£ _  -
          UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Pt£eGWE D
                              REGION iv          F I- A REGION !X

                          345 COURTLAND STREET        .      .    -.,.,,_
                          ATLANTA, GEORGIA 3030B        ' .'.V -VJ  I  ^5 I H I U


                           May 19, 1978
    TO ALL  INTERESTED GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES,  PUBLIC GROUPS
       AND  CONCERNED INDIVIDUALS
    The Draft Environmental  Impact  Statement  (DEIS)  for Ideal
    Basic  Industries Cement  Plant and  Limestone Quarry is enclosed
    for your review and comments.   This  document has been  prepared
    pursuant to Section 102(2)(c) of the National Environmental
    Policy Act (NEPA)  (Public Law 91-190).  Four additional volumes
    consisting of the  baseline document  and a technical appendix
    are also available.  These documents comprise EPA's detailed
    evaluation of the  proposed action  and contain the supporting
    data related to the DEIS.  Because of the amount of information
    in the baseline document and technical appendix  and recent
    Council on Environmental Quality directives to reduce paperwork
    and to make EIS's  more readable, the printing and distribution
    of this material has been limited.  These materials may be
    reviewed at the EPA Region IV Office and  at the  following
    libraries:

         Main Library, 701 Government  St., Mobile, AL
         Cottage Hill  Branch (Mobile,  AL)
         Monte L. Moorer Branch (Mobile,  AL)
         Parkway Branch (Mobile, AL)
         Saraland Branch (Mobile, AL)
         Toulminville  Branch (Mobile,  AL)
         Government Information Division (Mobile, AL)
         Fairhope Public Library (Baldwin County)
         University of South Alabama Library
         (Mobile, AL)
         Monroeville Public  Library (Monroeville, AL)
         Patrick Henry  State Junior College  Library
         (Monroeville, AL)
         Monroe County High  School Library (Monroe County)

-------
EPA has asked the Alabama Air Pollution Control Commission,
the Alabama Water Improvement Commission and the Mobile
District of the U.S.  Army Corps of Engineers for input into
the development of this document.  It is intended that this
document satisfy the  NEPA responsibility of all other Federal
agencies and conform  with the permit requirements of these
agencies and the State of Alabama.

A public hearing will be held to discuss this project on June
26, 1978  at 7:00 p.m. in the Municipal Auditorium at Mobile,
Alabama.  Persons wishing to make comments should attend and
speak at this hearing.  A verbatum transcript will be made.
For the accuracy of the record, lengthy or technically complex
statements should be  submitted in writing to:

                    John E.  Hagan III, Chief EIS Branch
                    Environmental Protection Agency
                    Region IV
                    345 Courtland Street, N.E.
                    Atlanta, GA 30308

The hearing record will remain open and additional written
comments may be submitted until July 11, 1978.  Such additional
comments will be considered  as if they had been presented
at the public hearing.

Recipients of this document  should be aware that EPA will
not reprint material  contained in the DEIS for the final EIS.
The final EIS will consist of the agency's statement of
findings, the decision on the new source HPDES permit, any
pertinent additional  information or evaluations developed
since publication of  the draft, comments on the project and
the agency responses, and the transcript of the public hearing.
You should keep this  copy of the draft EIS for reference.

Please notify any persons known to you who may be interested
in attending the public hearing.
                              John C. White
                              Regional Administrator
Enclosures

-------
                     JOINT PUBLIC NOTICE

            U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
             REGION IV, WATER ENFORCEMENT BRANCH
                      345 Courtland Street
                    Atlanta, Georgia  30308
                         404/881-2328

                      in conjunction with

              ALABAMA WATER IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION
         Perry Hill Office Park,  3815 Interstate Court
                   Montgomery, Alabama   36109
                           205/277-3630

Public Notice No. PH78AL0018                        Date: May 26, 1978

NOTICE OF PUBLIC INFORMATION HEARING ON DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
STATEMENT, NOTICE OF PROPOSED ISSUANCE OF NATIONAL POLLUTANT DIS-
CHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMIT, AND NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION FOR
STATE CERTIFICATION

