displayed significantly

higher concentrations of potassium and other metals with the exception

of cadmium and calcium, which were detected at similar concentrations in

both areas. Sulfate concentrations were also similar in the two ponds.

Sediment samples were collected from Calmus Creek, which runs vest

to southeast above Vest Quarry and Cooling Vater Pond and below Blue

Vaters and Arch Pond (Figure 3). Samples also were collected from the

Vinnebago River, which Calmus Creek enters southeast of the site. The

upstream (001 and 002) and downstream (003 and 004) sediment samples

from Calmus Creek and the Vinnebago River shoved no significant

differences in pH. The average was 7.5 units. For the majority of

metals detected, the highest concentrations were found in samples

collected from the tile drain on Calmus Creek. Chromium and lead were

detected in the tile drain at 29 and 140 mg/kg, respectively, as

6-3

compared to the background sample levels which averaged 8.25 for

chromium and 5.1 for lead. As previously stated, Calmus Creek has

received drainage from Blue Vaters Pond through this tile drain system

in the past.

Sample 010, collected at the Arch Pond, was analyzed for cyanide

because a red-orange coloration was observed in the water of Arch Pond.

A concentration of 0.1 mg/kg cyanide was qualitatively identified in the

sample. IDNR also analyzed for cyanide during their resampling effort

of August 4, 1987, and recorded a similar concentration (Appendix D).

6.2 VATER SAMPLES

Eighteen water samples, including nine surface water samples, seven

ground water samples, one duplicate sample, and one field blank, were

collected at the Lehigh site. All water samples were analyzed for total

metals and sulfates. In addition,•surface water samples were analyzed

for turbiditya and suspended solids, and ground water samples were

analyzed for dissolved metals. See Appendix D for the complete data

transmittal.

6.2.1 Surface Water Samples

Surface water samples were collected from each of the on-site

quarry ponds; upstream and downstream of Calmus Creek and at the tile

drain; and from the Winnebago River, upstream and at the confluence of

the Winnebago River and Calmus Creek. The majority of the surface water

samples were collected from.corresponding sediment sample locations

(Figure 5).

The pH values for surface water samples collected from the eastern

on-site ponds (Blue Waters Pond, Area "C" Pond, and the Arch Pond)

ranged from 11.19 to 11.29. Samples from these on-site quarry ponds

also showed elevated levels of sulfate, aluminum, sodium, and potassium.

6-4

Potassium and sodium concentrations for these three quarry ponds ranged

from 120,000 ug/1 to 290,000 ug/1; aluminum concentrations ranged from

930 ug/1 to 1,400 ug/1; and sulfate concentrations ranged from 870,000

ug/1 to 1,160,000 ug/1. Overall, levels of these compounds were 10

times the levels detected in the creek/river samples. In contrast,

calcium concentrations were low in the eastern ponds.

Samples from the Cooling Vater Pond (023) and the Vest Quarry Pond

(022) had pH values significantly lover (8.40 to 8.52) than those

detected in the eastern ponds. Conversely, these ponds had higher

concentrations of calcium (72,000 to 80,000 ug/1), than the three

eastern ponds. The calcium range detected was very similar to the level

detected in the creek/river samples. Sodium concentrations in these

western ponds also closely resembled levels found in the creek/river,

The sample from the Vest Quarry Pond contained a similar potassium

concentration (120,000 ug/1) as was found in the eastern quarry pond

samples. Potassium levels in the Cooling Vaters Pond sample was similar

to those found in the creek/river vater samples. Sulfate concentrations

vere just the opposite, vith Vest Quarry having a similar concentration

to the creek/river samples. Cooling Vaters Pond contained a high

concentration of sulfates as vas the case the eastern ponds.

Constituents of the creek/river samples vere found at very similar

concentrations, vith one exception. Potassium vas found to be the most

significant component detected in this group of samples. Concentrations

of potassium in the downstream samples (017 to 018) ranged from 19,000

ug/1 to 16,000 Ug/1. Potassium in the upstream samples (015 to 016)

vere undetected or were identified below the Contract Required Detection

Limit. The pH values ranged from 7.84 to 8.49.

Arsenic and lead vere the only heavy metals detected in the surface

vater samples. Arsenic vas detected at 51.0 ug/1 in the sample from

6-5

Arch Pond. Lead was detected at a concentration range of 3.6M to 38.0

ug/1 in all of the quarry ponds with the exception of Arch Pond in which

no lead was detected. Chromium, although detected in the respective

sediment samples, was not detected in any surface water samples. See

Table 5 for a summary of the surface water sample results and Figure 5

for the sample locations.

6.2.2 Ground Water Samples

Three on-site monitoring wells, three background wells, and one

deep Lehigh drinking water well make up the seven ground water samples

collected from the Lehigh site. Monitoring well #2 (029), located

between Area "C" Pond and Blue Vaters Pond, had a pH of 11.06.

Monitoring well #3 (030), located between the Arch Pond and Blue Vaters

Pond, had a pH of 12.04. Calcium concentrations were the lowest in

monitoring wells #2 and #3 at 7,600 ug/1 and 9,100 ug/1, respectively,

and the highest in monitoring well #1 at 130,000 ug/1. Monitoring well

#1 had the highest potassium concentration at 540,000 ug/1 but the

lowest pH value of 7.19 units. Monitoring well #3 had the highest

sulfate and sodium concentrations at 1,200,000 ug/1 and 220,000 ug/1,

respectively.

Samples 032, 033» and 034 were background samples with samples 033

and 034 taken from private wells finished in the surficial bedrock

(Upper Cedar Creek Formation) aquifer. These two samples had pH values

of 7.39 and 7.25, respectively. In sample 033, potassium was undetected

and in sample 034 the potassium concentration was below the CLP

detection limit. Calcium levels averaging 94,500 ug/1 and sulfate

concentrations averaging 48,500 ug/1 were reported in these samples.

Sample 032 was taken from the Lime Creek Nature Center well. The depth

of this well is unknown. It should be noted that this well showed

similar results as the other two background resident wells. The Lehigh

deep Well #1 also showed similar results to the Lime Creek Nature Center

well except for an elevated sulfate concentration of 67,000 ug/1.

6-6

6-7

Table 5

Total Metal Analysis, Sulfats, and pH Units

for Surface Mater Samples

Lehigh Portland Cement Company Site, Mason City, Iowa

E t E/FIT April 28-30, 1987

Sample Series 1X940

Sample Number/Location

Compound

(ug/1)

015(B)

Calmus

Creek

016(B)

Winnebago

River

017

Tile

Drain

018

Confluence

019

Blue

Haters

Pond

019D

Duplicate

020

Area "C"

Pond

021

Arch

Pond

022

Mast

Quarry

Pond

023

Cooling

Waters

Pond

Aluminum 150 M 120 M 170 M 160 M 1,400 1,100 1,800 930 820 440

Arsenic u u u u — u — 51.0 u u

Calcium 90,000 90,000 78,000 71,000 7,100 u 18,000 9,000 80,000 72,000

Lead 16.0 U u U U 38.0 5.40 u 4.50 M 3.60 M

Potassium U 770 M 19,000 16,000 290,000 150,000 K 140,000 120,000 120,000 3,100 M

Sodium 7,200 9,200 16,000 11,000 160,000 160,000 160,000 180,000 28,000 9,200

Sulfate 34,000 47,000 63,500 55,000 870,000 880,000 960,000 1,160,000 270,000 1,400,000

pH 7.84 8.49 7.90 8.43 11.23 11.23 11.19 11.29 8.52 8.40

B = background

u a compound was not detected

M a compound was qualitatively identified at less than contract required detection limits

Note: pH values represent on-site field measurements. Compounds listed are with one or more detects.

The heavy metals arsenic and cadmium were detected in on-site

monitoring well samples. Monitoring well #3 contained 33.0 ug/1

arsenic. Cadmium vas detected in monitoring well #2 and in Lehigh's

deep well #1 at 7.10 ug/1 and 5.40 ug/1, respectively. Cyanide was also

detected in monitoring well #3; however, the cyanide analysis failed to

meet all the quality assurance criteria and is, therefore, only an

estimated value.

In the dissolved metals fraction, sodium was the highest in

monitoring wells #2 and #3, which showed the highest pH values. Calcium

and potassium were either undetected or below the CLP detection limits

in these samples. Arsenic was detected at 72.0 ug/1 in monitoring well

#3. Zinc also was detected in monitoring wells #2 and #3, though in the

total metal fraction it was Undetected in both wells. See Tables 6 and

7 for a summary of sampling results and Figure 6 for ground water sample

locations.

