Vinyl Chloride – A Brief Introduction to a Dangerous Chemical
By Team Delta
David Seidel Andrew Smith Daniel South Doug Sposito
Mary Steffen-Deaton Stacey Stephenson Kandy VanMeeteren
Robin Walker Andrew Watson Damien Watt
General Chemistry and Use
by Damien Watt
Vinyl chloride is the organic compound with the formula CH2:CHCl. It burns easily and it is not stable at high temperatures. It is a manufactured substance that does not occur naturally. It can be formed when other substances such as trichloroethane, trichloroethylene, and tetrachloroethylene are broken down. This colorless compound is an important industrial chemical chiefly used to produce the polymer polyvinyl chloride (PVC). Vinyl chloride was first produced in 1835 by Justus von Liebig and his student Henri Victor Regnault. They obtained it by treating ethylene dichloride with a solution of potassium hydroxide in ethanol (Vinyl Chloride, 2006).
Vinyl chloride, also known as chloroethene, is a halogenated aliphatic hydrocarbon with an empirical formula of C2H3Cl and a molecular weight of 62.5. It is a colorless gas with a mild sweetish odor, a melting point of -153.71 °C, a boiling point of -13.8°C, a specific gravity of 0.9121 g/mL, and a vapor pressure of 2580 torr. The odor threshold for vinyl chloride is 3,000 ppm. Vinyl chloride is slightly soluble in water and is quite flammable. The vapor pressure for vinyl chloride is 2,600 mm Hg at 25 °C, and it has a log octanol/water partition coefficient (log Kow) of 1.36 (Vinyl Chloride, 2006).
Production
Two methods that are used in the commercial production of vinyl chloride are the
hydrochlorination of acetylene and the dehydrochlorination of dichloroethylene processes.
Production from Ethylene dichloride
The production of vinyl chloride from ethylene dichloride (EDC) consists of a series of welldefined steps. Ethylene dichloride (EDC) is prepared by reacting ethylene and chlorine (About Vinyl and PVC, 2008). In the presence of iron (III) chloride as a catalyst, these compounds react exothermically:
CH2=CH2 + Cl2 → ClCH2CH2Cl
When heated to 500 °C at 15–30 atm (1.5 to 3 MPa) pressure, EDC decomposes to produce vinyl chloride and HCl:
ClCH2CH2Cl → CH2=CHCl + HCl
A refrigerant is then used to chill the outlet stream prior to a series of distillation towers (About Vinyl and PVC, 2008). The last distillation tower has pure HCl going from the top and product vinyl chloride coming out of the bottom. The recycled HCl is used to produce more EDC. The recycling process involves a copper (II) chloride-catalyzed oxychlorination of ethylene. Oxychlorination entails the combined action of oxygen and hydrogen chloride to produce chlorine in situ:
CH2=CH2 + 2 HCl + ½ O2 → ClCH2CH2Cl + H2O
Due to the economical advantages of this recycling as well as the low cost of ethylene, most vinyl chloride has been produced via this technique since the late 1950s. (David Allen, 2009)
Production from Acetylene
Acetylene, produced by the hydrolysis of calcium carbide, is treated with hydrogen chloride to give vinyl chloride:
C2H2 + HCl → CH2=CHCl
The method is not widely practiced in the west due to the cost of the acetylene and the associated environmental impact of its production. (David Allen, 2009)
References:
David Allen. (2009, April 3). Industrial Ecology. [Green Engineering]. Retrieved April 3, 2009, from
http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/greenengineering/pubs/ch14_summary.html: Allen, David, Environmental Protection
Agency
Vinyl Chloride. (2006, July). Retrieved April 3, 2009, from http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp20-c2.pdf: Center for Disease Control
___________________________________________________________________________
Vinyl Chloride Toxic Effects
by Mary Steffen-Deaton
Vinyl chloride is a sweet smelling, colorless gas at room temperature. It is used commonly in our society in the production of PVC (polyvinyl chloride). The emissions of vinyl chloride are mostly into the air. A smaller percentage of the emissions enter into the water supply and contaminate wells. Studies have shown us that vinyl chloride is a toxic chemical for humans and the environment. Vinyl chloride is not a naturally occurring chemical but seeps into the environment through several sources like from the chemical industry, plastics industry, wastes in landfills, and treated wastewater. The EPA classifies vinyl chloride as a carcinogen. It is recommended to avoid human exposure to vinyl chloride. Some of the major potential health effects of vinyl chloride exposure are cancer, liver disease, lymphoma, Acroosteolysis, Raynaud's syndrome and leukemia.
How do you get exposed to Vinyl Chloride?
A person can get exposed to vinyl chloride through inhalation, touching or ingestion. Most ingestion exposure generally occurs through drinking or cooking with water from a contaminated well. Inhalation exposure can come from several sources. Breathing vinyl chloride at a contaminated work place or breathing air from a leaking landfill or the plastics industry are some examples. Also cigarettes with tobacco contain low levels of vinyl chloride so avoid breathing second hand smoke is recommended. Touching or skin exposure can occur in industry.
Toxic Effects from Exposure to Vinyl Chloride:
What toxic effects occur depends on several factors:
- the length of exposure to the vinyl chloride
- the amount of exposure
- how the vinyl chloride entered into the body (inhaled, touched, or eaten).
Acute exposure to high levels of vinyl chloride by inhalation has effects on the Central Nervous System (CNS), such as sleepiness, dizziness, drowsiness, and headaches. Vinyl chloride is slightly irritating to the eyes and respiratory tract in humans also.
Chronic effects of exposure to vinyl chloride can result in liver damage, immune reactions, nerve damage, and liver cancer. The long term effects to exposure to high levels of vinyl chloride result in decrease in bone strength in fingers, arms, and joints as well as blood flow problems.
References:
Air toxics and indoor air quality in Australia. State of knowledge reportEnvironment Australia, 2001 ISBN 0 6425 4739 4 from: http://www.environment.gov.au/atmosphere/airquality/publications/sok/vinyl.html
EPA Hazard Summary-Vinyl Chloride: Created in April 1992; Revised in January 2000 from: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/hlthef/vinylchl.html
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 2006. Toxicological Profile for Vinyl Chloride. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service. From: http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/tfacts20.html#bookmark05
Ohio Department of Health: Health Assessment Section Vinyl Chloride From:
http://www.odh.ohio.gov/ASSETS/B5689E862EAB4FD89846F63EB9ACBE04/vinlchl.pdf
__________________________________________________________________________
Health Hazard Information
By Kandy VanMeeteren
There has been many years of studies done that have proven workers who had inhalation exposure to high levels of vinyl chloride toxin had a higher risk of cancer, such as liver, brain or lung cancer. Workers have also been diagnosed with cancers of the blood. Breathing in high levels of this highly toxic substance increases the chances a person will develop drowsiness, headaches, and giddiness conditions.
Vinyl chloride is a vascular toxin and can lead to a tumor that grows very quickly called angiosarcoma. Workers who inhaled the toxin for chronic effects (many years) possibly changed the structure of their liver. When it arrives at the liver, the liver breaks down the vinyl chloride substance. These new substances journey throughout your blood, to your kidneys and they leave through your urine. The new substances that are in your liver do not leave as quickly. These new substances do more damage than the original toxin does. The reason for the delay is that the respond with the new chemical within your body will interrupts how your body would usually react to those chemicals.
Being exposed to high levels of vinyl chloride in the air can cause a set of symptoms termed "vinyl chloride disease," known as Raynaud's phenomenon that effects the flow of blood in your hands. Raynaud's is a deterioration of the bone that causes a lack of feeling in the tips of your fingers with discomfort to cold exposure and following ulcers that will deformity in the ends of the fingers.
The inhalation of air containing this carcinogen can cause ocular irritation and respiratory weakness. The central nervous system can be effected with dizziness, fatigue, visual, memory loss, and sleep disturbances.
Figure 1 The Normal Liver and a Liver Exposed to Vinyl Chloride
Figure 1 was in medical article www.beliefnet.com
references:
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/hlthef/vinylchl.html
____________________________________________________________________
Federal Regulations of Vinyl Chloride
By Stacy Stephenson
According to the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), vinyl chloride is classified as a Group 1 carcinogen mostly affecting the liver. (http://www.inchem.org/documents/iarc/suppl7/vinylchloride.html) and there is no level of exposure at which there are no possible health effects (http://www.articlecbase.com/health-articles/vinylchloride-classified-as-carcinogen-508930.html). These findings support the federal regulation of vinyl chloride in such everyday things as food, water and air.
In 1974, Congress passed the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) which required the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to set safe levels of contaminants in water. The result was the Maximum Contaminant Level Goals (MCLG) which the EPA set at zero for vinyl chloride. Since these are non-enforceable limits they were tasks with developing the Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) which are enforceable by law. The MCL for vinyl chloride is 2ppbm and should not be exceeded at any time. The EPA set this limit because it is the lowest level that is possible to reasonably reach based on the technology and the resources that are available today. The National Primary Drinking Water Regulations is the body of legislation responsible for ensuring that the MCLs are met in all public water supplies
(http://www.epa.gov/OGWDW/contaminants/dw_contamfs/vinylchl.html).
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates the content of vinyl chloride in plastic containers that are used to house and/or transport foods. These limits vary depending on the nature of the plastic used but are monitored by the FDA for acceptable levels- Toxicological Profile for Vinyl Chloride (http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/lfacts20.html#bookmark10). Aerosol drug products containing vinyl chloride have been pulled from the market and its use is now banned in the production of aerosol (cosmetic) products (http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/roc/eleventh/profiles/s186viny.pdf).
Given that vinyl chloride is a Hazardous Air Pollutant (HAP) it also regulated by the Clean Air Act (CAA) under NESHAPS (National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants) and NSPS (New Source Performance Standards). These are standards adopted by the EPA to regulate air emissions from industries (http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/ap/nsps.html#nspsoverview).
In addition to the above mentioned regulations, vinyl chloride is also regulated under RCRA as a hazardous constituent and hazardous waste, Superfund as a hazardous substance, Clean Water Act as a priority pollutant, under the Toxic Release Inventory as a reportable chemical (http://www.scorecard.org/chemical-profiles/regulation) and under The Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-know Act of 1986. The release of more than 1 pound into the air, water or land must be reported to the EPA. It is also regulated under the Department of Transportation (DOT) as a hazardous material (http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/roc/eleventh/profiles/s186viny.pdf).