The U. S. Environmental Protection Agency proposes to issue National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)  Permits to Ideal Basic
Industries, Cement Division, Ideal Plaza, 950 17th Street, P. 0.
Box 8789, Denver, Colorado 80201 for the following facilities:

    Theodore Cement Plant, Theodore Industrial Park, Mobile,
    Alabama, NPDES No. AL0028801.  This proposed facility
    will produce hydraulic cement (SIC Code 3241).  The
    facility will have two (2) proposed discharges.  Dis-
    charge 001 will consist of material stockpile run-off
    (SIC Code 3241), cooling tower blowdown (SIC Code 4930),
    vehicle and floor wash wastewaters (SIC Code 3241) and
    fuel storage area dike drainage discharging to the
    Theodore Ship Channel which is classified for fish and
    wildlife propagation.  Discharge 002 will consist of
    uncontaminated stormwater run-off entering the North
    Fork of the Deer River which is classified for fish
    and wildlife propagation.

    Gaillard Quarry, near Monroeville, Monroe County,
    Alabama, NPDES No. AL0028819.  This facility will mine
    limestone (SIC Code 1422) and will have proposed point
    source discharges associated with active mine dewatering
    (SIC Code 1422) entering the Alabama River which is classi-
    fied for fish and wildlife propagation at the points of
    discharge.

The proposed NPDES permits contain limitations on the amounts of
pollutants allowed to be discharged and were drafted in accordance
with the provisions of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act,
as amended (PL 92-500), and other lawful standards and regulations.
The pollutant limitations and other permit conditions are tentative
and open to comment from the public.

-------
Fact sheets which outlines the applicant's  proposed discharges and
EPA's proposed pollutant limitations and conditions are available
by writing the EPA (address above).   Copies of the draft permits
are appended to the draft EIS summary document and are also available
from the EPA Region IV office.  The permit  applications, supporting
data, draft environmental impact statement, comments received and
other information are available for review  and copying at 345 Court-
land Street, N. E., Atlanta, Georgia 30308, between the hours of
8:15 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday.  A copying machine
is available for public use at a charge of  20 cents per page.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has prepared a draft
environmental impact statement on the above referenced facilities.
The draft environmental impact statement will be made available to
the EPA Office of Federal Activities and to the public on May 19,
1978, by EPA, Region IV.  The Regional Administrator of EPA has
determined that a public hearing will be held to foster further
public participation on the proposed issuance of necessary permits
and approvals for the proposed project.  The public hearing is
scheduled for June 26, 1978, and will begin at 7:00 p.m. in the
Mobile City Auditorium, 401 Auditorium Drive, Mobile, Alabama.
Both oral and written comments will be accepted and a transcript of
the hearing proceeding will be made.  For the accuracy of the record,
written comments are encouraged.  The Hearing Officer reserves the
right to fix reasonable limits on the time allowed for oral state-
ments.

Another purpose of the hearing is to allow the public to comment
on EPA approval of air quality prevention of significant deteriora-
tion (PSD) aspects of the proposed construction of the cement plant
by Ideal Basic Industries.  Such approval has already been granted
and no public hearing was required.  However, the EPA regulations
under which such approval was granted are now being challenged in
the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit.  If the plaintiffs prevail in this litigation, it is
possible that PSD approval could be withdrawn and a public hearing
required before reissuance of PSD approval.  The public hearing on
June 26, 1978, is intended to satisfy any possible future require-
ment, with the recognition that such a public hearing is not
presently required.

Persons wishing to comment upon or object to the project,  the NPDES
permit issuance, air quality  prevention of significant  deteriora-
tion (PSD) approval which has already been granted, the proposed
permit limitations and  conditions, and/or the draft EIS are  invited
to respond in writing by July 11, 1978, to Enforcement  Division,
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency,  345 Courtland  Street, N. E.,
Atlanta, Georgia  30308, Attn:  Ms. Mona Ellison.  The NPDES  numbers

-------
(AL0028801 and AL0028819) should be included in the first page
of comments.  All comments received by July 11, 1978, will be
considered in the formulation of final determinations regarding
the final EIS and the NPDES permit conditions.