6-9

-10

Table 6

Total Metal Analysis, Sulfate, and pH Units

for Ground Water Samples

Lehigh Portland Ceaent Coapany Site, Mason City, Iowa

E a E/riT April 28-30, 1987

Sample Series IK940

Sample Humber/Location

Compound

(ug/1)

027

Lehigh Deep

Well #1

028

MW |1

029

MW #2

030

MW #3

031F

Field Blank

032

Lime Creek

Nature Center

033

Piippo Well

(background)

034 '

Willis Well

(background)

Aluminum u u 270 3,500 u u u u

Arsenic u u I 33.0 u u u . u

Cadmium 5.40 u 7.10 u u 4.80 M u 4.80 M

Calcium 79,000 130,000 7,600 9,100 1,400 61,000 95,000 94,000

Chromium u u u u 6.00 M u u u

Potassium 5,300 540,000 110,000 250,000 u 1,900 M u 510 M

Sodium 28,000 45,000 170,000 220,000 u 14,000 14,000 22,000

Zinc u U u U 160 27.0 u u

Cyanide — — — 100 J — . — — —

Sulfate 67,000 290,000 880,000 1,200,000 U u 48,000 49,000

pH 7.27 7.19 11.06 12.04 — 7.57 7.39 7.25

MW = monitoring well

u = compound vas not detected

M = compound was qualitatively identified at less than contract required detection limits.

J = compound was qualitatively identified:1 however, compound failed to meet all QA criteria and, therefore, is only an estimated

value.

I ■= analysis attempted, but no results can be reported

Rote: pH Units are from on-site field screening. Compounds listed are with one or more detects.

-11

Table 7

Dissolved Metals Analysis

for Ground Water Samples

Lehigh Portland Cenent Conpany Site, Mason City, Iowa

E £ E/PIT April 28-30, 1987

Saaple Series XK940

O'

Saaple ■uaber/Location

Compound

(ug/1)

027

Lehigh Deep

Well |1

028

MW |1

029

MW «2

030

MW 83

031F

Field Blank

032

Lime Creek

Mature Center

033

Piippo Well

(background)

034

Willis Well

(background)

Aluminum u u 250 u 11 u u u

Arsenic u u I 72.0 u u u u

Calcium 79,000 130,000 4,600 M 4,500 M u 59,000 91,000 94,000

Chromium u u 6.00 M 8.00 M 11 u 11 11

Potassium u 1,900 M u 510 M 5,600 140,000 750,000 300,000

Sodium 28,000 47,000 180,000 240,000 u 14,000 14,000 23,000

Zinc u U 220 260 u 11 U U

MW = monitoring well

u = compound was not detected

M = compound was qualitatively identified at less than contract required detection limits

I = analysis attempted, but no results can be reported

Mote: Compounds listed are with one or more detects

SECTION 7: DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

The analytical data indicates that the major hazard at the site is

pH levels high enough to be considered corrosive. It has been found

that waste kiln dust has a pH value of 13.0 units (Table 4). Fresh

waste kiln dust contains elevated concentrations of calcium, sulfate,

and potassium. Vhen this waste comes in contact with water, corrosive

hydroxides are formed and pH values are elevated. Other minor

contaminants such as aluminum, cadmium, chromium, arsenic, and lead also

are constituents of this waste.

7.1 ATTRIBUTION

Analytical results for the water and kiln dust/sediment samples

can be used to attribute high pH levels to this waste kiln dust. As

shown by water samples from monitoring wells numbers 2 and 3, potassium

concentrations correlate well with rising pH, suggesting that the

hydroxyl ions are associated with the potassium in the waste. This

phenomena is also illustrated by the decreased potassium concentrations

in the older or leached kiln dust. Calcium concentrations in sediment

samples trace the migration of the kiln dust via relatively insoluble

calcium carbonate, a major constituent of waste kiln dust.

* The analytical results also illustrate that the kiln dust is having

a detrimental affect on the quarry ponds on the Lehigh property. The

sediment samples taken at the Arch Pond and the Blue Vaters Pond have

increased pH values and calcium concentrations. Furthermore, the water

samples at these quarry ponds show similar pH values and have elevated

potassium concentrations. Ground water also is being adversely affected

by the contaminated on-site quarry ponds. Monitoring wells installed by

Lehigh between the Area "C" Pond, Arch Pond, and the Blue Vaters Pond

7-1

confirm the presence of contaminated water in the shallow bedrock

aquifer. Analytical data shows the highest pH value of 12.04 units was

detected in monitoring well #3 (Table 6). Monitoring well #3 also

had a high concentration of sulfates and a relatively high concentration

of potassium. Monitoring wells #2 and #3 have a similar chemical

composition to the water samples collected from the Area "C" Pond, Arch

Pond, and the Blu'e Waters Pond, which exhibited elevated pH values

ranging from 11.19 to 11.29. Chemical composition and pH in these wells

is significantly different from those of the background residential

wells. This data supports, the hypothesis that ground water is flowing

east-southeast and that Area nC" Pond, Arch Pond, and Blue Waters Pond

are the sources of ground water contamination.

Monitoring well #1 (MW #1) has a measured pH of 7.19 which is

similar to the pH values measured in the background residential wells.

The levels of calcium and potassium detected in MW #1 however, were

higher than those detected in monitoring wells #2 and #3. MW #1 is

located approximately 300 feet south and topographically downgradient

from the Blue Waters Pond which has a measured pH of 11.23. MW #1 is

thought to be hydrologically downgradient from the Blue Waters Pond as

well. It is not known at this time Why the recorded pH of MW #1 is

unaffected by the elevated pH levels of the Blue Waters Pond. Local

ground water flow may be altered in the area between the Blue Waters

Pond and MW #1 by a zone of lesser transmissivity and porosity or other

subsurface variations. The larger distance which exists between MW #1

and the waste kiln dust piles and its closer proximity to the Winnebago

River may also be factors influencing the difference in the pH level of

MW #1 from those in MW #2 (pH = 11.06) and MW #3 (pH =12.04).

Heavy metals were also detected in the ground water samples

collected from the on-site monitoring wells. Monitoring well #3 had

arsenic in both the total and dissolved metal fractions. Arsenic was

detected at levels three times above the background detection limit in

the total metals fraction and seven times above background levels in the

7-2

dissolved metals fraction (Tables 6 and 7). Zinc and sulfate were also

found to be at higher concentrations in monitoring well 43. The sulfate

concentration vas approximately 24 times greater than the background

concentrations (Table 6). Zinc concentrations in the same sample were

five to six times above background in both the total and dissolved

metals fractions.

Delineating attribution of ground vater contamination contributed

by the Lehigh facility from the contamination contributed by the NWSPCC

facility vas accomplished by observing the responses and recovery times

of the static vater levels of the three monitoring veils located on

site. Hydrologic studies of the Lehigh site conducted by a consulting

engineering firm in 1985 verify that ground vater flov is in a

east-southeast direction tovard Calmus Creek and the Winnebago River.,

The measured decrease of ground vater elevation betveen the Lehigh site

and Calmus Creek (measured from the 25th Street bridge) indicates that

contamination is originating from the Lehigh site (Ref. 13 and 14).

The Northvest States Portland Cement company (NWSPCC) located

Immediately south of the Lehigh site has also been shovn to be

contributing to the area contamination problem. Past investigations

have shovn that contaminated ground vater originating from the NWSPCC is

discharging into Calmus Creek and the Winnebago River (Ref. 9). NWSPCC

vas investigated by the E & E/FIT concurrently vith the Lehigh site.

The analytical data presented in Table 5 shows that at the time of

the E & E/FIT investigation, the contamination from the Lehigh site vas

affecting Calmus Creek. The IDOT tile drain outlet is a primary point

of entry for contaminants from the Lehigh site. Blue Waters Pond ties

into this drain outlet by a buried culvert located southeast of the

pond. The potassium concentration detected in Calmus Creek at the

background location vas reported as nondetected, vhile at the location

of the tile drain outlet, the potassium level had increased to 19,000

7-3

ug/1. Sulfates and sodium concentrations were also slightly increased

over background concentrations. However, at the tile drain outlet, a pH

of 7.90 was measured. The Winnebago River samples (upstream and

downstream) showed pH values in the 7 to 8 range as well, suggesting

that elevated pH levels are presently confined to the on-site quarries

and ground water. However, the pH of Calmus Creek may certainly be

affected in the near future.

The close proximity of the adjacent facility (NVSPCC) makes it

difficult to attribute surface water contamination to the Lehigh site.

The potential deterioration of Calmus Creek before it reaches the Lehigh

tile drain is evident. The NWSPCC's quarry pond (West Quarry) shows

poor water quality and water from this pond flows into Calmus Creek via

a blowout area located upstream of the Lehigh outlet. Sampling data

from the NWSPCC site indicates that contaminants from this site are

having an effect on Calmus Creek. (See site investigation report from

NWSPCC, TDD #F-07-8704-15, January 1988.)

7.1 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS

The kiln dust contains elevated levels of calcium and potassium,

producing an alkaline pH when mixed with water. At the Lehigh site, the

kiln dust is in direct contact with water* The on-site quarry ponds and

the local ground water have been shown to be contaminated with corrosive

hydroxide compounds. The kiln dust has been found to contain elevated

levels of arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead, zinc, and sulfates. These

constituents are documented to be highly toxic at elevated levels or

chronic exposure (Ref. 15).