As far as the workplace is concerned, vinyl chloride is regulated by OSHA under 1910.1200- Hazard Communication Standard. They place a PEL (permissible exposure limit) on vinyl chloride which is the regulatory limits of the concentration of a substance in air and is based on an 8 hour time weighted average (TWA) work shift unless otherwise stated. Another standard if measurement is the action level which is the regulatory limit set at one half the PEL but can vary. The PEL for vinyl chloride is 1ppm TW and 0.5ppm action level. Vinyl chloride also has an Threshold Limit Value (TLV) that is set forth by the American Conference of Governmental Industrial hygienists (ACGIH) which is not a standards but an opinion of a safe worker level. It is 1ppm TWA (http://www.mathesongas.com/pdfs.msds). This happens to agree with OSHA’s level but this isn’t always the case.
____________________________________________________________________
Transportation of Vinyl Chloride
By Andrew Watson
The handling and transportation of Vinyl Chloride is important to ensure the safety of the general public and property along its route is protected. Vinyl Chloride is an extremely flammable gas and exposure to it can cause serious harm to those who encounter it unprotected. Although, Vinyl Chloride is a hazardous chemical or a hazardous waste byproduct, it can be safely transported throughout the world as long as the generator, shipper, and transporter follow rules created by national governmental agencies. In the United States, the transportation of hazardous chemicals is regulated by the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) and the United States Department of Transportation (DOT).
Classification
Before any chemical can be transported, it must first be classified to determine if it is deemed a hazardous chemical/waste or if it is non-hazardous. This can be accomplished by looking in the Code of Federal Regulation (49 CFR) book under the proper shipping name of the chemical. Vinyl Chloride is listed as hazardous chemical (Class 2.1 flammable Gas) and to ensure safe transport, special handling and shipping requirements must be followed.
Mode of Transportation
Now that Vinyl Chloride has been determined to be a Class 2.1 flammable Gas material and needs to have special handling, a safe mode of transportation needs to be determined. The only approved modes of transportation for Vinyl Chloride are:
· Truck transport
· Cargo air craft
Forbidden modes of transportation are:
· Passenger aircraft
· Rail car
Placards
Placarding is a form of hazard communication and is the backbone of emergency response. The primary mission of DOT hazard communication is to alert the public and transportation workers of the presence of hazardous materials. Also, placarding provides visual indication to responders to a hazardous material incident. The United States Department of Transportation (US DOT) has specific requirements for placarding. Transporters, shippers, and generators must have placards that must meet the size, color, and placement required by the US DOT when shipping any hazardous chemical material or waste. An example of a placard for Vinyl Chloride is below:
Shipping papers
To become a shipper of hazardous chemicals or hazardous waste, special training and certification must be attained through agencies approved by US DOT. Shipping papers (manifest or bill of lading) are typically created and completed by the generator/shipper of hazardous chemicals/wastes and they will always be responsible for the accuracy and completeness of any manifest or documents they sign. Failure to review or falsify shipping documents can result in heavy fines AND jail time to the company and generator/shipper. So, it is imperative that the shipper/generator knows what the shipping papers requirements are and understand what the consequences are if they are not followed.
References:
PHEMSA Webpage:
http://www.phmsa.dot.gov/hazmat/regs
Matheson Tri Gas Webpage:
http://www.mathesongas.com/pdfs/msds/MAT24940.pdf
___________________________________________________________________________
A Selected List of Vinyl Chloride Contaminated Sites
By David Seidel
SOURCE: http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/npl/nar1787.html
National Priorities List (NPL)
Top of Form
NEW CARLISLE LANDFILL
New Carlisle, Ohio
Clark County
Site Location: New Carlisle Landfill is an inactive landfill located at 715 North Dayton-Lakeview Road, New Carlisle, Clark County, Ohio.
Site History: New Carlisle Landfill served as a general refuse and solid waste landfill from the mid-1950s until the early 1970s. During its operation, it received industrial, commercial and residential waste. The landfill was officially closed in 1977, after several years of inactivity. It was covered with two to four feet of clay. Since 1993, Ohio EPA has been sampling a nearby public well that serves a nursery and landscape business. In 1997, Ohio EPA discovered vinyl chloride above the safe drinking water standard in this well.
Site Contamination/Contaminants: New Carlisle Landfill is an unlined landfill that encompasses between approximately 12 to 21 acres. Ground water contaminated with volatile organic compounds including trichloroethene (TCE), tetrachloroethene and vinyl chloride have been detected beneath the landfill and in a plume south of the landfill.
Potential Impacts on Surrounding Community/Environment: Vinyl chloride contaminated two public wells and two residential wells above the safe drinking water level. The vinyl chloride ground water contamination could potentially migrate and affect approximately 15 residential wells within ½ mile radius of New Carlisle Landfill.
Response Activities (to date): In 2002, Ohio EPA required the nearby nursery and landscape business to cease public use of the well and limited future use to irrigation. In 2003, the nursery and landscape business installed a new public well. In 2005, at the request of the state, EPA extended the water line from the New Carlisle public water system to two residences and the nursery and landscape business.
Need for NPL Listing: The State of Ohio referred the site to EPA because vinyl chloride was detected at levels above the safe drinking water standard in three wells, and because of the potential threat the site poses to other residents who live in the area. Other federal and state cleanup programs were evaluated, but are not viable at this time because there are insufficient state funds to address the cleanup of this site. EPA received a letter of support for placing this site on the NPL from the state.
[The description of the site (release) is based on information available at the time the site was evaluated with the HRS. The description may change as additional information is gathered on the sources and extent of contamination. See 56 FR 5600, February 11, 1991, or subsequent FR notices.]
For more information about the hazardous substances identified in this narrative summary, including general information regarding the effects of exposure to these substances on human health, please see the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) ToxFAQs. ATSDR ToxFAQs can be found on the Internet at ATSDR - ToxFAQs (http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaq.html) or by telephone at 1-888-42-ATSDR or 1-888-422-8737.
Local Navigation
This page was generated on Friday, September 18, 2009
View the graphical version of this page at: http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/npl/nar1787.htm
Jump to main content.
SOURCE: http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/npl/nar932.html
NPL Site Narrative for Operating Industries, Inc., Landfill
OPERATING INDUSTRIES, INC., LANDFILLMonterey Park, California
Federal Register Notice: June 10, 1986
Conditions at proposal (October 15, 1984): Operating Industries, Inc., operated a landfill on 190 acres in the City of Monterey Park, Los Angeles County, California. The 45-acre northern section was separated in the 1960s from the southern 145-acre section by the Pomona Freeway. EPA has evidence that the original landfill included at least a portion of both sections. From 1948 to 1983, solid and liquid wastes, some hazardous, were disposed of at the site.
Leachate generated by the landfill contains vinyl chloride, benzene-type compounds, tetrachloroethylene, heavy metals, and other contaminants, according to testing by the Los Angeles County Sanitation District (LACSD), the California Department of Health Services (CDHS), and the company. In July 1983, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) detected vinyl chloride above ambient standards in air at and around the landfill, which is adjacent to a large residential area. SCAQMD, CDHS, and the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services have taken enforcement actions against the facility.
About 23,000 people use wells within 3 miles of the site as a source of drinking water.
The company acquired Interim Status when it filed Part A of a permit application under Subtitle C of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The company submitted a draft plan for closing the landfill under RCRA, but CDHS, in conjunction with other State agencies and EPA, determined that the plan had numerous deficiencies, most notably the failure to (1) provide financial assurance requirements for closure and (2) develop an adequate plan for monitoring ground water and for collecting and disposing of leachate. The company has not submitted complete and adequate closure and postclosure documents.
Status (February 1986): EPA collected gas samples in November 1984 from 16 subsurface probes in an adjacent housing development. Some samples confirmed the presence of methane and vinyl chloride in subsurface soils. Interior home samples collected in November 1984 had low levels of methane and nondetectable levels of vinyl chloride. Elevated levels of methane and vinyl chloride were also detected in a home adjacent to the landfill in October 1985.
EPA installed six monitoring wells around the landfill in 1984-85. Quarterly samples collected since March 1985 contain organic chemicals and trace metals.
In July 1985, EPA started planning for a comprehensive remedial investigation to determine the nature and extent of the problems associated with the landfill. When the investigation is complete, various alternatives to remedy the problems will be evaluated in a feasibility study. Interim measures are planned to stabilize and control the landfill, including slope stabilization and upgrading of existing gas leachate collection systems. EPA trucked leachate to an off-site treatment facility from October 1985 to February 1986, when the State took over.
Status (June 10, 1986): This site is placed on the NPL because the potentially responsible party declined to initiate work, and CERCLA-funded remedial activities are underway. Thus, the site meets one of the requirements of EPA's policy for placing RCRA-related sites on the NPL.
For more information about the hazardous substances identified in this narrative summary, including general information regarding the effects of exposure to these substances on human health, please see the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) ToxFAQs. ATSDR ToxFAQs can be found on the Internet at http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaq.html or by telephone at 1-888-42-ATSDR or 1-888-422-8737. This page was generated on Friday, September 18, 2009
View the graphical version of this page at: http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/npl/nar932.htm
Jump to main content.
SOURCE: http://www.epa.gov/cgi-bin/epaprintonly.cgi
.cTop of Form
NPL Site Narrative for Cayuga County Ground Water Contamination
CAYUGA COUNTY GROUND WATER CONTAMINATIONCayuga County, New York
Federal Register Notice: September 5, 2002Conditions at Proposal (September 13, 2001): The Cayuga County Ground Water Contamination site consists of a plume of contaminated ground water from an unknown source(s). The site is located west of Syracuse in a rural area of Cayuga County, between the Village of Union Springs to the west and the City of Auburn to the northeast. The site is in an area consisting of residential properties intermingled with extensive farmland and patches of woodlands. The homes in the area use private wells for potable water supply and septic systems for sanitary waste water disposal. The affected area is not serviced by a public water supply.
Routine testing of the Village of Union Springs' municipal drinking water supply revealed low levels of cis-1,2, DCE, and prompted referral to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for a CERCLA/SARA response action on December 4, 2000. Through investigations conducted by the New York Departments of Health and Environmental Conservation and by the EPA, over 300 drinking water supplies have been sampled as of April 2001. As a result of these sampling events, EPA determined that 51 residential wells are contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs), primarily vinyl chloride, trichloroethylene (TCE) and cis-1,2,dichloroethylene (cis-1,2,DCE), in concentrations above the Federal maximum contaminant levels (MCLs). Twenty-four of these drinking water supply wells are contaminated above EPA's Removal Action Levels (RALs) for vinyl chloride and/or cis-1,1,DCE of two parts per billion (ppb) and 400 ppb, respectively.