Information submitted by Ideal Basic Industries in connection
with its PSD application and a copy of the PSD approval, as well
as other pertinent information, may be inspected at the Mobile
County Health Department, Room 217, 248 Cox Street, Mobile,
Alabama, Monday through Friday during regular working hours.
Further information may be obtained from Mr. Eliot Cooper of the
Air Programs Branch, EPA, Region IV, 345 Courtland Street, N. E.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30308, Telephone: (404) 881-3286, or from Mr.
Danny Herrin at the Mobile County Health Department, Telephone:
(205) 690-8112.

After consideration of all written comments and of the requirements
and policies in the Act and appropriate regulations, the EPA Regional
Administrator will make determinations regarding permit issuance.
If the determinations are substantially unchanged from those an-
nounced by this notice, the EPA Regional Administrator will so
notify all persons submitting written comments.  If the determina-
tions are substantially changed, the EPA Regional Administrator will
issue a public notice indicating the revised determinations.  Requests
for adjudicatory hearings may be filed after the Regional Administrator
makes the above described determinations.  Additional information
regarding adjudicatory hearing is available in 40 CFR 125.36, or by
contacting the Legal Branch at the address above or at 404/881-3506.

The Alabama Water Improvement Commission has been requested to
certify the discharges in accordance with the provisions of Section
401 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended  (PL 92-500).
Persons wishing to comment on the State certification of these dis-
charges are invited to submit same in writing to the State  agency
address above within 30 days of the date of this notice.  Since a
public hearing will be held, the State agency will hear and receive
comments relative to State certification.

Copies of the draft EIS which includes the draft NPDES permits and
the Supporting Documents are also available for review at the
following Libraries.

          Main Library, 701 Government St., Mobile, Alabama
          Cottage Hill Branch (Mobile, Alabama)
          Monte L. Moorer Branch (Mobile, Alabama)
          Parkway Branch (Mobile, Alabama)
          Saraland Branch (Mobile, Alabama)

-------
              Toulminville Branch (Mobile, Alabama)
              Government Information Division (Mobile, Alabama)
              Fairhope Public Library (Baldwin County)
              University of South Alabama Library (Mobile, Alabama)
              Monroeville Public Library (Monroeville, Alabama)
              Patrick Henry State Junior College Library (Monroeville, Alabama)
              Monroe County High School Library (Monroe County)


Please bring the foregoing to the attention of persons who you know will
be interested.

-------
 005
                                       EPA 904/9-78-005
                                       NPDES Application Numbers:
                                       AL0028801, Cement Plant
                                       AL0028819, Limestone Quarry
                    DRAFT
         ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
6

                    for

   Proposed Issuance of a New Source National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System  Permit

                     to

         Ideal Basic Industries, Inc.
Cement Plant, Theodore Industrial Park, Alabama
 atnd Limestone Quarry, Monroe County,  Alabama
 EJBD
 ARCHIVE
 EPA
 78~
                 prepared by

     U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency
                  Region IV
           Atlanta, Georgia 30308
BSgional
          Administrator
          Headquarter? and Chemical Libraries
              E'PA Wesl awfl Room 334°
                   Maifcocte 3404T
               1301 Constitution Ave NW
                Washington DC 20004
                    202-566-0556
                                                  Environmer-
                                                Protect/on A
                                                    Re-'- q
                                                     ai
                                           Mav 19. 1978
                                       Date
              Repository Material
                 /        tr

-------
                           TABLE OF CONTENTS

                            SUMMARY DOCUMENT



            SUMMARY SHEET FOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT

TYPE OF ACTION                                                       1

DESCRIPTION OF ACTION                                                1

MAJOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS                                          2

ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION                                  4