Hydroxide solution is a powerful skin and eye irritant (Ref. 15).

Waste streams with a pH above 12.5 are classified as RCRA and CERCLA

hazardous wastes. Water quality criteria for pH have been set at 5 to 9

for domestic water supplies and 6.5 to 9 for freshwater aquatic life.

Outside of the range of 6.5 to 9.0, fish suffer adverse physiological

7-4

effects that increase in severity as the degree of deviation increases

until lethal levels are reached.

Chromium, cadmium, arsenic, and lead are listed as highly toxic in

Dangerous Properties of Industrial Materials (Ref. 15). Studies have

found a greater risk from exposure to hexavalent chromium than trivalent

chromium compounds, though the difference in risk between the two is not

clear-cut. It is not known whether hexavalent or trivalent chromium is

the predominant form of compound at Lehigh. Based on various studies,

the EPA has determined that a concentration of 50 ug/1 of hexavalent

chromium is the level deemed to provide a reasonable factor of safety to

avoid any hazard to human health. Consequently, the Safe Drinking Vater

Act Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) for hexavalent chromium has been set

at 50 ug/1. The proposed Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG) for

total chromium is 120 ug/1 (Ref. 16).

iCadmium is bioaccumulated in the liver and kidneys and causes

problems ranging from bone mineral loss to cancer. The MCL for cadmium

is 10 ug/1 and the proposed MCLG is 5 ug/1 (Ref. 16). Arsenic is a

human carcinogen which is also known for its acute toxicity. The Safe

Drinking Vater Act (SDVA) MCL is 50 ug/1. A concentration of .0022 ug/1

poses a cancer risk (Ref. 16). Lead is a toxic metal that

bioaccumulates in humans and animals and affects the neurological

tissues and synthesis of blood. Lead is soluble only up to 3 ug/1 in

hard water. The SDVA MCL for lead is 50 ug/1 and the proposed MCLG is

20 ug/1 (Ref. 16).

In addition to the concerns posed by ground water and surface water

contaminants from the constituents of Lehigh's waste kiln dust, the

possibility of direct contact with waste piles or the pond water by the

local population and on-site employees is evident. Potential air

contamination could also occur from blowing dust.

7-5

SECTION 8: SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The major hazard posed by the Lehigh site is the waste kiln dust

which is a by-product of the cement manufacturing process. The Lehigh

site has been in operation since 1911 and continues to produce and

deposit this waste on site. Waste kiln dust has been designated as a

special study waste under RCRA.

Past investigations conducted internally by the Lehigh facility and

by the State of Iowa have shown that on-site contamination exists and

contaminants are migrating to ground water sources and Calmus Creek.

The April 1987 field work conducted by E & E/FIT included kiln

dust/sediment, surface water, and ground water sampling. This

investigation has confirmed that the on-site quarry ponds and ground

water are contaminated locally and have the potential to migrate off

site. The E & E/FIT investigation conducted in April 1987 found the

waste kiln dust to have a pH of 13.0 units. Lehigh disposes some of

this waste in an abandoned, flooded quarry. When combined with water,

the dust forms very corrosive hydroxide compounds and produces extremely

elevated (alkaline) pH levels. It has been determined that the

characteristic of corrosivity is determined by a pH value greater than

or equal to 12,5 units. The measured pH levels in the on-site quarry

ponds and monitoring wells ranged from 7.19 to 12.04. Other

constituents of the kiln dust are arsenic* chromium, lead, zinc, and

sulfates. These kiln dust constituents are toxic and persistent.

Seepage has occurred from the quarry ponds and is contaminating the

ground water. The highest pH value detected in the on-site ground water

was 12.04 units. Sampling also indicated a contamination threat to

8-1

Calmus Creek and the Winnebago River, which is located within 1,500 feet

of the site. However, contamination could occur during high intensity

rainfall events, ground water infiltration, and flooding. The potential

exists for human and biological exposures to the hazards present at the

Lehigh site.

8-2

SECTION 9: REFERENCES

1. Cullen, James J., 1985, Feasibility Study for the Elimination of Blue Waters Pond, Phase I, R.E. Wright Associates, Inc., Middletown, PA.

2. Dewitt, Thomas A., 1981, Soil Survey of Cerro Gordo County, Iowa, Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, et. al.

3. Hershey, H.G., W.L. Steinhilber, and K.D. Wahl, 1970, Geology and Ground Water Resources of Cerro Gordo County, Iowa, Iowa Water Supply Bulletin #9, U.S. Geological Survey,

4. Bunker, Bill J., and Brian J. Witzke, 1984, Devonian Stratigraphy of North-Central Iowa, Open File, Report 84-2, Iowa Geological Survey.

5. Well logs, Lehigh and NWSPCC, Iowa Geological Survey, August 10,1987, and Mason City Municipal Well Logs, Muon City WaterDepartment, August 15, 1987.

6. Field Log Book of Ecology and Environment, Inc., FieldInvestigation Team for Lehigh Portland Cement Company Site, Mason City, Iowa, PAN #FIA0181SI, TDD #F-07-8611-32.

7. Jablonski, Dick, May 5, 1986, personal communication, City of Mason City Water Department, Mason City, Iowa.

8. Mason City Chamber of Commerce, June 3, 1986, Personalcommunication, Mason City, Iowa.

9. Adams, Joseph D., 1985, Hydrogeologic Investigation West QuarrySite, Northwestern States Portland Cement Company, Mason City, Iowa, IT Corporation.

10. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental ProtectionTechnology Series, 1975, Disposal and Utilization of Waste Kiln Dust from Cement Industry, Office of Research and Development, Cincinnati, Ohio.

11. Blum, Ken, April 6, 1987, personal communication, Plant Manager,Lehigh Portland Cement Company, Mason City, Iowa.

12. Kennedy, Jack 0. and Roger C. Splinter, Ph.D., 1984, Calmus Creek Water Quality Study, No. 85-1, University of Iowa Hygienic Laboratory for Iowa Department of Water, Air, and Waste Management.

9-1

13. Drustrup, Bob, August 17, 1987, personal communication, Geologist,Abandoned and Uncontrolled Sites Section, Iowa Department ofNatural Resources, Iowa City, Iova.

14. Volter, Calvin, August 20, 1987, personal communication, Geologist,Abandoned and Uncontrolled Sites Section, Iova Department of

Natural Resources, Iova City, Iova.

15. Sax, Irving N., 1984, Dangerous Properties of Industrial Materials, 6th Edition, Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, Nev York, Nev York.

16. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, July, 1987, EPA Regulatory Status for Chemicals in Drinking Water, Washington, D.C.

9-2

Appendix A

Technical Directive Document (TDD) for Lehigh Portland Cement Company Site

A-l

K

1A. Cost Center:

FT 1307

IB. Account Number:

FIA0181SA

FIT ZONE II CONTRACT Contract Number 68-01-7347

TECHNICAL DIRECTIVE DOCUMENT (TDD)

2. TDD Number:

F-07-8611-32

2A. Amendment: ^IQ Administrative

-- G Technical

3A. Priority: £] High

□ Medium□ Low

3B. Key EPA Contact:

Mem- Peter Culver, Phone: 236-2856

4A. Estimate of 4B. Subcontract: 4C. Estimate of 5A. SSID Number: 5B. CERID Number:Technical Hours: Subcontract Cost: A/0nC500 NA NA ■IAD10?39061Q

SC. EPA Site Name:

Lehigh Portland Cement Company

5D. City/County/State:

Mason Clty/Cerro, Gordo/Iowa

6. Desired Report Format:QB Formal Report Q Standard Report □Letter Report G Formal Briefing

□ Other (Specify):7A. Activity Start Date:

November 7, 1986

7B. Estimated Completion ■Data:—-

November 30, 1987*

8A. Type of Activity:□ PA □ HRS Support

IS SI G QA Support□ ESI □ Special Studies

□ Enforcement Support□ Program Management□ Equipment Maintenance

□Training

□ General Technical Assistance

8B. FIT/SCAP Goal:Will Deliverable Meet a Unit of the Goal?

Yes □ No

9. General Task Description: Prepare work plan fnr a a-Lt-e invest-Igat-inn fnr T.r»hf gh Port-Land

Cement Company. Mason Cltv. Iowa (state lead site). Perform field work for site

investigation and prepare final ST report.* ______________________

10. Specific Elements: 1. Gather background information.______ ■

2. Meet with state officials and perform site reconnaissance.

3. Calculate draft HRS score.________________________ . .

4. Prepare work plan for site investigation. Coordinate

_closely with State of Iowa fIDNR) personnel.---------- -—-----

5. Perform field work for site investigation.---- -------------

6- Prepare trip report.