As of July 2001, EPA has installed 55 treatment systems to treat contaminated water from 52 wells as part of a time critical Removal Action. Two large dairy farms in the impacted area have had air-stripper treatment systems installed; at these farms water is used for both residential drinking water and for livestock (approximately 1,500 dairy cows). A treatment system installed on a well at a child day care facility exhibited partial breakthrough of contaminants in May 2001; however, contamination was contained due to built-in redundancy in the treatment system.
The suspected extent of the plume covers an area of approximately 3,050 acres or 4.8 square miles and falls within three townships, Aurelius, Fleming and Springport. The plume extends from the Village of Union Springs to the Auburn City limits, a distance of seven miles, and has approximately 120 homes within its boundaries.
The ground water flow system consists of three hydrological units: the overburden, shallow bedrock (Onondaga, Oriskany, and Manlius Formations) and the deep bedrock (Rondout, Cobleskill and Bertie Formations). Downward hydraulic gradients exist throughout, but are particularly strong between the shallow and deep bedrock units, with water-level differences in excess of 40 feet observed during dry periods of the year.
An observed release of vinyl chloride, TCE and cis-1,2 DCE has been documented by chemical analysis of ground water samples collected from private wells during an April 2001, sampling event. Actual contamination was documented for 49 wells during an April 2001 EPA sampling event. According to information provided by NYSDEC and preliminary information gathered by EPA, the source of the ground water contamination at the site has not been determined. Due to these conditions, the State of New York requested on June 7, 2001 that EPA place the site on the NPL.
Status (September 2002): EPA is considering various alternatives for this site.
For more information about the hazardous substances identified in this narrative summary, including general information regarding the effects of exposure to these substances on human health, please see the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) ToxFAQs. ATSDR ToxFAQs can be found on the Internet at http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaq.html or by telephone at 1-888-42-ATSDR or 1-888-422-8737.
Jump to main content.
This page was generated on Saturday, September 19, 2009
View the graphical version of this page at: http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/npl/nar1650.htm
Brio/Dixie Refining NPL Site
SOURCE:
http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/contaminants/NRDAR/SiteInformation/Texas/BrioDixie.pdf
Case History: The Brio and Dixie Oil Refining Site is located near the city of Friendswood, in southern Harris County, Texas. Between 1957 and 1982, site operations included by-product recycling, copper catalyst regeneration, petrochemical recovery, and jet fuel processing. Contaminants include styrene tars, vinyl chloride, chlorinated solvent residues, metallic catalyst, and fuel oil residues. The site occupies about 58 acres, and drains to a tributary feeding Clear Creek. Large numbers of birds were assumed killed over time in the open pits located on the site. The adjacent South Bend Subdivision was bought out due to a class action suit, and demolition of the homes has been completed. The Trustees and the Responsible Parties agreed upon the creation of 6 acres of freshwater riparian wetland habitat adjacent to Mud Gully in Harris County and the preservation of 100 acres of mature mixed forest with a 19 acre pasture buffer zone. This habitat creation and acquisition compensates the public for injuries to natural resources. The total settlement value at this site is worth over $1.2 million.
Responsible Parties: Dixie Oil, Intercoastal Chemical Co., Dow Chemical Co., Merichem Co., Monsanto Co., Lowenco, Inc., Mobil Chemical Co., Petro-Tex Chemical Co., Rohm & Haas Co., and Tex-Tin Co.
Trustees:
Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD)
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ)
Texas General Land Office (TXGLO)
Created Marsh on Lavaca Bay
NOAA
DOI-FWS
Current Status: The Restoration Plan/ Environmental Assessment was completed in December 2003 and a Consent Decree was signed on January 2006. The 6 acre wetland habitat has been constructed and planted. The entire restoration site is protected in perpetuity through a Conservation Easement held by the Legacy Land Trust.
U.S. EPA Adds East Troy Site to Superfund List, Proposes Two Ohio and One Indiana Site for List
SOURCE: http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/1542250/us_epa_adds_east_troy_site_to_superfund_list_proposes/#
Posted on: Wednesday, 3 September 2008, 12:00 CDT
CHICAGO, Sept. 3 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has added the East Troy Contaminated Aquifer site in Troy, Ohio, to the Superfund National Priorities List. Three other sites in EPA Region 5 -- the Behr Dayton Thermal System VOC Plume site in Dayton, the New Carlisle Landfill in New Carlisle, Ohio, and the U.S. Smelter and Lead Refinery in East Chicago, Ind. -- were proposed for addition to the NPL. Sites on the list are eligible for additional study and resources under EPA's Superfund program.
Nationally, six new sites were added to the NPL, bringing the total to 1,258, and 11 sites were proposed for addition to the list. Under the NPL process, sites are first proposed and public comments considered before a determination is made to formally add a site to the list. The NPL is updated twice each year.
The East Troy site is an area where volatile organic compounds, including the common industrial chemicals PCE and TCE, have contaminated ground water, soil and the indoor air in basements. EPA addressed the indoor air health risk by installing vapor abatement systems in 16 homes and St. Patrick Elementary School in the summer of 2007. EPA and Ohio EPA data also shows that VOCs have contaminated ground water below the city of Troy, as well as a local drinking water well field. To address this, Ohio EPA and Troy have taken steps to contain one potential source of the contamination, and are treating contaminated ground water prior to use. Adding the site to the NPL enables EPA to study site conditions further, identify possible sources of the contamination, and develop a comprehensive strategy to address all locations and sources of the VOC contamination.
The proposed Behr Dayton site also involves TCE contamination in ground water. In 2003 and 2006, volatile organic compounds were detected in ground water beneath the Behr Dayton Thermal System auto parts manufacturing facility at 1600 Webster St. To address potential health risks associated with the pollution, EPA has installed vapor mitigation systems in 180 homes in the neighborhood south of the plant since late 2006. EPA will soon announce an October open house session to discuss the project.
The New Carlisle Landfill, at 715 N. Dayton-Lakeview Road in New Carlisle, operated from the mid-1950s until the early 1970s. It is now covered with two to four feet of clay, but was not designed with a protective liner in the manner of modern landfills. Ohio EPA data indicates that water from two public wells and two residential wells in the nearby area contain vinyl chloride above the safe drinking water level. In 2005, EPA extended the water line from the New Carlisle public water system to two homes and a plant nursery business. EPA remains concerned about potential migration of the vinyl chloride toward residential wells within one-half mile of the site.
The U.S. Smelter and Lead Refinery site, 5300 Kennedy Ave., East Chicago, Ind., was also proposed for addition to the NPL today. The company operated from 1920 to 1985. Lead, most likely dispersed from long-removed smokestacks, has been detected in residential soil north of the property. The company also discharged process water to wetlands on the property that flow toward the Grand Calumet River Corridor. In July 2008, EPA began removing lead-contaminated soil from 15 nearby homes. Adding the site to the NPL will enable EPA and the Indiana Department of Environmental Management to complete a comprehensive approach to address the contamination.
A 60-day comment period on all three newly proposed NPL sites is under way. Links to the Federal Register notice, information on submitting comments, background on the NPL process and summaries of the sites newly added or proposed are at http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/npl/current.htm.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 5
CONTACT: Mick Hans of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 5,+1-312-353-5050, hans.mick@epa.gov; Heather Lauer or Dina Pierce,+1-614-644-2160, both of Ohio EPA; Barry Sneed of IDEM, +1-317-232-8596
Web Site: http://www.epa.gov/
Berks Landfill
SOURCE: http://www.epa.gov/reg3hscd/npl/PAD000651810.htm
Current Site Information EPA Region 3 (Mid-Atlantic)
PennsylvaniaBerks CountySinking Springs
EPA ID# PAD000651810
6th Congressional District
Last Update: March 2009
Other Names
Stabatrol Berks County Landfill
Current Site Status
EPA prepared a final close-out report (FCOR) in March 2008 that documents the cleanup was fully implemented and the cleanup objectives have been met. EPA recommended removing the site from the National Priorties List (NPL) in the fall of 2008. The Berks Landfill site was removed or deleted from the National Priorties List in November 2008.
EPA will continue to oversee the operation and maintenance at the site. EPA will perform another five-year review in 2010.
Site Description
The Berks Landfill Superfund Site is located in Spring Township, Berks County, Pennsylvania. It is approximately seven miles southwest of the City of Reading. The site consists of two closed landfills: a 49-acre eastern landfill and a 19-acre western landfill.
The property historically was used as an iron ore mine. Later from the 1950s to the 1980s, the Berks Landfill operated as a municipal landfill. In 1975, the landfill was granted a permit by the state to discharge leachate from its collection system into an adjacent stream. Also, in 1975, the eastern landfill was granted a solid waste permit to accept municipal refuse and demolition refuse. In 1986 landfill operations ended and the landfills were closed with a soil cap. Later on a fence was erected around the eastern landfill, the existing cap was repaired, and a pumping station was constructed to convey the leachate to the local wastewater treatment plant.
Site Responsibility
Cleanup of this site is the responsibility of Federal and State governments and parties potentially responsible for site contamination.
NPL Listing History
Our country's most serious, uncontrolled, or abandoned hazardous waste sites can be cleaned using federal money. To be eligible for federal cleanup money, a site must be put on the National Priorities List. This site was proposed to the list on June 24, 1988 and formally added to the list October 4, 1989.
Threats and Contaminants
Sampling of on-site monitoring wells in the 1980's discovered the groundwater was contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and metals. VOCs include vinyl chloride, trichloroethene, and cis-1,2-dichloroethene and metals include aluminum, iron, and manganese. The groundwater on-site can pose a threat to human health if consumed.Contaminant descriptions and associated risk factors are available at: (ATSDR web site).
Cleanup Progress
In July 1997, EPA selected a remedy to repair the eastern landfill cap; to repair and to continue operating of the existing leachate collection system; to perform long-term sampling and monitoring of a sentinel well, residential wells, on-site wells, landfill gas, and the creek; and to implement institutional controls to prevent future consumption of on-site groundwater and to restrict development on-site.