FEDERAL. STATE AND LOCAL AGENCIES AND INTERESTED
GROUPS REQUESTED TO COMMENT6

                              INTRODUCTION

PROJECT BACKGROUND                                                   9

SUMMARY OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT                             13

PROJECT HISTORY                                                     19

SITE SELECTION                                                      20

                               PLANT SITE

LOCATION                                                            25

PROJECT DESCRIPTION                                                 28

PLANT LAYOUT                                                        28

PLANT CONSTRUCTION                                                  31

CEMENT MANUFACTURING PROCESS                                        32

RESOURCE UTILIZATION                                                35

TRANSPORTATION                                                      36

                            LAND USE SETTING

PRESENT LAND USE                                                    38

FUTURE LAND USE                                                     40

-------
                              AIR QUALITY
BASELINE CONDITIONS                                                 44
RELEVANT PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS                                    45
IMPACTS                                                             52
MITIGATING MEASURES                                                 60
ALTERNATIVES                                                        62
                                 NOISE
BASELINE                                                            65
INTRODUCTION                                                        65
PRESENT CONDITIONS                                                  66
RELEVANT PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS                                    66
IMPACTS                                                             67
MITIGATING MEASURES                                                 71
ALTERNATIVES                                                        72
                              SOLID WASTE
BASELINE CONDITIONS                                                 74
RELEVANT PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS                                    75
IMPACTS                                                             77
MITIGATING MEASURES                                                 78
ALTERNATIVES                                                        78
               WATER RESOURCES AND GEOTECHNICAL ASPECTS
BASELINE ENVIRONMENT                                                80
RELEVANT PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS                                    81
IMPACTS                                                             86
MITIGATING MEASURES                                                 88
ALTERNATIVES                                                        89

-------
                               ARCHAEOLOGY



 BASELINE CONDITIONS                                                 91



                                 ECOLOGY



 BASELINE CONDITIONS                                                 92



 STRUCTURE OF TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEMS                                 92



 SIGNIFICANT TERRESTRIAL SPECIES                                     95



 AQUATIC ECOLOGY                                                     97



 RELEVANT PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS                                    98



 IMPACTS                                                             99



 MITIGATING MEASURES                                                101



 ALTERNATIVES                                                       101



                            SOCIOECONOMICS



 BASELINE  CONDITIONS                                                104



 PRESENT CONDITIONS                                                  104



 FUTURE  CONDITIONS                                                   107



 RELEVANT  PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS                                    108



 IMPACTS                                                            109



 MITIGATING MEASURES                                                 114



 ALTERNATIVES                                                        115



                              QUARRY SITE





 LOCATION                                                            117



 PROJECT DESCRIPTION                                                 121



 CONSTRUCTION                                                        121



QUARRYING PROCESS                                                   122



RECLAMATION                                                         124
                                m

-------
RESOURCE UTILIZATION                                               127



TRANSPORTATION                                                     128



LAND USE SETTING                                                   129



PRESENT LAND USE                                                   129



FUTURE LAND USE                                                    129



                              AIR QUALITY



BASELINE CONDITIONS                                                130



RELEVANT PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS                                   130



IMPACTS                                                            132



MITIGATING MEASURES                                                132



ALTERNATIVES                                                       133



                                 NOISE



BASELINE CONDITIONS                                                135



RELEVANT PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS                                   135



IMPACTS                                                            138



MITIGATING MEASURES                                                138



ALTERNATIVES                                                       138



                              SOLID WASTE



BASELINE CONDITIONS                                                139



RELEVANT PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS                                   139



IMPACTS                                                            140



MITIGATING MEASURES                                                141



ALTERNATIVES                                                       141

-------
              WATER RESOURCES AND GEOTECHNICAL ASPECTS

BASELINE CONDITIONS                                                142

GEOTECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS                                       146

RELEVANT PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS                                   147

IMPACTS                                                            150

MITIGATING MEASURES                                                152

ALTERNATIVES                                                       152

                              ARCHAEOLOGY

BASELINE CONDITIONS                                                154

                                ECOLOGY

BASELINE CONDITIONS                                                156

TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGY                                                156