7. Prepare final report and fully□ Additional Scope Attached

11. Interim Deadlines:

12. Comments:documented HRS.

Fully documented HRS package to be completed under separate TDD ffF-07-8706-07

Oiitribution; Sheet 1 (White)—FITOM Copy Sheet 2 (Green t-HPO Copy Sheet 3 (Canary i-ZPM, WOC Copy

Sheet 4 (Pink)—PO, WDC Copy Sheet 5 (Goldenrod)-CO, WDC Copy

Appendix B

EPA Site Investigation Form 2070-13

POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITE

EPA SITE INSPECTION REPORT

I. IDENTIFICATION

01 STATE IA

02 SITE NUMBER D00S288634

rAKT & ■“ ai>ib uwjii mu Amu i.d*irb\.i iun mr vuiaiiuix

II. SITE NAME AND LOCATION

01 SITE NAME (Legal, common, or descriptive name of site) 02 STREET, ROUTE NO., OR SPECIFIC LOCATION IDENTIFIER

Cement Company RR 81, Box 200, 700 25th NW

04 STATE

IA

OS ZIP CODE

50401

06 COUNTY

Cerro Gordo

07 COUNTY CODE

08 CONG DZST

03 CITY

Mason City

09 COORDINATES

LATITUDE |

43*10'39.7*N

LONGITUDE

93*12'30.0"W

Jt__A. PRIVATE

F. OTHER

B. FEDERAL STATE _D.COUNTY

O.UNKNOWN

E. MUNICIPAL

III. INSPECTION INFORMATION

01 DATE OF INSPECTION

04/27/8

MO/DAY/YR

02 SITE STATUS

X ACTIVE

INACTIVE

03 YEARS OF OPERATION

1911 |

BEGINNING YEAR

presont

ENDING YEAR

UNKNOWN

04 AGENCY PERFORMING INSPECTION (Check all that apply)

A. EPA x B. EPA CONTRACTOR Ecology 8 Environment

(Name of firm)

E. STATE F. STATE CONTRACTOR __________________

_C. MUNICIPAL _D. MUNICIPAL CONTRACTOR

G. OTHER

(Name of firm)

(Name of firm) (Specify)

05 CHIEF INSPECTOR

Kenna Roberson

06 TITLE

Environmental Engineer

07 ORGANIZATION

E 6 E/FIT

08 TELEPHONE NO.

(913)432-9961

09 OTHER INSPECTORS

David Zimmermann

10 TITLE

EnvironmentalScientist

11 ORGANIZATION

E t E/FIT

12 TELEPHONE NO.

(913)432-9961

Karen Koth Biologist E i E/FIT (913)432-9961

Jim Hale Geographer E & E/FIT (913)432-9961

^Patty RobertsEnvironmentalScientist

E & E/FIT (913)432-9961

Calvin Wolter Geologist IDNR (515)281-4968

13 SITE REPRESENTATIVES INTERVIEWED

Ken Blum

14 TITLE

Plant Manager

15 ADDRESSRR #1, Rox 200Mason City, IA

16 TELEPHONE NO.

(515)421-3400

Gail Meyer Plant EngineerRR 81, Box 200Mason City, IA (515)421-3400

•

■

17 ACCESS GAINED BY

(Check one)

x PERMISSION

___ WARRANT

18 TIME OF INSPECTION

10:30 AM

19 WEATHER CONDITIONS

clear and mild

IV. INFORMATION AVAILABLE FROM

01 CONTACT

Pete Culver

02 OF (Agency/Organization)

Region VII EPA Superfund

03 TELEPHONE NO.

(913)236-2856^ PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR SITE INSPECTION FORM

1 Patty Roberts

05 AGENCY |06 ORGANIZATION |07 TELEPHONE NO.

| EPA | E t E/FIT | (913)432-996108 DATE

12/28/87

EPA FORM 2070-13 (7-81)

EPA

POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITE

SITE INSPECTION REPORT

PART 2 - WASTE INFORMATION

I. IDENTII■T CATION

01 STATE IA

02 SITE NUMBER D00528B634

II. WASTE STATES. QUANTITIES. AND CHARACTERISTICS

01 PHYSICAL STATES

heck all that apply)

__A. SOLID ___E. SLURRY

X_B. POWDER,PINES __ P. LIQUID

__C. SLUDGE ___□. GAS

D. OTHER waste kiln dust

(Specify)

02 WASTE QUANTITY AT SITE

(Kaasuras of waste quanti­ties must be independent)

TONS

CUBIC YARDS

NO. OP DRUMS

(1981-66)136,107.9

03 WASTE CHARACTERISTICS

(Check all that apply)

___A. TOXIC X E. SOLUBLE

X B. CORROSIVE ___F. INFECTIOUS

___C. RADIOACTIVE ___G. FLAMMABLE

D. PERSISTENT H. IGNITABLE

I. HIGHLY VOLATILE

_J. EXPLOSIVE

_K. REACTIVE

_L. INCOMPATIBLE

M. NOT APPLICABLE

III- WASTE TYPE

CATEGORY SUBSTANCE NAME Gil GROSS AMOUNT 02 UNIT OF MEASURE 03 COMMENTS

SLU SLUDGE

OLW OILY WASTE

SOL SOLVENTS

PSD PESTICIDES

OCC OTHER ORGANIC CHEMICALS

IOC INORGANIC CHEMICALS

ACD ACIDS

BAS BASES (1981-66) 136,107.9 tons waste kiln dust

MBS HEAVY METALS

IV. HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES (See Appendix for most frequently cited CAS Numbers)

01 CATEGORY 02 SUBSTANCE NAME 03 CAS NUMBER 04 STORAGE/DISPOSAL METHOD 05 CONCENTRATION06 MEASURE OF CONCENTRATION

BAS waste kiln dust 1310S83;1310732 unknown (in piles and dis- pH 13.0 units

(hydroxides) posed of in quarry ponds)

IOC Arsenic 7440382 unknown 72.0 ug/1

IOC Chromium 7440473 unknown 58.0 ug/1

IOC Lead 7439921 unknown 390.0 ug/1

w..

|t

V. FEEDSTOCKS (See Appendix for CAS Numbers)

CATEGORY 01 FEEDSTOCK NAME 02 CAS NUMBER CATEGORY 01 FEEDSTOCK NAME 02 CAS NUMBER

PDS FDS

PDS PDS

PDS FDS

FDS FDS

VI. SOURCES OF INFORMATION (Cite specific references, e.g., state files, sample analysis, reports)

E t E/FIT site investigation, April 1987Dangerous Properties of Industrial Materials, 6th Edition SAX.

EPA form 2070-13 (7-81)

POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITE

BPA SITE INSPECTION REPORT

PART 3 - DESCRIPTION OF HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS AND INCIDENTS

I. IDENTIFICATION

01 STATE IA

02 SITE NUMBER D0052B8634

11. HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS AND INCIDENTS

X A. GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION

POPULATION POTENTIALLY APTECTED 30,831

02 ___ OBSERVED (DATE: 04-27-87 ) ___ POTENTIAL X ALLEGED

04 NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION

Fresh waste kiln dust has a pH value of 13.0. This waste is placed into water-Cilled quarries, which are excavated down to the water table. Monitoring well 83 showed a relatively high pH of 12.04 units. It also had elevated concentrations of arsenic, sine, and sulfatas. Chromium was also detected but below Contract Required Detection

01 X B. SURFACE WATER CONTAMINATION 02 OBSERVED (DATE: ) X POTENTIAL ___ ALLEGED

03 POPULATION POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: 04 NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION

Past investigations have found a chemical April 1987, E a E/FIT field work snowed a

deterioration to Calmus Creek and was linked minimal affect on the nearby Calmus Creek.

to the Lehigh site, however,

01 ___C. CONTAMINATION OF AIR 02 OBSERVED (DATE: ) _ POTENTIAL ___ ALLEGED

03 POPULATION POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: 04 NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION

none known

01 ___D. FIRE/EXPLOSIVE CONDITIONS 02 OBSERVED (DATE: ) ___ POTENTIAL __ ALLEGED

03 POPULATION POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: 04 NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION

none known

01 X E. DIRECT CONTACT 02 ___ OBSERVED (DATE: 04-27-87 > X POTENTIAL ___ ALLEGED

03 POPULATION POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: 2687______ 04 NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION

Waste piles still remain on the Bite which are not covered or stabilized. Wastes are placed directly into water- filled quarries. These piles and quarries are accessible to Lehigh employees as well as NWSPCC (located south from Lehigh) employees.

01 X f. CONTAMINATION OF SOIL 02____OBSERVED (DATE: _______ ) X ~ POTENTIAL ____ ALLEGED

03 AREA POTENTIALLY AFFECTED! not known 04 NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION

(Acres)

Waste kiln dugt is placed in piles throughout the facility, thereby, potentially contaminating the surface and subsurface soil horizons.

01 X Q. DRINKING WATER CONTAMINATION 02 ___ OBSERVED (DATE: 04-27-87 ) x POTENTIAL . ALLEGED

03 POPULATION POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: 30,831 04 NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION

Shallow private water wells located ngrtheast of the site are used for drinking water. Seven deep municipal wells, located south in Mason City, and on-site wells are also within a 3-mile radius of the site. These wells receive water from both the shallow Devonian (0 to 300 feet) aquifer as well as the Cambro-rOrdovician deeper aquifers.