EPA gave the parties potentially responsible for the pollution (PRPs) the opportunity to provide good faith offers to do the cleanup work. None were recieved, so EPA ordered them to perform the work. In accordance with the order, a subgroup of the PRPs developed a remedial design that outlined how the landfill cap and leachate collection system would be repaired. EPA conditionally approved this final design on September 30, 1999. Following approval of the design, EPA approved a plan for implementing the design on January 13, 2000. The PRPs selected a construction firm to build the remedy in March 2000.
Construction Activities:
The PRPs submitted a plan detailing the management of construction and EPA approved the plan in May 2000. Construction started in June 2000 and continued until November 2000 with regular oversight from EPA. During the construction the eastern landfill was cleared of vegetation, covered by soil, and seeded and on the western landfill 7,000 feet of inspection trails were laid. The leachate collection lines and manholes were cleaned, inspected, and repaired and the three leachate collection ponds were re-shaped and re-lined for an approximate volume of 1.5 million gallons. The leachate is then pumped to the local wastewater treatment plant. To monitor the site gas monitoring probes and a groundwater monitoring well were installed. A total of 300 trees were planted to improve a wetland area on-site.
After construction was completed, EPA conducted two inspections: one in October 31, 2000 and a second on November 14, 2000. On December 22, 2000 EPA documented in a Preliminary Close-Out Report (PCOR) that the remedy was constructed.
Long-term monitoring of the site will continue to evaluate the groundwater, on-site wells and gas probes, residential wells, and the sentinel well. EPA prepared a final close-out report on the clean-up activities in March 2008 that documents the cleanup objectives have been met. EPA will recommend removing the site from the Superfund list in 2008.
Five-Year Review:
EPA completed a Five-Year Review of the Berks Landfill Superfund Site in August 2005. As part of the five-year review, EPA inspected the landfills and reviewed the monitoring data. The remedy currently protects human health and the environment because on-site and residential groundwater is being monitored; the leachate is collected and then discharged to the wastewater treatment plant; the eastern landfill cap was repaired; and there is regular monitoring and maintenance. EPA also recommended that institutional controls, or legal restrictions, be implemented in order for the remedy to maintain protective in the long-term. In follow-up to the five-year review, institutional controls were fully implemented. EPA will also perform another five-year review in 2010.
Site Deletion:
EPA prepared a final close-out report (FCOR) in March 2008 that documents the cleanup was fully implemented and the cleanup objectives have been met. EPA recommended removing the site from the National Priorties List (NPL) in the fall of 2008 and received no comment. The Berks Landfill site was removed or deleted from the National Priorties List in November 2008.
__________________________________________________________________________
PVC in the Third World the Hidden Cost
By Rob Walker
In Ghana Africa a child laborer “… hoists a tangle of copper wire off the old tire he's using for fuel and douses the hissing mass in a puddle. With the flame retardant insulation burned away—a process that has released a bouquet of carcinogens and other toxics.” (http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/01/high-tech-trash/carroll-text/1 ; September 19 2009)
Others buy computers or TVs. Salvage useable parts then they rip out wiring and burn the plastic. Scenes like this are typical in the growing trade in e-waste. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-j_Zohgg4S8
Scenes like these are repeated from India to Africa and China. The burning of e-waste produces toxic that damage health and have long turn health consequences.
E-waste trade is a growing problem in many third world countries. But what does e-waste have to do with PVC? PVC makes up a large constituency of the plastics casings and wire insulation that cover copper wire. Plastic casings PVC make up to 6.3 Kg of an average computer. Over a ¼ of all the Plastic used by computer and electronics industry are PVC based plastics (everything2.com/title/e-waste , September 19 2009). In Africa and Third World countries the common practice of copper recover is to burn wire/cords to remove the protective casing. Often the casing are PVC based. Most developed countries and some companies have laws and policy that prohibit E-waste from being shipped to developing countries. Some company and shady recycles often conceal e-waste as second hand goods (useable goods) and ship them to developing nations. Once the “second hand goods” reached the developing world it is sold as scrap and is scraped out for its useable part and copper content. (http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/01/high-tech-trash/carroll-text/1 ; September 19 2009)
References:
ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/01/high-tech-trash/carroll-text/1
(everything2.com/title/e-waste
http://ewasteguide.info/e-waste-campaign-gra
http://abcnews.go.com/WN/
___________________________________________________________________________
Remediation of Vinyl Chloride Contamination
By Daniel South
Groundwater:
Groundwater contaminated by vinyl chloride can be treated in two ways: ex-situ and in-situ. Either method has its positive and negative points.
Ex-Situ Remediation
For ex-situ (meaning “out of place”), the water is pumped out of the ground and sent to a treatment plant. The water is then treated by running it through activated carbon that causes the pollutants to adsorb onto the carbon. Frequently there is an air stripper as well. An air stripper usually is a column filled with plastic or steel balls so that there is a large amount of surface area. The contaminated water trickles down the balls, exposing it to the atmosphere. Volatile organic compounds, like vinyl chloride leave the water and go into a gaseous phase where they can react with oxygen and break down or be sucked into the carbon filter. Water leaving the treatment plant should have no contaminants and the water is either pumped back into the ground, usually upgradient, or it is discharged into surface drainage under a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (better known as NPDES) permit.
In-Situ Remediation
For in-situ (meaning “in place”) remediation, the primary method of remediation is to oxidize the contaminant and chemically change it to an end result of carbon dioxide. The oxidation breaks the carbon-carbon double bond and replaces it with a carbon-oxygen double bond. The chlorine is removed to form hydrochloric acid as an intermediate compound before reacting to form other compounds.
Vinyl Chloride
Molecular Formula C2H3Cl
Source of diagram: http://z.about.com/d/chemistry/1/0/5/1/ethylene.gif
Source of diagram: http://chemistry.about.com/od/factsstructures/ig/Chemical-Structures---C/Carbon-Dioxide.htm
This is done in three ways: direct chemical oxidation, bioremediation using aerobic micro-organisms, and bioremediation using anaerobic micro-organisms.
Direct Chemical Oxidation
Direct chemical oxidation is performed by injecting a strong oxidizer such as concentrated hydrogen peroxide, ozone, or one of the other commercially available products. This method uses direct chemistry to destroy the vinyl chloride by reacting directly with it. One problem associated with this method is that the oxidizer reacts with other compounds as well as the intended contaminant. Enough oxidizer must be injected into the groundwater such that there is sufficient amount to cover the mass of contaminant in the water as well as enough to cover that lost to reactions with unintended materials such as organic roots, debris, and peat. Also, these reactions generate significant amounts of heat and pressure and can damage well casings and other buried objects. On the positive side, this treatment is quick and the vinyl chloride can be destroyed in a matter of days.
Injection of remediation agent into the subsurface using direct-push technology
http://www.regenesis.com/library/Regenesis_Corp_Brochure_0607_L.pdf
Bioremediation Using Aerobic Micro-organisms
Micro-organism using enzymes are able to carry out chemical reactions without the heat generated by direct chemical reaction. As such, there is less likelihood of damaging subsurface materials and it is a very effective method of remediation. It can be a much slower process than direct oxidation. The main goal is to create conditions that will promote the growth of colonies of the desired organisms. These organisms use the vinyl chloride as food and use the oxygen for respiration. Most environments already contain these organisms to some degree unless the environment is severely reducing or too harsh in other ways. This method injects a product that releases oxygen slowly into the groundwater. This can be a commercial product such as Oxygen Release Compound (ORC®) produced by Regenesis, or simply dilute hydrogen peroxide (5-10% concentration). Depending on the size of the area to be remediated and the nature of the subsurface environment, it may take several injections over time to create the conditions you desire. Evidence that you are creating an aerobic environment would include an increase in dissolved oxygen content in the groundwater and an increase in levels of oxidation-reduction potential (ORP) which measures the relative reducing or oxidizing ability of the groundwater. These measurements are easily made at wells using commercially available meters. Analysis of groundwater samples should show a decrease in vinyl chloride and an increase in ethene or ethane.
Bioremediation Using Anaerobic Micro-organisms
There can exist environments where it may be too difficult to create oxidizing conditions. Luckily, there are some microbes that can de-chlorinate the vinyl chloride under reducing conditions. The goal of dechlorination is to convert the vinyl chloride into ethene (also known as ethylene) by removing the chlorine. The chlorine is converted into a chloride ion and usually forms a non-hazardous compound such as sodium chloride. For chlorinated solvents it is relatively easy to remove a chlorine atom from tetrachlorethene (C2Cl4) under reducing conditions. It is a bit harder to remove a chlorine atom from trichloroethene (C2HCl3) and harder still from cis-1,2-dichloroethene (C2H2Cl2) under these conditions. With each step you need slightly stronger reducing conditions. With vinyl chloride it is hardest of all under reducing conditions, but it can be done. Again, the process is not complicated. A compound is injected into the area to be cleaned by direct-push applications. This time though, the object is to create strongly reducing conditions so compounds that put hydrogen into the groundwater such as Hydrogen Release Compound (HRC®) again by Regenesis, or some similar compound are used. For this method, the concentration of dissolved oxygen in groundwater should decrease and the ORP readings should become strongly negative. The time it takes for remediation is very site-dependent and groundwater will need to be sampled several times to monitor concentrations of vinyl chloride to see if the process is working.
Source of diagram: http://z.about.com/d/chemistry/1/0/5/1/ethylene.gif
Injection into the subsurface,
Source: www.teamzebra.com
Soil:
Vinyl chloride does not tend to adsorb onto soil. It may occur in the pres between soils and in groundwater that may have sorbed onto soil. Treating soil contaminated by vinyl chloride would include excavation or by injecting the same compounds described above with enough water to temporarily saturate the soil. Systems can be developed to recirculate water through an area that is being treated and keeping the water table elevated in the area of remediation.
This brief summary has described a few methods of remediation for sites affected by vinyl chloride. There are more methods available, but this has introduced some of the more popular methods.
Sources
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/hlthef/vinylchl.html, accessed 9/20/09.
http://z.about.com/d/chemistry/1/0/5/1/ethylene.gif%20accessed%209/17/09.
http://chemistry.about.com/od/factsstructures/ig/Chemical-Structures---C/Carbon-Dioxide.htm accessed 9/22/09.
http://www.regenesis.com/library/Regenesis_Corp_Brochure_0607_L.pdf accessed 9/20/09.
http://toxics.usgs.gov/sites/solvents/oxidation_VC.html accessed 9/18/09.
http://wvlc.uwaterloo.ca/biology447/Assignments/assignment1/vinyl_chloride/vinyl_chloride1.htm%20accessed%209/18/09.
http://www.teamzebra.com/ accessed 9/20/09.