AQUATIC ECOLOGY                                                    163

  Introduction                                                     163
  Aquatic Fauna                                                    167

    Fishes                                                         167
    Rare and Endangered Fishes                                     168
    Benthic Macroinvertebrates                                     169

RELEVANT PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS                                   170

IMPACTS                                                            171

MITIGATING MEASURES                                                174

ALTERNATIVES                                                       175

-------
                            SOCIOECONOMICS
BASELINE                                                           177
PRESENT CONDITIONS                                                 177
FUTURE CONDITIONS                                                  179
RELEVANT PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS                                   181
IMPACTS                                                            181
MITIGATING MEASURES                                                183
ALTERNATIVES                                                       183
                      PERMIT AND APPROVAL SECTION
DRAFT NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
  (NPDES) PERMIT (PLANT SITE)P-l
DRA.FI_^TI9NAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
  (NPDES) PERMIT (QUARRY SITEjP-13
JOINT PUBLIC NOTICE—U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS AND
  ALABAMA WATER IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (PLANT SITE)                P-23
JOINT PUBLIC NOTICE—U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS AND
  ALABAMA WATER IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION [QUARRY SITE)               P-33
EPA!§.. AUTHORITY I9_P.9!JSircucT (EPA REGULATIONS FOR THE
  PREVENTION UF SIGNIFICANT DETERIORATION OF AIR QUALITY
  40 CFR 52.21) CEMENT PLANTP-45
ALABAMA HISTORICAL COMMISSION (PLANT SITE)                         P-51
ALABAMA HISTORICAL COMMISSION (QUARRY SITE)                        P-53
ALABAMA STATE DOCKS DEPARTMENT APPROVALS (PLANT SITE)              P-55
ALABAMA STATE DOCKS DEPARTMENT APPROVALS (QUARRY SITE)             P-57

                            BIBLIOGRAPHY                           B-l
                                 VI

-------
LIST OF TABLES
PLANT SITE

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Table  1.   Summary of Significant Adverse Environmental
            Impacts, Proposed Mitigating Measures, and
            Practical  Alternatives

AIR QUALITY

Table  2.   Summary of Existing Ambient Total Suspended
            Particulate Matter Levels (ug/m3) in the
            Vicinity of the Proposed Ideal Basic Industries
            Plant Site, 1976 and 1977

Table  3.   Maximum Allowable Atmospheric Emissions from the
            Proposed Cement Manufacturing Plant for Particulate
            Matter and Sulfur Dioxide and Estimated Quantities
            of Other Pollutants:  Nitrogen Oxides, Hydro-
            carbons, and Carbon Monoxide

Table  4.   Summary of PSD Evaluation Results for the Proposed
            Ideal Basic Industries Cement Manufacturing Plant

SOCIOECONOMICS

Table  5.   Population of the Mobile Metropolitan Area  and
            Component Areas, Past and Projected

Table  6.   Gross and Net Employment Attributable to
            Ideal Basic Industries Under  Worst-Case
            Conditions; Mobile SMSA

QUARRY

SOCIOECONOMICS

Table  7.   Forecasts of Nonagricultural  Wage and Salary
            Employment in Monroe County

Table  8.   Comparison of Population Forecast for
            Monroe County with OBERS Series  E Projections
                                        14
                                        47
                                        50
                                        58
                                       105


                                       112
                                        180


                                        180
     vii

-------
                            LIST OF FIGURES

PROJECT BACKGROUND

Figure  1.  Proposed Cement Plant and Quarry Sites                   11

PLANT SITE

Figure  2.  The Proposed Plant Site Relative to Mobile,              26
            Alabama

Figure  3.  The Theodore Industrial Park Site                        27

Figure  4.  Proposed Plant Plot Plan                                 29

Figure  5.  Flow Diagram of Proposed Plant Process                   33

LAND USE SETTING

Figure  6.  Present Land Use in the Vicinity of the Proposed         39
            Ideal Basic Industries Plant Site