01 H. WORKER EXPOSURE/IN JURY 02 OBSERVED (DATE: ) POTENTIAL ALLEGED

03 WORKERS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: __ 04 NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION

None known

01 I. POPULATION EXPOSURE/INJURY 02 ___ OBSERVED (DATE: > ___ POTENTIAL ___ ALLEGED

03 POPULATION POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: _ 04 NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION

None known

ERA FORM 2070-13 (7-81)

I. IDENTIFICATION

01 STATE IA

02 SITE NUMBER D0052B8634

»APOTENTIAL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITE

SITE INSPECTION REPORT

PAST 3 - DESCRIPTION OF HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS AND - INCIDENTS

XI. HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS AHD INCIDENTS (CONTINUED)

01 X J. DAMAGE TO FLORA

.4 NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION02 OBSERVED (DATE: POTENTIAL ALLEGED

<£•• Surface Water Contamination

01 X K. DAMAGE TO FAUNA 02 ___ OBSERVED (DATE: May, Auq. 84 X POTENTIAL ___ ALLEGED

04 NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION (Include name(s) of species)

May and August of 1984, IDNR found a significant deterigration of the chemical and biological quality of Calmus Creek due to effluent froa Lehigh and adjacent NWSPCC site. Variety of fish and benthic populations have been reduced.

01 _X_L. CONTAMINATION OF FOOD CHAIN 02 ___ OBSERVED (DATE: May, Auq, 84 x POTENTIAL ___ ALLEGED

04 NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION

Not deterained, Calaus Creek is potentially an excellent bass spawning area, if the poor water quality could be returned to normal. e J

01 M. UNSTABLE CONTAINMENT OF HASTES 02 ___ OBSERVED (DATE: ) X POTENTIAL _____________ _ ALLEGED

(Spills/rurioff/standing liquids/leaking drums)

03 POPULATION POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: 2687_______ 04 NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION

Soae waste kiln dust piles are uncovered and unstable. Haste kiln dust has also been placed into water-filled quarries.

I 1 ____N. DAMAGE TO OFFSITE PROPERTY 02 __OBSERVED (DATE: ) __ POTENTIAL ___ ALLEGED

04 NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION

none known

^ ^ O. CONTAMINATION OF SEWERS, 02 OBSERVED (DATE: ) x POTENTIAL ALLEGED

--- STORM DRAINS, WWTPs --- ----------- --- ——

04 NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION

01 ___P. ILLEGAL/UNAUTHORIZED DUMPING 02 ___ OBSERVED (DATE: ) ___ POTENTIAL ___ ALLEGED

04 NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION

none known

OS DESCRIPTION OF ANY OTHER KNOWN, POTENTIAL, OR ALLEGED HAZARDS

none known

III. TOTAL POPULATION POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: 30,831

IV. COMMENTS

A similar company (NWSPCC) is located adjacent facility is also contributing to the threat of Lehigh.

to the Lehigh site and produces the same contamination of ground water and surface

tvpe of wastes. This water in the vicinity of

V. SOURCES OF INFORMATION (Cite specific references, e.g., state files, sample analysis , reports)

E & E/FIT site investigation, April 1987.i ’

EPA FORM 2070-13 (7-81)

POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS HASTE SITE I. IDENTIFICATION

EPA SITE INSPECTION REPORT

PART 4 - PERMIT AND DESCRIPTIVE INFORMATION

01 STATE IA

02 SITE NUMBER D005288634

XI. PERMIT INFORMATION

01 TYPE OF PERMIT ISSUED k (Check all that apply)

"__a. HPDES unknown

02 PERMIT NUMBER 03 DATE ISSUED 04 EXPIRATION DATE 05 COMMENTS

___B. UIC

C. AIN

___D. RCRA

___E. RCRA INTERIM STATUS

F. SPCC PLAN

___G. STATE (Specify)

___H. LOCAL (Specify)

___I. OTHER (Specify)

___J. NONE

III. SITE DESCRIPTION

01 STORAGE/DISPOSAL

(Check all that apply)

___A. SURFACE IMPOUNDMENT

a B. PILES

___C. DRUMS, ABOVE GROUND

D. TANK, ABOVE GROUND

E. TANK, BELOW GROUND

___F. LANDFILL

__G. LANDFARM

__H. OPEN DUMP

x_I. OTHER kiln duet

(Specify)

02 AMOUNT 03 UNIT OF MEASURE

disposed In Ijuaiiy ponds

04 TREATMENT

(Check all that apply)

■__ A. INCINERATION

___B. UNDERGROUND INJECTION

X C. CHEMICAL/PHYSICAL

___D. BIOLOGICAL

___E. HASTE OIL PROCESSING

___F. SOLVENT RECOVERY

___G. OTHER RECYCLING/AECOVERY

___H. OTHER

(Specify|

05 Other

X A. BUILDINGS ON SITE

06 AREA OF SITE

___ 150 ___ (Acres)

07 COMMENTS

quantityorechemical and an

IV. CONTAINMENT

01 CONTAINMENT OF WASTES (Check one).

___A. ADEQUATE, SECURE X B.MODERATE ___C.INADEQUATE, POOR ___D. INSECURE, UNSOUND, DANGEROUS

02 DESCRIPTION OF DRUMS, DIKING, LINERS, BARRIERS, ETC.

Piles stored on original soil and not contained. Waste kiln dust disposed of in open quarries, filled with water. These quarries are excavated down to the water table.

V. ACCESSIBILITY

01 WASTE EASILY ACCESSIBLE: X YES NO02 COMMENTS --- ---

Piles and ponds would be readily accessible to the Lehigh employees.

VI. SOURCES OF INFORMATION (Cite specific references, e.g. state files, sample analysis, reports)

E a E/FIT site investigation, April 1987 U.S. EPA Region VII files.

t

EPA FORM 2070-13 (7-81)

EFA

POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS HASTE SITE

SITE INSPECTION REPORT

PART 5 - HATER, DEMOGRAPHIC, AMD ENVIRONMENTAL DATA

I. IDENTIFICATION

01 STATE I.A

02 SITE NUMBER D005288634

II. DRIRKIRQ HATER SUPPLY

TYPE OP DRINKING SUPPLY (Check as applicable)

SURFACE WELL

A« B a X

C. D. X

COMMUNITY

NON-COMMUNITY

02 STATUS

ENDANGERED

A.___

D.

AFFECTED

B.__

E.

MONITORED

C. X

F. X

03 DISTANCE TO SITE

A.

B.

63

1.5

_(mi)

(mi)

XIX. GROUNDWATER

01 GROUNDWATER USE IN VICINITY (Check one)

X Aw ONLY SOURCE FOR -- DRINKING

B. DRINKING‘{Other sources available)

COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL, IRRIGATION (Ho other water sources available)

C. COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL IRRIGATION ' (Limited other sources available)

D. NOT USED, ‘ UNUSABLE

02 POPULATION SERVED BY GROUND WATER 30,831 03 DISTANCE TO NEAREST DRINKING WATER WELL 1,250 ft (mi)

04 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER

5-9 (ft)

05 DIRECTION OP GROUNDWATER FLOW

southeast

06 DEPTH TO AQUIFER OF CONCERN

5 (ft)

07 POTENTIAL YIELD OF AQUIFER unknown (gpd)

08 SOLE SOURCE AQUIFER

X YES ___NO

0,pD1w:

DESCRIPTION OP WELLS (Including usage, depth, and location relative to population and buildings) rivate wells located north to northeast ol the site developed in the surflcial aquifer. Six municipal wells

within a 3-mile radius.from site are uncased in upper and lower aquifers. Therefore, wells r-- -—both aquifers before distribution. Shallow aquifer 0-300 feet. Lower aquifer 725-1,200 feet

wells receive water from

10 RECHAHUI

X YES

___NO

AHEM ------------------------

COMMENTS

relatively flat area

11 DISCHAKI

X YES

___NO

IE AREA----- --------------------------------------

COMMENTS Discharge to Calmus Creek andthe Winnebago River.