By Team Delta
David Seidel Andrew Smith Daniel South Doug Sposito
Mary Steffen-Deaton Stacey Stephenson Kandy VanMeeteren
Robin Walker Andrew Watson Damien Watt
General Chemistry and Use
by Damien Watt
Vinyl chloride is the organic compound with the formula CH2:CHCl. It burns easily and it is not stable at high temperatures. It is a manufactured substance that does not occur naturally. It can be formed when other substances such as trichloroethane, trichloroethylene, and tetrachloroethylene are broken down. This colorless compound is an important industrial chemical chiefly used to produce the polymer polyvinyl chloride (PVC). Vinyl chloride was first produced in 1835 by Justus von Liebig and his student Henri Victor Regnault. They obtained it by treating ethylene dichloride with a solution of potassium hydroxide in ethanol (Vinyl Chloride, 2006).
Vinyl chloride, also known as chloroethene, is a halogenated aliphatic hydrocarbon with an empirical formula of C2H3Cl and a molecular weight of 62.5. It is a colorless gas with a mild sweetish odor, a melting point of -153.71 °C, a boiling point of -13.8°C, a specific gravity of 0.9121 g/mL, and a vapor pressure of 2580 torr. The odor threshold for vinyl chloride is 3,000 ppm. Vinyl chloride is slightly soluble in water and is quite flammable. The vapor pressure for vinyl chloride is 2,600 mm Hg at 25 °C, and it has a log octanol/water partition coefficient (log Kow) of 1.36 (Vinyl Chloride, 2006).
Production
Two methods that are used in the commercial production of vinyl chloride are the
hydrochlorination of acetylene and the dehydrochlorination of dichloroethylene processes.
Production from Ethylene dichloride
The production of vinyl chloride from ethylene dichloride (EDC) consists of a series of welldefined steps. Ethylene dichloride (EDC) is prepared by reacting ethylene and chlorine (About Vinyl and PVC, 2008). In the presence of iron (III) chloride as a catalyst, these compounds react exothermically:
CH2=CH2 + Cl2 → ClCH2CH2Cl
When heated to 500 °C at 15–30 atm (1.5 to 3 MPa) pressure, EDC decomposes to produce vinyl chloride and HCl:
ClCH2CH2Cl → CH2=CHCl + HCl
A refrigerant is then used to chill the outlet stream prior to a series of distillation towers (About Vinyl and PVC, 2008). The last distillation tower has pure HCl going from the top and product vinyl chloride coming out of the bottom. The recycled HCl is used to produce more EDC. The recycling process involves a copper (II) chloride-catalyzed oxychlorination of ethylene. Oxychlorination entails the combined action of oxygen and hydrogen chloride to produce chlorine in situ:
CH2=CH2 + 2 HCl + ½ O2 → ClCH2CH2Cl + H2O
Due to the economical advantages of this recycling as well as the low cost of ethylene, most vinyl chloride has been produced via this technique since the late 1950s. (David Allen, 2009)
Production from Acetylene
Acetylene, produced by the hydrolysis of calcium carbide, is treated with hydrogen chloride to give vinyl chloride:
C2H2 + HCl → CH2=CHCl
The method is not widely practiced in the west due to the cost of the acetylene and the associated environmental impact of its production. (David Allen, 2009)
References:
David Allen. (2009, April 3). Industrial Ecology. [Green Engineering]. Retrieved April 3, 2009, from
http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/greenengineering/pubs/ch14_summary.html: Allen, David, Environmental Protection
Agency
Vinyl Chloride. (2006, July). Retrieved April 3, 2009, from http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp20-c2.pdf: Center for Disease Control
___________________________________________________________________________
Vinyl Chloride Toxic Effects
by Mary Steffen-Deaton
Vinyl chloride is a sweet smelling, colorless gas at room temperature. It is used commonly in our society in the production of PVC (polyvinyl chloride). The emissions of vinyl chloride are mostly into the air. A smaller percentage of the emissions enter into the water supply and contaminate wells. Studies have shown us that vinyl chloride is a toxic chemical for humans and the environment. Vinyl chloride is not a naturally occurring chemical but seeps into the environment through several sources like from the chemical industry, plastics industry, wastes in landfills, and treated wastewater. The EPA classifies vinyl chloride as a carcinogen. It is recommended to avoid human exposure to vinyl chloride. Some of the major potential health effects of vinyl chloride exposure are cancer, liver disease, lymphoma, Acroosteolysis, Raynaud's syndrome and leukemia.
How do you get exposed to Vinyl Chloride?
A person can get exposed to vinyl chloride through inhalation, touching or ingestion. Most ingestion exposure generally occurs through drinking or cooking with water from a contaminated well. Inhalation exposure can come from several sources. Breathing vinyl chloride at a contaminated work place or breathing air from a leaking landfill or the plastics industry are some examples. Also cigarettes with tobacco contain low levels of vinyl chloride so avoid breathing second hand smoke is recommended. Touching or skin exposure can occur in industry.
Toxic Effects from Exposure to Vinyl Chloride:
What toxic effects occur depends on several factors:
- the length of exposure to the vinyl chloride
- the amount of exposure
- how the vinyl chloride entered into the body (inhaled, touched, or eaten).
Acute exposure to high levels of vinyl chloride by inhalation has effects on the Central Nervous System (CNS), such as sleepiness, dizziness, drowsiness, and headaches. Vinyl chloride is slightly irritating to the eyes and respiratory tract in humans also.
Chronic effects of exposure to vinyl chloride can result in liver damage, immune reactions, nerve damage, and liver cancer. The long term effects to exposure to high levels of vinyl chloride result in decrease in bone strength in fingers, arms, and joints as well as blood flow problems.
References:
Air toxics and indoor air quality in Australia. State of knowledge reportEnvironment Australia, 2001 ISBN 0 6425 4739 4 from: http://www.environment.gov.au/atmosphere/airquality/publications/sok/vinyl.html
EPA Hazard Summary-Vinyl Chloride: Created in April 1992; Revised in January 2000 from: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/hlthef/vinylchl.html
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 2006. Toxicological Profile for Vinyl Chloride. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service. From: http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/tfacts20.html#bookmark05
Ohio Department of Health: Health Assessment Section Vinyl Chloride From:
http://www.odh.ohio.gov/ASSETS/B5689E862EAB4FD89846F63EB9ACBE04/vinlchl.pdf
__________________________________________________________________________
Health Hazard Information
By Kandy VanMeeteren
There has been many years of studies done that have proven workers who had inhalation exposure to high levels of vinyl chloride toxin had a higher risk of cancer, such as liver, brain or lung cancer. Workers have also been diagnosed with cancers of the blood. Breathing in high levels of this highly toxic substance increases the chances a person will develop drowsiness, headaches, and giddiness conditions.
Vinyl chloride is a vascular toxin and can lead to a tumor that grows very quickly called angiosarcoma. Workers who inhaled the toxin for chronic effects (many years) possibly changed the structure of their liver. When it arrives at the liver, the liver breaks down the vinyl chloride substance. These new substances journey throughout your blood, to your kidneys and they leave through your urine. The new substances that are in your liver do not leave as quickly. These new substances do more damage than the original toxin does. The reason for the delay is that the respond with the new chemical within your body will interrupts how your body would usually react to those chemicals.
Being exposed to high levels of vinyl chloride in the air can cause a set of symptoms termed "vinyl chloride disease," known as Raynaud's phenomenon that effects the flow of blood in your hands. Raynaud's is a deterioration of the bone that causes a lack of feeling in the tips of your fingers with discomfort to cold exposure and following ulcers that will deformity in the ends of the fingers.
The inhalation of air containing this carcinogen can cause ocular irritation and respiratory weakness. The central nervous system can be effected with dizziness, fatigue, visual, memory loss, and sleep disturbances.
Figure 1 The Normal Liver and a Liver Exposed to Vinyl Chloride
Figure 1 was in medical article www.beliefnet.com
references:
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/hlthef/vinylchl.html
____________________________________________________________________
Federal Regulations of Vinyl Chloride
By Stacy Stephenson
According to the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), vinyl chloride is classified as a Group 1 carcinogen mostly affecting the liver. (http://www.inchem.org/documents/iarc/suppl7/vinylchloride.html) and there is no level of exposure at which there are no possible health effects (http://www.articlecbase.com/health-articles/vinylchloride-classified-as-carcinogen-508930.html). These findings support the federal regulation of vinyl chloride in such everyday things as food, water and air.
In 1974, Congress passed the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) which required the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to set safe levels of contaminants in water. The result was the Maximum Contaminant Level Goals (MCLG) which the EPA set at zero for vinyl chloride. Since these are non-enforceable limits they were tasks with developing the Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) which are enforceable by law. The MCL for vinyl chloride is 2ppbm and should not be exceeded at any time. The EPA set this limit because it is the lowest level that is possible to reasonably reach based on the technology and the resources that are available today. The National Primary Drinking Water Regulations is the body of legislation responsible for ensuring that the MCLs are met in all public water supplies
(http://www.epa.gov/OGWDW/contaminants/dw_contamfs/vinylchl.html).
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates the content of vinyl chloride in plastic containers that are used to house and/or transport foods. These limits vary depending on the nature of the plastic used but are monitored by the FDA for acceptable levels- Toxicological Profile for Vinyl Chloride (http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/lfacts20.html#bookmark10). Aerosol drug products containing vinyl chloride have been pulled from the market and its use is now banned in the production of aerosol (cosmetic) products (http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/roc/eleventh/profiles/s186viny.pdf).
Given that vinyl chloride is a Hazardous Air Pollutant (HAP) it also regulated by the Clean Air Act (CAA) under NESHAPS (National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants) and NSPS (New Source Performance Standards). These are standards adopted by the EPA to regulate air emissions from industries (http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/ap/nsps.html#nspsoverview).
In addition to the above mentioned regulations, vinyl chloride is also regulated under RCRA as a hazardous constituent and hazardous waste, Superfund as a hazardous substance, Clean Water Act as a priority pollutant, under the Toxic Release Inventory as a reportable chemical (http://www.scorecard.org/chemical-profiles/regulation) and under The Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-know Act of 1986. The release of more than 1 pound into the air, water or land must be reported to the EPA. It is also regulated under the Department of Transportation (DOT) as a hazardous material (http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/roc/eleventh/profiles/s186viny.pdf).