Figure  7.  Projected Land Use in the Vicinity of the Proposed       41
            Ideal Basic Industries Plant Site, 1992

Figure  8.  Plan View of Proposed Corps Project—Entire Harbor       43

AIR QUALITY

Figure  9.  Locations of Ambient Monitoring Stations in the          46
            Vicinity of the Proposed Cement Plant, Theodore,
            Alabama

Figure 10.  Ambient Total Suspended Particulate Matter               48
            Concentrations at Stations Near the Proposed
            Ideal Cement Plant, Mobile County, 1975-1977

Figure 11.  Isopleths of the Incremental Contributions to            54
            Predicted Annual Average Ground-Level Sulfur
            Dioxide Concentrations (ug/m3), Proposed
            Cement Plant Only, Theodore, Alabama, 1980

Figure 12.  Isopleths of the Incremental Contributions to            55
            Predicted Annual Average Ground-Level Suspended
            Particulate Matter Concentrations  (ug/m3),
            Proposed Cement Plant, Theodore, Alabama, 1980
                                 vm

-------
PLANT SITE (Continued)
NOISE
Figure 13.  Equal  Sound Level  (Ldn) Contours Due to Worst-Case
            Construction Activities from the Proposed
            Plant  Only
Figure 14.  Equal  Sound Level  (Ldn) Contours Due to Plant
            Operations Only
WATER RESOURCES AND GEOTECHNICAL ASPECTS
Figure 15.  Surface Water Bodies
Figure 16.  Photos of the Theodore Plant Site Along the
            North Fork Deer River from the Bridge on Dauphin
            Island Parkway
ECOLOGY
Figure 17.  Vegetation Map for the Proposed Plant Site
                                                                    68
                                                                     70
                                                                     82
                                                                     83
                                                                     93
QUARRY SITE
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Figure 18.  Present Land Use in the Vicinity of the Proposed
            Ideal Basic Industries Quarry Site
Figure 19.  Quarry Site Vicinity
Figure 20.  Steps of Proposed Quarry Process
Figure 21.  Mining Areas
Figure 22.  Schematic Layout of Waterfront Development
AIR QUALITY
Figure 23.  Trends in Ambient Total Suspended Parti cul ate
            Matter Concentrations, Rural Alabama  in the
            Region of the Proposed Ideal Quarry Site,
            1972-1977
Figure 24.  Equal Sound Level  (L^p) Contours Surrounding the
            Quarry Site During Construction Activities
Figure 25.  Estimated Boundary of Sound Level,  L
-------
QUARRY SITE (Continued)
WATER RESOURCES AND GEOTECHNICAL ASPECTS
Figure 26.  Watershed Map:  MeGirts Creek, Thompson Mill            143
            Creek, Hoi linger Creek, Randons Creek, Alabama
            Tributaries 1, 2, 3, and 4
Figure 27.  Cross Sections of a Typical Quarrying Area              148
ECOLOGY
Figure 28.  Vegetation Map of the Proposed Quarry Site              157
Figure 29.  Ecological Relationship of the Ecosystems               160
            of the Proposed Quarry Site
Figure 30.  Photographs of Thompson Mill Creek                      164
Figure 31.  Photographs of Hoi linger Creek                          165
Figure 32.  Photographs of Randons Creek                            166

-------
                 NOTE ON THE USE OF THE  METRIC  SYSTEM:
The numbers contained In this volume  and  In  all  of the following
appendices are expressed In metric units,  with  the English units In
parentheses.
                                   XI

-------
SUMMARY SHEET

-------
            SUMMARY SHEET FOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
                   CEMENT PLANT AND LIMESTONE QUARRY
                      IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES, INC.
          THEODORE INDUSTRIAL PARK AND MONROE COUNTY, ALABAMA

(X)  Draft
( )  Final
1.   TYPE OF ACTION:  Administrative (X) Legislative ( ).
2.   DESCRIPTION OF ACTION:
The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was prepared by the Region IV
office of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).  EPA has prepared
this document to fulfill the requirements of the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and the EPA January 11, 1977 regulations:
Preparation of Environmental Impact Statements for New Source NPDES
Permits (42 CFR 6.900).  NEPA requires all Federal agencies to assess
the impacts which would occur following a major Federal action which
will result in a significant impact on the human environment.