IV. SURFACE HATER

01 SURFACE WATER USE (Check one)

X A. RESERVOIR, RECREATION --- DRINKING WATER SOURCE

B, IRRIGATION, ECONOMICALLY IMPORTANT RESOURCES

C. COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL D. NOT CURRENTLY USED

02 AFPECTED/POTENTIALLY APPECTED BODIES OP WATER

NAME:

calmus Creek_____:____________________________

AFFECTED

Winnebago River

DISTANCE TO SITE

2200 feet

4000 feet

(mi)

(mi)

(mi)

V. DEMOGRAPHIC AND PROPERTY INFORMATION

01 TOTAL POPULATION WITHIN

ONE (1) MILE OF SITE TWO (2) MILES OF SITE THREE (3)

A. 2687 B. unknown C. 30NO*. "OF PERSONS-- HO. OF PERSONS • --HO. C

MILES OF SITE

831>r PERSONS

02 DISTANCE TO NEAREST POPULATION

on-site employees (mi)

03"NUMBER OF BUILUIHU3 WITHIN TWO (21 MILES’ OF SITE------- 04' DISTANCE TU NEAREST Uff-Sl'XE BUILDING-------------------

•• UKUMtl ai««

05 POPULATION WITHIN VICINITY OP SITE (Provide narrative description of nature of population within vicinity of site,e.g., rural, village, densely populated urban area)

The.site is located on the north side of.Mason City, Cerro Gordo County, Iowa. Mason City has a population 30,144 peoplg. Residents north of the site consist of 315 people. Scattered homes around site, outside of Mason City city limits, totals approximately 372 people. These people are on private wells.

of

EPA FORM 2070-13 (7-81)

EPA

POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS HASTE SITE

SITE INSPECTION REPORT

PAST 5 - NATES, DEMOGRAPHIC, AND ENVIRONMENTAL DATA

I. IDENTIFICATION

01 STATE 02 SITE NUMBERIA D005288634

II. ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION

PERMEABILITY OF UNSATURATED ZONE (Check one)

A. 10"e - 10-® cm/sec B. 10 ^ - 10 6 cm/sac -4 -3x C. 10 - 10 cm/sec D. GREATER THAN 10~3 cm/BOC

02 PERMEABILITY OF BEDROCK (Check one)

A. IMPERMEABLE (Less than 10-6 cn/Bec)

_B. RELATIVELY IMPERMEABLE (10-® - 10"6 cn/sec)

X C. RELATIVELY PERMEABLE (10 3 - 10 ® cn/sec)

___D, VERY PERMEABLE(Greater than 10 3 cm/sec)

03 DEPTH TO BEDROCK

.5 to 34 (ft)

04 DEPTH OF CONTAMINATED SOIL ZONE

unknown_____ (ft)

05 SOIL pH

fresh waste kiln duut '" pH s 13.0

06 NET PRECIPITATION 07 ONE YEAR 24 HOUR RAINFALL 08 SLOPESITE SLOPE DIRECTION OF SITE SLOPE TERRAIN AVERAGE SLOPE

-4.0 (in) 2. 5 (in) 8 % SE .45 %

09 FLOOD POTENTIAL

SITE IS IN unknown YEAR FLOOD PLAN

10NA SITE IS ON BARRIER ISLAND, COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA, RIVERINE FLOODWAY

11 DISTANCE TO WETLANDS (5 acre aininua)

ESTUARINE OTHER

A. N/A (ai) B. none (ai)

12 DISTANCE TO CRITICAL HABITAT (of endangered species)

_________ ______ (ai)

ENDANGERED SPECIES: none known _____

13 LAND USE IN VICINITY

DISTANCE TO:

COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIALRESIDENTIAL AREAS; NATIONAL/STATE PARKS,

FORESTS, OR WILDLIFE RESERVESAGRICULTURAL LANDS

PRIME AG LAND AG LAND

A. on-site (al) B. ( mi) C. NA (mi) (mi)

4 DESCRIPTION OF SITE IN RELATION TO SURROUNDING TOPOGRAPHY

kJfhe site is located in ire relatively stee Southeast into anspproxiaately 4000 ___ ________ ______ ____from another facility (NWSFCC) located south.

a relatively level urban area. The plant is surrounded by quarry ponds. North of the plantep cement kiln dust pi4.es. Drainage is from Blue Waters Pond through, a culvert, which flows IDOT drainage ti4e, which flows into Calaus Creek which in turn flows into Winnebago River, feet from the site. Calaus Creak flows northwest to southeast, and divides the Lehigh site

VII. SOURCES OF INFORMATION (cite specific references, e.g

E & E/FIT site investigation, April 1987.U.S. EPA Region VII files.

EPA FORM 2070-13 (7-81)

state files, sample analysis, reports)

I. IDENTIFICATION

01 STATE IA

02 SITE NUMBER D0052B8634

BPA

POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS MASTS SITE

SITE INSPECTION REPORT

PART 6 - SAMPLE AMO FIELD INFORMATION

II. SAMPLES TAKEN

SAMPLE TYPE01 NUMBER OF

SAMPLES TAKEN02 SAMPLES SENT TO 03 ESTIMATED DATE

RESULTS AVAILABLE

GROUNDWATER 8 U.S. EPA Laboratory July 30, 1987

SURFACE WATER 10 - U.S. EPA Laboratory July 30, 1987

WASTE 3 July 30, 1987

AIR 0

RUNOFF o

SPILL 0

SOIL 8 U.S. EPA Laboratory July 30, 1987

VEGETATION 0

OTHER 0

III. FIELD MEASUREMENTS TAKEN

01 TYPE

)H, con temperature£H^_conductivity,

02 COMMENTS

pHi conductivity, and temperature was taken on all water samples

IT. PHOTOGRAPHS AND MAPS

01 TYPE X GROUND AERIAL 02 IN CUSTODY OF Ecology t Environment, Inc.

(Name of organization or individual)

03 MAPSX YES

NO

04 LOCATION OF MAPS

Ecology and Environment, Inc,, and EPA Region VII

T. OTHER FIELD DATA COLLECTED (Provide narrative description)

In addition to the E a E/FIT sampling, IpNR has conducted a comprehensive study on surface water contamination. Calmua Creek is a.perennial stream, which has been reported as deteriorating. Lehigh has also conducted sampling of the site. ’

TI. SOURCES OF INFORMATION (Cite specific references, e.g., state files, sample analysis, reports)

E S E/FIT site investig U.S. EPA Region VII fil

ation, es.

April 1987.

IIEPA FORM 2070-13 (7-81)

I. IDENTIFICATION

01 STATE IA

02 SITE NUMBER D00S288634

KPA

POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITE

SITE INSPECTION REPORT

PAST 7 - OWNER INFORMATION

II. CURRENT ONNER(S) PARENT COMPANY (If applicable)

NAMEKehigh Portland Cement Company

02 D+B NUMBER 08 NAMEN/A

09 D+B NUMBER

03 STREET ADDRESS (P.O. BOX, RFD *, ETC.) RR |1, Box 200 700 25th Street

04 SIC CODE 10 STREET ADDRESS (P.O. BOX, RFD t, ETC.) 11 SIC CODE

05 CITYMason city

06 STATE IA

07 ZIP CODE50401

12 CITY 13 STATE 14 ZIP CODE

01 NAMEH/A

02 D+B NUMBER 08 NAMEN/A

09 D+B NUMBER

03 STREET ADDRESS (P.O. BOX, RFD 6, BTC.) 04 SIC CODE 10 STREET ADDRESS (P.O. BOX, RFD *, ETC.) 11 SIC CODE

05 CITY 06 STATE 07 ZIP CODE 12 CITY 13 STATE 14 ZIP CODE

01 NAME 02 DhhB NUMBER 08 NAME 09 D-l-B NUMBER

03 STREET ADDRESS (P.O. BOX, RFD I, ETC.) 04 SIC CODE 10 STREET ADDRESS (P.O. BOX, RFD #, ETC.) 11 SIC CODE

OS CITY 06 STATE 07 ZIP CODE 12 CITY 13 STATE 14 ZIP CODE

III. PREVIOUS ONHEB(S) (List moot recent first) IV. REALTT OWNER(S) (if applicable; list Dost recent first)

01 NAME H/A

02 D+B NUMBER 01 NAME N/A

02 D+B NUMBER

03 STREET ADDRESS (P.O. Box, RFD «, etc:. > 04 SIC CODE 03 STREET ADDRESS (P.O. Box, RFD (i, etc ) 04 SIC CODE

05 CITY 06 STATE 07 ZIP CODE 05 CITY 06 STATE 07 ZIP CODE

01 NAMEft_____ :__________________________ ____

02 D+B NUMBER 01 NAME 02 D+B NUMBER

■5 STREET ADDRESS (P.O. Box, RFD 0, etc.) 04 SIC CODE 03 STREET ADDRESS (P.O. Box, RFD 0> etc.) 04 SIC CODE

05 CITY 06 STATE 07 ZIP CODE 05 CITY 06 STATE 07 ZIP CODE

01 NAME 02 D+B NUMBER 01 NAME 02 D+B NUMBER

03 STREET ADDRESS (P.O. Box, RFD 6, etc.) 04 SIC CODE 03 STREET ADDRESS (P.O. Box, RFD 8, etc.) 04 SIC CODE

05 CITY 06 STATE 07 ZIP CODE 05 CITY 06 STATE 07 ZIP CODE

V. SOURCES OF INFORMATION (Cite specific references, e.g., state files, sample analysis, reports)

EPA FORM 2070-13 (7-61)