As far as the workplace is concerned, vinyl chloride is regulated by OSHA under 1910.1200- Hazard Communication Standard. They place a PEL (permissible exposure limit) on vinyl chloride which is the regulatory limits of the concentration of a substance in air and is based on an 8 hour time weighted average (TWA) work shift unless otherwise stated. Another standard if measurement is the action level which is the regulatory limit set at one half the PEL but can vary. The PEL for vinyl chloride is 1ppm TW and 0.5ppm action level. Vinyl chloride also has an Threshold Limit Value (TLV) that is set forth by the American Conference of Governmental Industrial hygienists (ACGIH) which is not a standards but an opinion of a safe worker level. It is 1ppm TWA (http://www.mathesongas.com/pdfs.msds). This happens to agree with OSHA’s level but this isn’t always the case.
____________________________________________________________________
Transportation of Vinyl Chloride
By Andrew Watson
The handling and transportation of Vinyl Chloride is important to ensure the safety of the general public and property along its route is protected. Vinyl Chloride is an extremely flammable gas and exposure to it can cause serious harm to those who encounter it unprotected. Although, Vinyl Chloride is a hazardous chemical or a hazardous waste byproduct, it can be safely transported throughout the world as long as the generator, shipper, and transporter follow rules created by national governmental agencies. In the United States, the transportation of hazardous chemicals is regulated by the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) and the United States Department of Transportation (DOT).
Classification
Before any chemical can be transported, it must first be classified to determine if it is deemed a hazardous chemical/waste or if it is non-hazardous. This can be accomplished by looking in the Code of Federal Regulation (49 CFR) book under the proper shipping name of the chemical. Vinyl Chloride is listed as hazardous chemical (Class 2.1 flammable Gas) and to ensure safe transport, special handling and shipping requirements must be followed.
Mode of Transportation
Now that Vinyl Chloride has been determined to be a Class 2.1 flammable Gas material and needs to have special handling, a safe mode of transportation needs to be determined. The only approved modes of transportation for Vinyl Chloride are:
· Truck transport
· Cargo air craft
Forbidden modes of transportation are:
· Passenger aircraft
· Rail car
Placards
Placarding is a form of hazard communication and is the backbone of emergency response. The primary mission of DOT hazard communication is to alert the public and transportation workers of the presence of hazardous materials. Also, placarding provides visual indication to responders to a hazardous material incident. The United States Department of Transportation (US DOT) has specific requirements for placarding. Transporters, shippers, and generators must have placards that must meet the size, color, and placement required by the US DOT when shipping any hazardous chemical material or waste. An example of a placard for Vinyl Chloride is below:
Shipping papers
To become a shipper of hazardous chemicals or hazardous waste, special training and certification must be attained through agencies approved by US DOT. Shipping papers (manifest or bill of lading) are typically created and completed by the generator/shipper of hazardous chemicals/wastes and they will always be responsible for the accuracy and completeness of any manifest or documents they sign. Failure to review or falsify shipping documents can result in heavy fines AND jail time to the company and generator/shipper. So, it is imperative that the shipper/generator knows what the shipping papers requirements are and understand what the consequences are if they are not followed.
References:
PHEMSA Webpage:
http://www.phmsa.dot.gov/hazmat/regs
Matheson Tri Gas Webpage:
http://www.mathesongas.com/pdfs/msds/MAT24940.pdf
___________________________________________________________________________
A Selected List of Vinyl Chloride Contaminated Sites
By David Seidel
SOURCE: http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/npl/nar1787.html
National Priorities List (NPL)
Top of Form
NEW CARLISLE LANDFILL
New Carlisle, Ohio
Clark County
Site Location: New Carlisle Landfill is an inactive landfill located at 715 North Dayton-Lakeview Road, New Carlisle, Clark County, Ohio.
Site History: New Carlisle Landfill served as a general refuse and solid waste landfill from the mid-1950s until the early 1970s. During its operation, it received industrial, commercial and residential waste. The landfill was officially closed in 1977, after several years of inactivity. It was covered with two to four feet of clay. Since 1993, Ohio EPA has been sampling a nearby public well that serves a nursery and landscape business. In 1997, Ohio EPA discovered vinyl chloride above the safe drinking water standard in this well.
Site Contamination/Contaminants: New Carlisle Landfill is an unlined landfill that encompasses between approximately 12 to 21 acres. Ground water contaminated with volatile organic compounds including trichloroethene (TCE), tetrachloroethene and vinyl chloride have been detected beneath the landfill and in a plume south of the landfill.
Potential Impacts on Surrounding Community/Environment: Vinyl chloride contaminated two public wells and two residential wells above the safe drinking water level. The vinyl chloride ground water contamination could potentially migrate and affect approximately 15 residential wells within ½ mile radius of New Carlisle Landfill.
Response Activities (to date): In 2002, Ohio EPA required the nearby nursery and landscape business to cease public use of the well and limited future use to irrigation. In 2003, the nursery and landscape business installed a new public well. In 2005, at the request of the state, EPA extended the water line from the New Carlisle public water system to two residences and the nursery and landscape business.
Need for NPL Listing: The State of Ohio referred the site to EPA because vinyl chloride was detected at levels above the safe drinking water standard in three wells, and because of the potential threat the site poses to other residents who live in the area. Other federal and state cleanup programs were evaluated, but are not viable at this time because there are insufficient state funds to address the cleanup of this site. EPA received a letter of support for placing this site on the NPL from the state.
[The description of the site (release) is based on information available at the time the site was evaluated with the HRS. The description may change as additional information is gathered on the sources and extent of contamination. See 56 FR 5600, February 11, 1991, or subsequent FR notices.]
For more information about the hazardous substances identified in this narrative summary, including general information regarding the effects of exposure to these substances on human health, please see the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) ToxFAQs. ATSDR ToxFAQs can be found on the Internet at ATSDR - ToxFAQs (http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaq.html) or by telephone at 1-888-42-ATSDR or 1-888-422-8737.
Local Navigation
This page was generated on Friday, September 18, 2009
View the graphical version of this page at: http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/npl/nar1787.htm
Jump to main content.
SOURCE: http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/npl/nar932.html
NPL Site Narrative for Operating Industries, Inc., Landfill
OPERATING INDUSTRIES, INC., LANDFILLMonterey Park, California
Federal Register Notice: June 10, 1986
Conditions at proposal (October 15, 1984): Operating Industries, Inc., operated a landfill on 190 acres in the City of Monterey Park, Los Angeles County, California. The 45-acre northern section was separated in the 1960s from the southern 145-acre section by the Pomona Freeway. EPA has evidence that the original landfill included at least a portion of both sections. From 1948 to 1983, solid and liquid wastes, some hazardous, were disposed of at the site.
Leachate generated by the landfill contains vinyl chloride, benzene-type compounds, tetrachloroethylene, heavy metals, and other contaminants, according to testing by the Los Angeles County Sanitation District (LACSD), the California Department of Health Services (CDHS), and the company. In July 1983, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) detected vinyl chloride above ambient standards in air at and around the landfill, which is adjacent to a large residential area. SCAQMD, CDHS, and the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services have taken enforcement actions against the facility.
About 23,000 people use wells within 3 miles of the site as a source of drinking water.
The company acquired Interim Status when it filed Part A of a permit application under Subtitle C of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The company submitted a draft plan for closing the landfill under RCRA, but CDHS, in conjunction with other State agencies and EPA, determined that the plan had numerous deficiencies, most notably the failure to (1) provide financial assurance requirements for closure and (2) develop an adequate plan for monitoring ground water and for collecting and disposing of leachate. The company has not submitted complete and adequate closure and postclosure documents.
Status (February 1986): EPA collected gas samples in November 1984 from 16 subsurface probes in an adjacent housing development. Some samples confirmed the presence of methane and vinyl chloride in subsurface soils. Interior home samples collected in November 1984 had low levels of methane and nondetectable levels of vinyl chloride. Elevated levels of methane and vinyl chloride were also detected in a home adjacent to the landfill in October 1985.
EPA installed six monitoring wells around the landfill in 1984-85. Quarterly samples collected since March 1985 contain organic chemicals and trace metals.
In July 1985, EPA started planning for a comprehensive remedial investigation to determine the nature and extent of the problems associated with the landfill. When the investigation is complete, various alternatives to remedy the problems will be evaluated in a feasibility study. Interim measures are planned to stabilize and control the landfill, including slope stabilization and upgrading of existing gas leachate collection systems. EPA trucked leachate to an off-site treatment facility from October 1985 to February 1986, when the State took over.
Status (June 10, 1986): This site is placed on the NPL because the potentially responsible party declined to initiate work, and CERCLA-funded remedial activities are underway. Thus, the site meets one of the requirements of EPA's policy for placing RCRA-related sites on the NPL.
For more information about the hazardous substances identified in this narrative summary, including general information regarding the effects of exposure to these substances on human health, please see the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) ToxFAQs. ATSDR ToxFAQs can be found on the Internet at http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaq.html or by telephone at 1-888-42-ATSDR or 1-888-422-8737. This page was generated on Friday, September 18, 2009
View the graphical version of this page at: http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/npl/nar932.htm
Jump to main content.
SOURCE: http://www.epa.gov/cgi-bin/epaprintonly.cgi
.cTop of Form
NPL Site Narrative for Cayuga County Ground Water Contamination
CAYUGA COUNTY GROUND WATER CONTAMINATIONCayuga County, New York
Federal Register Notice: September 5, 2002Conditions at Proposal (September 13, 2001): The Cayuga County Ground Water Contamination site consists of a plume of contaminated ground water from an unknown source(s). The site is located west of Syracuse in a rural area of Cayuga County, between the Village of Union Springs to the west and the City of Auburn to the northeast. The site is in an area consisting of residential properties intermingled with extensive farmland and patches of woodlands. The homes in the area use private wells for potable water supply and septic systems for sanitary waste water disposal. The affected area is not serviced by a public water supply.
Routine testing of the Village of Union Springs' municipal drinking water supply revealed low levels of cis-1,2, DCE, and prompted referral to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for a CERCLA/SARA response action on December 4, 2000. Through investigations conducted by the New York Departments of Health and Environmental Conservation and by the EPA, over 300 drinking water supplies have been sampled as of April 2001. As a result of these sampling events, EPA determined that 51 residential wells are contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs), primarily vinyl chloride, trichloroethylene (TCE) and cis-1,2,dichloroethylene (cis-1,2,DCE), in concentrations above the Federal maximum contaminant levels (MCLs). Twenty-four of these drinking water supply wells are contaminated above EPA's Removal Action Levels (RALs) for vinyl chloride and/or cis-1,1,DCE of two parts per billion (ppb) and 400 ppb, respectively.