Ideal Cement Company, a division of Ideal Basic Industries, Inc. (the
applicant), has proposed to construct and operate a new 1.4 million
metric ton (1.5 million ton) per year portland cement plant and supple-
mental limestone quarry.  The cement plant will be located in the
Theodore Industrial Park along the federally-authorized Theodore Ship
Channel.  The limestone quarry site will be located near Monroeville in
Monroe County, Alabama, bordering the Alabama River.

The proposed plant site will involve the clearing of approximately
20 hectares (50 acres) of the 71-hectare (175-acre) tract owned by the
applicant.  When completed, the plant site will consist of a docking
facility with loading and unloading equipment, grinding mills, kilns,
storage and mixing silos, an aboveground fuel oil storage tank, under-
ground diesel and gasoline tanks, and raw material storage piles.

The quarry site consists of 1,633 hectares (4,035 acres) of modified
timberland which is currently being converted to pastureland.  Approxi-
mately 40 hectares (100 acres) will be cleared and graded for the access

-------
                                  SUMMARY SHEET (PLANT AND QUARRY SITE)
road, main building, and stockpile area.  An estimated 14 hectares
(35 acres) of the quarry property will be impacted during each year of
operation.  As the quarrying progresses, the overburden removed will be
used for reclamation of the quarried areas no longer in production.
Over the projected 50-year life of the quarry, approximately 80 percent
of the area will be impacted by quarrying.  Facilities to be constructed
at the quarry site will be the barge docking and loading facility, clar-
ification basins, limestone storage piles, an office and maintenance
shop, a well and pump house for potable water, a septic tank and drain-
field, and underground diesel fuel and gasoline tanks.

No construction has commenced, pending issuance of the EPA's NPDES
Permit, EPA's Authority to Construct (EPA Regulations for the Prevention
of Significant Deterioration of Air Quality, 40 CFR 52.21), the Corps of
Engineers' Section 10 and Section 404 Construction Permit, and the nec-
essary state approval certificates and permits.

3.   MAJOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
(A)  CONSTRUCTION
Plant
The plant site is undeveloped land within the Theodore Industrial Park.
Site construction will employ an average of 360 workers, with a peak of
700 workers.  A short-term increase in air pollution, especially fugi-
tive dust, is expected on and near the plant site.  Pollutants in the
form of suspended solids from site preparation runoff and construction
of the access road and railroad corridor on the property will drain to
the barge canal and the North Fork Deer River.  Some regrowth vegetation
following recent timber harvest will be removed, which will alter
existing wildlife habitat.  Increased noise in the vicinity of the pro-
posed plant site will result from site construction and increased
vehicular use of roadways.

Quarry
Construction of the quarry site will commit an estimated 80 percent of
the 1,633 hectares (4,035 acres) of company-owned and leased property to

-------
                                  SUMMARY SHEET (PLANT AND QUARRY SITE)
limestone production.  Construction will employ an average of
133 workers for 18 months, with a peak labor force of 250 workers.
Fugitive dust is expected on and near the quarry site during construc-
tion.  Noise generated by earthmoving equipment and construction of the
docking facility will have minimal impacts.  Impacts from removal of
vegetation and alteration of wildlife habitat will be of low magnitude
since much of the timber has been harvested for conversion of the area
to pastureland.  Stormwater runoff may increase suspended solids levels
in some on-site creeks and the Alabama River.

Construction of the cement plant and limestone quarry will have positive
impacts on the economy in the Mobile area and in Monroe County.  These
impacts will be of moderate significance.  All adverse impacts resulting
from construction of the cement plant and quarry will be of moderate to
low magnitude and significance.