SPA

POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS HASTE SITE

SITE INSPECTION BEPORT

PART A - OPERATOR INFORMATION

I. IDENTIFICATION

01 STATE IA

02 SITE NUMBER 0005288634

II. CURRBRT OPERATOR (Provide if different from owner) OPERATOR'S PARENT COMPANY (If applicable)

Bl NAME■«M as nit# ovn«r

02 D+B NUMBER 10 NAMEN/A

11 D+B NUMBER

03 STREET ADDRESS (P.O. BOX, RFD 1, ETC.) 04 SIC CODE 12 STREET ADDRESS (P.O. BOX, RFD ft, ETC.) 13 SIC CODE

05 CITY 06 STATE 07 ZIP CODE 14 CITY 15 STATE 16 ZIP CODE

08 YEARS OF OPERATION 09 NAME OF OWNER

III. PREVIOUS OPERAXOR(S) (List most recent first; pro­vide only if different from owner)

PREVIOUS OPERATORS' PARENT COMPANIES (If applicable)

01 NAME I 02 D+B NUMBERN/A

10 NAMEN/A

11 D+B NUMBER

03 STREET ADDRESS (P.O. Bos, RFD 1, etc.) 04 SIC CODE 12 STREET ADDRESS (P.O. Box, RFD ft, etc.) 13 SIC CODE

05 CITY 06 STATE 07 ZIP CODE 14 CITY 15 STATE 16 ZIP CODE

08 YEARS OF OPERATION 09 NAME OF OWNER DURING THIS PERIOD

01 NAME 02 D+B NUMBER 10 NAME 11 D+B NUMBER

03 STREET ADDRESS (P.O. Bos, RFD ft, etc.) 04 SIC CODE 12 STREET ADDRESS (P.O. Box, RFD ft, etc.) 13 SIC CODE

05 CITY 06 STATE 07 ZIP CODE 14 CITY 15 STATE 16 ZIP CODE

08 YEARS OF OPERATION 09 NAME OF OWNER DURING THIS PERIOD>

A! NAME 02 D+B NUMBER 10 NAME 11 D+B NUMBER

03 STREET ADDRESS (P.O. BOS, RFD I, etc.) 04 SIC CODE 12 STREET ADDRESS (P.O. Box, RFD 1, etc.) 13 SIC CODE

05 CITY 06 STATE 07 ZIP CODE 14 CITY 15 STATE 16 ZIP CODE

08 YEARS OF OPERATION 09 NAME OF OWNER DURING THIS PERIOD

IT. SOURCES OF IRFORMATIOH (Cite specific refarancas, e.g., state tiles, seieple analysis, reports)

U.S. EPA Region VII Files

EPA FORM 2070-13 (7-81)

f POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITE

DA SIR INSPECTION REPORT

FART 9 - GENERATOR/TRANSPORTER INFORMATION

I. IDENTIFICATION

01 STATE IA

02 SITE NUMBER D005288634

XI. ON-SITE GENERATOR

NAME

FA02 D+B NUMBER

03 STREET ADDRESS (F.O. BOX, RFD #, ETC.) 04 SIC CODE

OS CITY 06 STATE 07 ZIP CODE

III. OFF-SIR GENERATOR(S)

01 NAME

N/A

02 D+B NUMBER 01 NAME 02 D+B NUMBER

03 STREET ADDRESS (P.O. Box, RFD t, etc.) 04 SIC CODE 03 STREET ADDRESS (P.O. Box, RFD 0, etc.) 04 SIC CODE

05 CITY 06 STATE 07 ZIP CODE 05 CITY 06 STATE 07 ZIP CODE

01 NAME 02 D+B NUMBER 01 NAME 02 D+B NUMBER

03 STREET ADDRESS (P.O. Box, RFD (t, etc.) 04 SIC CODE 03 STREET ADDRESS (P.O. Box, RFD t, etc.) 04 SIC CODE

05 CITY 06 STATE 07 ZIP CODE 05 CITY 06 STATE 07 ZIP CODE

XT. TRANSPORTER(S)

01 NAME

J»/A

02 D+B NUMBER 01 NAME 02 D+B NUMBER

WS STREET ADDRESS (P.O. Box, RFD 1, etc.) 04 SIC CODE 03 STREET ADDRESS (P.O. Box, RFD t, etc.) 04 SIC CODE

05 CITY 06 STATE 07 ZIP CODE 05 CITY 06 STATE 07 ZIP CODE

01 NAME 02 D+B NUMBER 01 NAME 02 D+B NUMBER

03 STREET ADDRESS (P.O. Box, RFD #, etc.) 04 SIC CODE 03 STREET ADDRESS (P.O. Box, RFD It, etc.) 04 SIC CODE

05 CITY 06 STATE 07 ZIP CODE 05 CITY 06 STATE 07 ZIP CODE

V. SOURCES OF INFORMATION (Cite specific references, e.g., state files, sample analysis, reports)

>

ERA FORM 2070-13 (7-61)

EPA PORN 2070-13 (7-81)

EPA

POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITE

SITE INSPECTION REPORT

PART 10 - PAST RESPOHSE ACTIVITIES

I. IDEHTIFICATIOH

01 STATE IA

02 SITE HUMBER D005288634

II. PAST RESPOHSE ACTIVITIES (Continued)

M R. BARRIER WALLS CONSTRUCTED 02 DATE 03 AGENCY■ DESCRIPTION

01 S. CAPPINO/COVERINO 02 DATE 03 AGENCY

04 DESCRIPTION

01 T. BULK TANKAGE REPAIRED 02 DATE 03 AGENCY

04 DESCRIPTION

01 U. GROUT CURTAIN CONSTRUCTED 02 DATE 03 AGENCY

04 DESCRIPTION

01 V. BOTTOM SEALED 02 DATE 03 AGENCY

04 DESCRIPTION

01 W. GAS CONTROL 02 DATE 03 AGENCY

04 DESCRIPTION

01 X. FIRE CONTROL 02 DATE 03 AGENCY

04 DESCRIPTION

01 X. LEACHATE TREATMENT 02 DATE 03 AGENCY

04 DESCRIPTION

01 ___Z. AREA EVACUATED 02 DATE 03 AGENCY

04 DESCRIPTION

|(

Gi ___1. ACCESS TO SITE RESTRICTED 02 DATE 03 AGENCY

04 DESCRIPTION

01 ___2. POPULATION RELOCATED 02 DATE 03 AGENCY

04 DESCRIPTION

01 3. OTHER REMEDIAL ACTIVITIES 02 DATE 03 AGENCY

04 DESCRIPTION

April 1985, a private consulting firm, contracted by Lehigh Portland or the elimination of Blue Waters Pond. Several remedial activities

Cement Company, conducted a feasibility study were initiated.

V. SOURCES OF INFORMATION (Cite specific references, e.g., state files, sample analysis, reports)

U.S. EPA Region VII files.

EPA PORK 2070-13 (7-B1)

POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITE

EPA SITE INSPECTION REPORT

PART 11 - ENFORCEMENT INFORMATION

I. IDENTIFICATION

01 STATE IA

02 SITE NUMBER D005288634

II. ENFORCEMENT INFORMATION

FAST REGULATORY/ENFORCEMENT ACTION X YES NO

12 DESCRIPTION OF FEDERAL, STATE, LOCAL REGULATORY/ENFORCEMENT ACTION

This facility was operated as a cement processing plant since 1911. This site is a State of Iowa lead site. In August 1984, the state conducted a comprehensive study of Calmus Creek and found that surface water contamination was related to Lehigh's Blue Waters Pond. An Administrative Order was made for Lehigh to stop the Blue Waters Pond problem. Lehigh contracted a private consultant to help eliminate the problem of surface water contamination.

In April 1987, the E t E/FIT conducted a site investigation of the facility to identify possible additional contaminant locations, further define the extent of ground Water contamination, and to verify the results made in the past.

Ill. SOURCES OF INFORMATION (Cite specific references, e.g., state files, sample analysis, reports)

U.S. EPA Region VII files.

EPA FORM 2070-13 (7-81)

Appendix C

Site Contacts and Property Owners

Site Contacts and Property Owners Lehigh Portland Cement Company Site

Mason City, Iowa April 28 through 30, 1987

Site Contact/Property Owner Samples Collected .