As of July 2001, EPA has installed 55 treatment systems to treat contaminated water from 52 wells as part of a time critical Removal Action. Two large dairy farms in the impacted area have had air-stripper treatment systems installed; at these farms water is used for both residential drinking water and for livestock (approximately 1,500 dairy cows). A treatment system installed on a well at a child day care facility exhibited partial breakthrough of contaminants in May 2001; however, contamination was contained due to built-in redundancy in the treatment system.
The suspected extent of the plume covers an area of approximately 3,050 acres or 4.8 square miles and falls within three townships, Aurelius, Fleming and Springport. The plume extends from the Village of Union Springs to the Auburn City limits, a distance of seven miles, and has approximately 120 homes within its boundaries.
The ground water flow system consists of three hydrological units: the overburden, shallow bedrock (Onondaga, Oriskany, and Manlius Formations) and the deep bedrock (Rondout, Cobleskill and Bertie Formations). Downward hydraulic gradients exist throughout, but are particularly strong between the shallow and deep bedrock units, with water-level differences in excess of 40 feet observed during dry periods of the year.
An observed release of vinyl chloride, TCE and cis-1,2 DCE has been documented by chemical analysis of ground water samples collected from private wells during an April 2001, sampling event. Actual contamination was documented for 49 wells during an April 2001 EPA sampling event. According to information provided by NYSDEC and preliminary information gathered by EPA, the source of the ground water contamination at the site has not been determined. Due to these conditions, the State of New York requested on June 7, 2001 that EPA place the site on the NPL.
Status (September 2002): EPA is considering various alternatives for this site.
For more information about the hazardous substances identified in this narrative summary, including general information regarding the effects of exposure to these substances on human health, please see the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) ToxFAQs. ATSDR ToxFAQs can be found on the Internet at http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaq.html or by telephone at 1-888-42-ATSDR or 1-888-422-8737.
Jump to main content.
This page was generated on Saturday, September 19, 2009
View the graphical version of this page at: http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/npl/nar1650.htm
Brio/Dixie Refining NPL Site
SOURCE:
http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/contaminants/NRDAR/SiteInformation/Texas/BrioDixie.pdf
Case History: The Brio and Dixie Oil Refining Site is located near the city of Friendswood, in southern Harris County, Texas. Between 1957 and 1982, site operations included by-product recycling, copper catalyst regeneration, petrochemical recovery, and jet fuel processing. Contaminants include styrene tars, vinyl chloride, chlorinated solvent residues, metallic catalyst, and fuel oil residues. The site occupies about 58 acres, and drains to a tributary feeding Clear Creek. Large numbers of birds were assumed killed over time in the open pits located on the site. The adjacent South Bend Subdivision was bought out due to a class action suit, and demolition of the homes has been completed. The Trustees and the Responsible Parties agreed upon the creation of 6 acres of freshwater riparian wetland habitat adjacent to Mud Gully in Harris County and the preservation of 100 acres of mature mixed forest with a 19 acre pasture buffer zone. This habitat creation and acquisition compensates the public for injuries to natural resources. The total settlement value at this site is worth over $1.2 million.
Responsible Parties: Dixie Oil, Intercoastal Chemical Co., Dow Chemical Co., Merichem Co., Monsanto Co., Lowenco, Inc., Mobil Chemical Co., Petro-Tex Chemical Co., Rohm & Haas Co., and Tex-Tin Co.
Trustees:
Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD)
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ)
Texas General Land Office (TXGLO)
Created Marsh on Lavaca Bay
NOAA
DOI-FWS
Current Status: The Restoration Plan/ Environmental Assessment was completed in December 2003 and a Consent Decree was signed on January 2006. The 6 acre wetland habitat has been constructed and planted. The entire restoration site is protected in perpetuity through a Conservation Easement held by the Legacy Land Trust.
U.S. EPA Adds East Troy Site to Superfund List, Proposes Two Ohio and One Indiana Site for List
SOURCE: http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/1542250/us_epa_adds_east_troy_site_to_superfund_list_proposes/#
Posted on: Wednesday, 3 September 2008, 12:00 CDT
CHICAGO, Sept. 3 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has added the East Troy Contaminated Aquifer site in Troy, Ohio, to the Superfund National Priorities List. Three other sites in EPA Region 5 -- the Behr Dayton Thermal System VOC Plume site in Dayton, the New Carlisle Landfill in New Carlisle, Ohio, and the U.S. Smelter and Lead Refinery in East Chicago, Ind. -- were proposed for addition to the NPL. Sites on the list are eligible for additional study and resources under EPA's Superfund program.
Nationally, six new sites were added to the NPL, bringing the total to 1,258, and 11 sites were proposed for addition to the list. Under the NPL process, sites are first proposed and public comments considered before a determination is made to formally add a site to the list. The NPL is updated twice each year.
The East Troy site is an area where volatile organic compounds, including the common industrial chemicals PCE and TCE, have contaminated ground water, soil and the indoor air in basements. EPA addressed the indoor air health risk by installing vapor abatement systems in 16 homes and St. Patrick Elementary School in the summer of 2007. EPA and Ohio EPA data also shows that VOCs have contaminated ground water below the city of Troy, as well as a local drinking water well field. To address this, Ohio EPA and Troy have taken steps to contain one potential source of the contamination, and are treating contaminated ground water prior to use. Adding the site to the NPL enables EPA to study site conditions further, identify possible sources of the contamination, and develop a comprehensive strategy to address all locations and sources of the VOC contamination.
The proposed Behr Dayton site also involves TCE contamination in ground water. In 2003 and 2006, volatile organic compounds were detected in ground water beneath the Behr Dayton Thermal System auto parts manufacturing facility at 1600 Webster St. To address potential health risks associated with the pollution, EPA has installed vapor mitigation systems in 180 homes in the neighborhood south of the plant since late 2006. EPA will soon announce an October open house session to discuss the project.
The New Carlisle Landfill, at 715 N. Dayton-Lakeview Road in New Carlisle, operated from the mid-1950s until the early 1970s. It is now covered with two to four feet of clay, but was not designed with a protective liner in the manner of modern landfills. Ohio EPA data indicates that water from two public wells and two residential wells in the nearby area contain vinyl chloride above the safe drinking water level. In 2005, EPA extended the water line from the New Carlisle public water system to two homes and a plant nursery business. EPA remains concerned about potential migration of the vinyl chloride toward residential wells within one-half mile of the site.
The U.S. Smelter and Lead Refinery site, 5300 Kennedy Ave., East Chicago, Ind., was also proposed for addition to the NPL today. The company operated from 1920 to 1985. Lead, most likely dispersed from long-removed smokestacks, has been detected in residential soil north of the property. The company also discharged process water to wetlands on the property that flow toward the Grand Calumet River Corridor. In July 2008, EPA began removing lead-contaminated soil from 15 nearby homes. Adding the site to the NPL will enable EPA and the Indiana Department of Environmental Management to complete a comprehensive approach to address the contamination.
A 60-day comment period on all three newly proposed NPL sites is under way. Links to the Federal Register notice, information on submitting comments, background on the NPL process and summaries of the sites newly added or proposed are at http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/npl/current.htm.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 5
CONTACT: Mick Hans of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 5,+1-312-353-5050, hans.mick@epa.gov; Heather Lauer or Dina Pierce,+1-614-644-2160, both of Ohio EPA; Barry Sneed of IDEM, +1-317-232-8596
Web Site: http://www.epa.gov/
Berks Landfill
SOURCE: http://www.epa.gov/reg3hscd/npl/PAD000651810.htm
Current Site Information EPA Region 3 (Mid-Atlantic)
PennsylvaniaBerks CountySinking Springs
EPA ID# PAD000651810
6th Congressional District
Last Update: March 2009
Other Names
Stabatrol Berks County Landfill
Current Site Status
EPA prepared a final close-out report (FCOR) in March 2008 that documents the cleanup was fully implemented and the cleanup objectives have been met. EPA recommended removing the site from the National Priorties List (NPL) in the fall of 2008. The Berks Landfill site was removed or deleted from the National Priorties List in November 2008.
EPA will continue to oversee the operation and maintenance at the site. EPA will perform another five-year review in 2010.
Site Description
The Berks Landfill Superfund Site is located in Spring Township, Berks County, Pennsylvania. It is approximately seven miles southwest of the City of Reading. The site consists of two closed landfills: a 49-acre eastern landfill and a 19-acre western landfill.
The property historically was used as an iron ore mine. Later from the 1950s to the 1980s, the Berks Landfill operated as a municipal landfill. In 1975, the landfill was granted a permit by the state to discharge leachate from its collection system into an adjacent stream. Also, in 1975, the eastern landfill was granted a solid waste permit to accept municipal refuse and demolition refuse. In 1986 landfill operations ended and the landfills were closed with a soil cap. Later on a fence was erected around the eastern landfill, the existing cap was repaired, and a pumping station was constructed to convey the leachate to the local wastewater treatment plant.
Site Responsibility
Cleanup of this site is the responsibility of Federal and State governments and parties potentially responsible for site contamination.
NPL Listing History
Our country's most serious, uncontrolled, or abandoned hazardous waste sites can be cleaned using federal money. To be eligible for federal cleanup money, a site must be put on the National Priorities List. This site was proposed to the list on June 24, 1988 and formally added to the list October 4, 1989.
Threats and Contaminants
Sampling of on-site monitoring wells in the 1980's discovered the groundwater was contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and metals. VOCs include vinyl chloride, trichloroethene, and cis-1,2-dichloroethene and metals include aluminum, iron, and manganese. The groundwater on-site can pose a threat to human health if consumed.Contaminant descriptions and associated risk factors are available at: (ATSDR web site).
Cleanup Progress
In July 1997, EPA selected a remedy to repair the eastern landfill cap; to repair and to continue operating of the existing leachate collection system; to perform long-term sampling and monitoring of a sentinel well, residential wells, on-site wells, landfill gas, and the creek; and to implement institutional controls to prevent future consumption of on-site groundwater and to restrict development on-site.
EPA gave the parties potentially responsible for the pollution (PRPs) the opportunity to provide good faith offers to do the cleanup work. None were recieved, so EPA ordered them to perform the work. In accordance with the order, a subgroup of the PRPs developed a remedial design that outlined how the landfill cap and leachate collection system would be repaired. EPA conditionally approved this final design on September 30, 1999. Following approval of the design, EPA approved a plan for implementing the design on January 13, 2000. The PRPs selected a construction firm to build the remedy in March 2000.
Construction Activities:
The PRPs submitted a plan detailing the management of construction and EPA approved the plan in May 2000. Construction started in June 2000 and continued until November 2000 with regular oversight from EPA. During the construction the eastern landfill was cleared of vegetation, covered by soil, and seeded and on the western landfill 7,000 feet of inspection trails were laid. The leachate collection lines and manholes were cleaned, inspected, and repaired and the three leachate collection ponds were re-shaped and re-lined for an approximate volume of 1.5 million gallons. The leachate is then pumped to the local wastewater treatment plant. To monitor the site gas monitoring probes and a groundwater monitoring well were installed. A total of 300 trees were planted to improve a wetland area on-site.
After construction was completed, EPA conducted two inspections: one in October 31, 2000 and a second on November 14, 2000. On December 22, 2000 EPA documented in a Preliminary Close-Out Report (PCOR) that the remedy was constructed.
Long-term monitoring of the site will continue to evaluate the groundwater, on-site wells and gas probes, residential wells, and the sentinel well. EPA prepared a final close-out report on the clean-up activities in March 2008 that documents the cleanup objectives have been met. EPA will recommend removing the site from the Superfund list in 2008.
Five-Year Review:
EPA completed a Five-Year Review of the Berks Landfill Superfund Site in August 2005. As part of the five-year review, EPA inspected the landfills and reviewed the monitoring data. The remedy currently protects human health and the environment because on-site and residential groundwater is being monitored; the leachate is collected and then discharged to the wastewater treatment plant; the eastern landfill cap was repaired; and there is regular monitoring and maintenance. EPA also recommended that institutional controls, or legal restrictions, be implemented in order for the remedy to maintain protective in the long-term. In follow-up to the five-year review, institutional controls were fully implemented. EPA will also perform another five-year review in 2010.
Site Deletion:
EPA prepared a final close-out report (FCOR) in March 2008 that documents the cleanup was fully implemented and the cleanup objectives have been met. EPA recommended removing the site from the National Priorties List (NPL) in the fall of 2008 and received no comment. The Berks Landfill site was removed or deleted from the National Priorties List in November 2008.
__________________________________________________________________________
PVC in the Third World the Hidden Cost
By Rob Walker
In Ghana Africa a child laborer “… hoists a tangle of copper wire off the old tire he's using for fuel and douses the hissing mass in a puddle. With the flame retardant insulation burned away—a process that has released a bouquet of carcinogens and other toxics.” (http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/01/high-tech-trash/carroll-text/1 ; September 19 2009)
Others buy computers or TVs. Salvage useable parts then they rip out wiring and burn the plastic. Scenes like this are typical in the growing trade in e-waste. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-j_Zohgg4S8
Scenes like these are repeated from India to Africa and China. The burning of e-waste produces toxic that damage health and have long turn health consequences.
E-waste trade is a growing problem in many third world countries. But what does e-waste have to do with PVC? PVC makes up a large constituency of the plastics casings and wire insulation that cover copper wire. Plastic casings PVC make up to 6.3 Kg of an average computer. Over a ¼ of all the Plastic used by computer and electronics industry are PVC based plastics (everything2.com/title/e-waste , September 19 2009). In Africa and Third World countries the common practice of copper recover is to burn wire/cords to remove the protective casing. Often the casing are PVC based. Most developed countries and some companies have laws and policy that prohibit E-waste from being shipped to developing countries. Some company and shady recycles often conceal e-waste as second hand goods (useable goods) and ship them to developing nations. Once the “second hand goods” reached the developing world it is sold as scrap and is scraped out for its useable part and copper content. (http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/01/high-tech-trash/carroll-text/1 ; September 19 2009)
References:
ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/01/high-tech-trash/carroll-text/1
(everything2.com/title/e-waste
http://ewasteguide.info/e-waste-campaign-gra
http://abcnews.go.com/WN/
___________________________________________________________________________
Remediation of Vinyl Chloride Contamination
By Daniel South
Groundwater:
Groundwater contaminated by vinyl chloride can be treated in two ways: ex-situ and in-situ. Either method has its positive and negative points.
Ex-Situ Remediation
For ex-situ (meaning “out of place”), the water is pumped out of the ground and sent to a treatment plant. The water is then treated by running it through activated carbon that causes the pollutants to adsorb onto the carbon. Frequently there is an air stripper as well. An air stripper usually is a column filled with plastic or steel balls so that there is a large amount of surface area. The contaminated water trickles down the balls, exposing it to the atmosphere. Volatile organic compounds, like vinyl chloride leave the water and go into a gaseous phase where they can react with oxygen and break down or be sucked into the carbon filter. Water leaving the treatment plant should have no contaminants and the water is either pumped back into the ground, usually upgradient, or it is discharged into surface drainage under a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (better known as NPDES) permit.
In-Situ Remediation
For in-situ (meaning “in place”) remediation, the primary method of remediation is to oxidize the contaminant and chemically change it to an end result of carbon dioxide. The oxidation breaks the carbon-carbon double bond and replaces it with a carbon-oxygen double bond. The chlorine is removed to form hydrochloric acid as an intermediate compound before reacting to form other compounds.
Vinyl Chloride
Molecular Formula C2H3Cl
Source of diagram: http://z.about.com/d/chemistry/1/0/5/1/ethylene.gif
Source of diagram: http://chemistry.about.com/od/factsstructures/ig/Chemical-Structures---C/Carbon-Dioxide.htm
This is done in three ways: direct chemical oxidation, bioremediation using aerobic micro-organisms, and bioremediation using anaerobic micro-organisms.
Direct Chemical Oxidation
Direct chemical oxidation is performed by injecting a strong oxidizer such as concentrated hydrogen peroxide, ozone, or one of the other commercially available products. This method uses direct chemistry to destroy the vinyl chloride by reacting directly with it. One problem associated with this method is that the oxidizer reacts with other compounds as well as the intended contaminant. Enough oxidizer must be injected into the groundwater such that there is sufficient amount to cover the mass of contaminant in the water as well as enough to cover that lost to reactions with unintended materials such as organic roots, debris, and peat. Also, these reactions generate significant amounts of heat and pressure and can damage well casings and other buried objects. On the positive side, this treatment is quick and the vinyl chloride can be destroyed in a matter of days.
Injection of remediation agent into the subsurface using direct-push technology
http://www.regenesis.com/library/Regenesis_Corp_Brochure_0607_L.pdf
Bioremediation Using Aerobic Micro-organisms
Micro-organism using enzymes are able to carry out chemical reactions without the heat generated by direct chemical reaction. As such, there is less likelihood of damaging subsurface materials and it is a very effective method of remediation. It can be a much slower process than direct oxidation. The main goal is to create conditions that will promote the growth of colonies of the desired organisms. These organisms use the vinyl chloride as food and use the oxygen for respiration. Most environments already contain these organisms to some degree unless the environment is severely reducing or too harsh in other ways. This method injects a product that releases oxygen slowly into the groundwater. This can be a commercial product such as Oxygen Release Compound (ORC®) produced by Regenesis, or simply dilute hydrogen peroxide (5-10% concentration). Depending on the size of the area to be remediated and the nature of the subsurface environment, it may take several injections over time to create the conditions you desire. Evidence that you are creating an aerobic environment would include an increase in dissolved oxygen content in the groundwater and an increase in levels of oxidation-reduction potential (ORP) which measures the relative reducing or oxidizing ability of the groundwater. These measurements are easily made at wells using commercially available meters. Analysis of groundwater samples should show a decrease in vinyl chloride and an increase in ethene or ethane.
Bioremediation Using Anaerobic Micro-organisms
There can exist environments where it may be too difficult to create oxidizing conditions. Luckily, there are some microbes that can de-chlorinate the vinyl chloride under reducing conditions. The goal of dechlorination is to convert the vinyl chloride into ethene (also known as ethylene) by removing the chlorine. The chlorine is converted into a chloride ion and usually forms a non-hazardous compound such as sodium chloride. For chlorinated solvents it is relatively easy to remove a chlorine atom from tetrachlorethene (C2Cl4) under reducing conditions. It is a bit harder to remove a chlorine atom from trichloroethene (C2HCl3) and harder still from cis-1,2-dichloroethene (C2H2Cl2) under these conditions. With each step you need slightly stronger reducing conditions. With vinyl chloride it is hardest of all under reducing conditions, but it can be done. Again, the process is not complicated. A compound is injected into the area to be cleaned by direct-push applications. This time though, the object is to create strongly reducing conditions so compounds that put hydrogen into the groundwater such as Hydrogen Release Compound (HRC®) again by Regenesis, or some similar compound are used. For this method, the concentration of dissolved oxygen in groundwater should decrease and the ORP readings should become strongly negative. The time it takes for remediation is very site-dependent and groundwater will need to be sampled several times to monitor concentrations of vinyl chloride to see if the process is working.
Source of diagram: http://z.about.com/d/chemistry/1/0/5/1/ethylene.gif
Injection into the subsurface,
Source: www.teamzebra.com
Soil:
Vinyl chloride does not tend to adsorb onto soil. It may occur in the pres between soils and in groundwater that may have sorbed onto soil. Treating soil contaminated by vinyl chloride would include excavation or by injecting the same compounds described above with enough water to temporarily saturate the soil. Systems can be developed to recirculate water through an area that is being treated and keeping the water table elevated in the area of remediation.
This brief summary has described a few methods of remediation for sites affected by vinyl chloride. There are more methods available, but this has introduced some of the more popular methods.
Sources
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/hlthef/vinylchl.html, accessed 9/20/09.
http://z.about.com/d/chemistry/1/0/5/1/ethylene.gif%20accessed%209/17/09.
http://chemistry.about.com/od/factsstructures/ig/Chemical-Structures---C/Carbon-Dioxide.htm accessed 9/22/09.
http://www.regenesis.com/library/Regenesis_Corp_Brochure_0607_L.pdf accessed 9/20/09.
http://toxics.usgs.gov/sites/solvents/oxidation_VC.html accessed 9/18/09.
http://wvlc.uwaterloo.ca/biology447/Assignments/assignment1/vinyl_chloride/vinyl_chloride1.htm%20accessed%209/18/09.
http://www.teamzebra.com/ accessed 9/20/09.
No comments:
Post a Comment