Lehigh Portland Cement Company RR #1 - Box 200 Mason City, IA 50401 Ken Blum, Plant Manager Gail Meyer, Plant Engineer

Lime Creek Nature Center 3501 Lime Creek Road Mason City, IA 50401 Fred Heinz, Superintendent

George Villis RR #4 Winnebago Ave.Mason City, IA 50401

Marvin Piippo RR #4 - Box 439 Mason City, IA 50401

IK940001, IK940002, IK940005, IK940005D, IK940006, IK940007, IK940008, IK940009, IK940010, IK940015, IK940016, IK940019, IK940019D, IK940020, IK940021, IK940022, IK940023, IK940027, IK940028, IK940029, IK940030, IK940031F

IK940004, IK940018, IK940032

IK940034

IK940033

Iowa Department of Transportation IK940003, IK940017 Ames, IA 50010Kermit Dirks, Design Soils Geologist

Iowa Department of Natural Resources 900 East Grand Vallace State Building Des Moines, IA 50319 Calvin Volter, Geologist

Appendix D

Data Transmittal, Field Sheets, and Chain-of-Custody Records

D-l

-■V

CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORDENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION VII

ACTIVITY LEADER(Print) ■ ... , NAME OF SURVEY OR ACTIVITY^■/? M Kpt^ f+UfjT\ lefthhflryitmrf frms/if Sb

CONTENTS OF SHIPMENT /

SAMPLE

NUMBER

TYPE OF CONTAINERS SAMPLEO MEDIA RECEIVING LABORATORYREMARKS/OTHER INFORMATION (condition ot samples upon receipL

otner simple numoers. etc.)COBhJli^eA BOTTCtj* BOTTLE BOTTLE (2 VIALS EA)

S*5* 5

M

cifVI

ts9

Other

NUMBERS OF CONTAINERS PER SAMPLE NUMBER

TMOOOl 1 vf

-f)0? i XAwe CSs ^u\-F/rfiLn

~ pni 1 V v r\tf//»/&-oo4 1 X y r - ^

- no* 1 X

-s'nzr-, i X0/1/■ . /> i

X

■ S’ '

ii

X

• • i y i X

- fin & \ Y

......L_________________________ _

~A/n ' i X ti-[ild C r 0 y/7ri .A**T i --

" 1 ./o i .—i—

y rr A rr >■ //» >

- /“)//

' //* pX

T ' ^ /■ Ti.7

- m "*YY‘ ‘

<

f 'V

__ •__ i -'1<................ ......~ m? rX X

-o/O •:s <-nrtn ■2, X

: r n

■ <)~>n JX

I

- 071 Xj

■ a r '■ .7 X . iS.

X—

DESCRIPTION OF SHIPMENT MODE OF SHIPMENT

. PIECE(S) CONSISTING OF. , BOX(ES)a

. ICE CHEST(S); OTHER .

COMMERCIAL CARRIER:. COURIER

SAMPLER CONVEYED (SHIPPING DOCUMENT NUMBERl

PERSONNEL CUSTODY RECORDRELINQUISHED BY (SAMPLER)

Af 'S'-

RELINQUISHED BY DAfE TIME

datM TIME

1^20~| SEALED

RECEIVED BY

EALED UNSEALED |~ ^ ’

REASON FOR CHANGE OF CUSTODY

n SEALED UNSEALED f*~

RECEIVED BY

~~| SEALED

REASON FOR CHANGE OF CUSTODY

UNSEALED

RELINQUISHED BY DATE TIME

^2sealed_ UNSEALEO|~

RECEIVED BY

~| SEALED

REASON FOR CHANGE OF CUSTODY

UNSEALED f~

7-EPA-9262(Revised 5/85)

CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORDENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION VII

ACTIVITY LEADER(PriptL / NAME OF SURVEY OR ACTIVITY 5h£IT

30ECONTENTS OF SHIPMENT

SAMPLENUMBER

TYPE OF CONTAWERS r / / ^ SAMPLED MEDIA RECEIVING LABORATORYREMARKS/OTHER INFORMATION (condition at samples upon receipl.

ainei sample numnen. etc. 1

daiflUefF bottle bottle ____ VOA SETBOTTLE 12 VIALS EA) £

m» 3M s

ediment

S•o

otncr

NUMBERS OF CONTAINERS PER SAMPLE NUMBER

i ppiO* FTpKK?l'sTfl

A ftral. cJ Ciu -rj Msf-y

i /?(K jUjfo/r

- n A ? yX <N,/r rtM (\ fU*.

- % i IVJ Qv ||(*/y

- -F ? —7 / (i t . U'v "iri£ "T" ^ C\K. fj{ji- '3 / \. r- - 4 -

yj/______________

DESCRIPTION OF SHIPMENT MODE OF SHIPMENT

. PIECE(S) CONSISTING OF. . BOX(ES)

ICE CHEST(S); OTHER,

__ ,__ COMMERCIAL CARRIER:_____ COURIER—^..SAMPLER CONVEYED (SHIPPING DOCUMENT NUMBER)

PERSONNEL CUSTODY RECORDRELINQUISHED BY (SAMPLER)

”| SEALED UNSEALED Po:

DATE TIME RECEI VED BY I REASON FOR CHANGE OF Cl7 i^3C fif %<MUM (yAf,xJby<LULs

'~~| SEALED UNSEALED |~ */

REASON FOR CHANGE OF CUSTODY

RELINQUISHED BY DATE TIME

~1 SEALED UNSEALED r~

RECEIVED BY

~1 SEALED

REASON FOR CHANGE OF CUSTODY

UNSEALED T

RELINQUISHED BY

*~1 SEALED

DATE TIME RECEIVED BY REASON FOR CHANGE OF CUSTODY

UNSEALED|~ ~| SEALED UNSEALEDr

7-EPA-9262(Revised 5/85)

C pLO

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYREGION 7 /• '

25 FUNSTON ROAD KANSAS CITY. KANSAS 66115

DATE: 4/19/88

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: Data Transmittal for Activity Number: IK940. . .-Site Description: Lehigh Portland Cement Co.

FROM: Robert D. Kleopfer, Ph.D.^fltP^Chief, Laboratory Branch, ENSV

TO: Charles P. Hensley Chief. Emergency Planning and Response Branch. ENSV

Attached is the data transmittal for the above referenced site.

This is a Modified Data Transmittal; these data are modified and differ

from data previously transmitted. If you have any questions or comments,

please contact D. Simmons at 236-3881.

Attachment

cc: Data FileE+e

SPFh

MODIFIED DATA: Data were modified for the following reason(s):

Sample #030. Aluminum changpd from 1300 II tn 1300; trancrript.inn prrar.

\E a E K.CK»

u

EPA Region VII

Data Qualification Codes

- The material was analyzed for, but was not detected. The associated numerical value is the sample quantitation limit.

M - Compound was qualitatively identified; however, quantitative value is less than contract required quantitation limits (CLP data); or value is less than limit of quantitation (EPA data) and is, therefore, an estimated value.

J - The associated numerical value is an estimated quantity.

I - The data are invalid (compound may or may not be present). Resampling and/or reanalysis is necessary for verification.

0 - Sample lost or not analyzed.#

L - Value known to be higher than value reported.

K - Presumptive evidence of presence of material.

NA - Sample was not analyzed for this compound.

NJ — Presumptive evidence of the presence of the material at an . estimated quantity.

UJ - The material was analyzed for, but was not detected. The sample quantitation limit is an estimated quantity.

Codes for Flash Point Data

L The sample did not ignite or "flash." This is the highest temperature at which the sample was tested. It is possible that the material may be ignitable at higher temperatures.

- The sample did ignite or "flash" at the lowest temperature tested. This is usually the ambient temperature at the time of the test. It is possible that the material may be ignitable at even lower temperatures.

K

MODIFIED DATA

ANALYSIS TYPE: DISSOLVED METALS (CONTRACTOR)

[TLE: LEHIGH PORTLAND TAB: CHCMTECH

SAMPLE PREP:ANALYST/ENTRY: E 46

COMPOUND

IK940027

ALUMINUMANTIMONYARSENICBARIUMBERYLLIUMCADMIUMCALCIUMCHROMIUMCOBALTCOPPERIRONLEADMAGNESIUMMANGANESEMERCURYNICKELPOTASSIUMSELENIUMSILVERSODIUMTHALLIUMTINVANADIUMZINCCYANIDE

£0060.010.081.0S.005.00

79000.10.050.025.0

1205.00

31000.15.0 0.7

40.0 5600.

10.0 .28000.

N/A13.028.0

N/A

MATRIX: WATER METHOD: 9001MD7 /REVIEWER: _„Y3j___

UNITS: UG/L CASE: 7294 DATE: 07/15/07

SAMPLE NUMBERS

IK94002C IK940029 11(940030

U 200 U 60.0U 10.0M 52.0 U 5.00U 5.00

130000. U 10.0U 50.0U 25.0

100U 10.0

42000.U 31.0

U 1.00U 40.0

140000.1

U 10.047000.

1I N/A

M 50.0U 20.0I N/A

u 250 1300.

u 60.0 U 60.0 U

u I 72.0

M 200 U 20 0 U

U 5.00 U 5.00 uU 5.00 U 5.00 u

4600. M 4500 . M

U 6.00 M 8.00 M

U 50.0 U 50.0 U

U 57.0 U 40.0 U

U 140 140

u 5.00 U 5.00 U790 M 5000 . U

15.0 U 15.0 U

u 1.20 U 1.40 U

U 46.0 45.0750000. 300000.

I I'

u 10.0 U 10.0 U180000. 240000.

I I

I N/A I N/A

u 80.0 78.0

u 220 260

I N/A I. N/A