(B)  OPERATION
Plant
Operation impacts will be long-term, i.e., occurring throughout the life
of the proposed cement plant (about 50 years).  Impacts to air quality
will be increased levels of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and partic-
ulate matter.  EPA has determined that the operation of the cement plant
will not cause a violation of the applicable air quality standards.
However, the available deterioration increments will be reduced for
other new source industries which will build in certain limited areas of
Theodore Industrial  Park.  Wastewater discharges to the Theodore Ship
Channel will be limited to overflow from a settling basin collecting
limestone and clay storage pile runoff, cooling tower blowdown, truck
and  process area wash water, and oil tank  stormwater runoff.  Rainfall
runoff from the remainder of the  plant  site will be directed to a
catchment area which will discharge into the freshwater wetlands  north
of the plant site.   These discharges are considered of  low magnitude  and
significance.  EPA's preliminary  determination  is  that  the discharges
will comply with applicable water quality  standards.  Solid wastes will
be disposed in state-permitted  sanitary  landfills.  Noise  impacts  from

-------
                                  SUMMARY SHEET (PLANT AND QUARRY SITE)
plant operation will be of moderate magnitude and low significance to
the surrounding area.

Quarry
The major impact from operation of the limestone quarry will be the
constant change in topographic features over the projected 50-year life
of the quarry.  Approximately 14 hectares (35 acres) will be quarried
and a comparable area reclaimed each year.  Reclamation of the limestone
quarry will replace the overburden in a manner which will provide for
drainage and permit reseeding to grass and return to pasture!and.  Clar-
ification basins designed to collect runoff from the quarry operation
will discharge water to the Alabama River and the creeks on the quarry
property.  EPA's preliminary determination is that these discharges will
comply with applicable water quality standards and will be of low sig-
nificance.  Fugitive dust will be generated from quarry operations but
will be controlled by watering and will normally be confined within the
limits of the active quarry area.  Noise from the quarry operation will
not adversely impact residences.  Transport of the limestone will
increase barge traffic on the Alabama River.

Adverse impacts from operation of the cement plant and limestone quarry
will be of low to moderate magnitude with low significance.  Beneficial
impacts to the economy in the Mobile area and in Monroe County,
including supporting services, will result from operation of the cement
plant and limestone quarry.  These impacts will be of moderate to high
magnitude and of moderate significance.

4.   ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION
(A)  PLANT
Twenty-seven alternative plant sites were considered for locating the
cement plant.  The selected site is in an industrial park designated by
the State of Alabama and Mobile County to be used for industrial
development.

-------
                                  SUMMARY SHEET (PLANT AND QUARRY SITE)
The alternatives for the manufacture of cement are the wet process and
the dry process.  The dry process was selected mainly due to lower
energy requirements and possibly lower maintenance costs.  Alternative
raw materials considered for the calcium supply were dolomite from the
proposed Gaillard quarry site and several other sources, aragonite from
the Bahamas, and oyster shells from the Gulf Coast area.  Oil and
natural gas were considered as alternative fuels to operate the plant.

Alternatives considered for solid waste disposal were use of county-
maintained sanitary landfills and on-site burial.

Alternative air pollution abatement devices considered for control of
particulate emissions were baghouses, electrostatic precipitators,
scrubbers, and multicyclones.  Water sprays and enclosing/venting to a
baghouse were the alternatives considered for fugitive dust control.

Alternative treatment and discharge of process-related wastewaters and
stormwater runoff from the plant were considered.  The alternatives
were to direct wastewater discharges to the wetlands north of the plant,
to direct these discharges to the proposed ship channel, or to use the
proposed wastewater pipeline to Mobile Bay.  Alternatives considered for
the general stormwater runoff were to discharge to the wetlands, to the
proposed ship channel, or partially to both the wetlands and the ship
channel.  Alternative access corridors considered were from the north
across the North Fork Deer River through the wetlands, and bridging the
entire wetland area, and from Dauphin Island Parkway on  the east.

(B) QUARRY
Alternative air pollution abatement devices considered for control of
particulate emissions were water sprays  and enclosures with  baghouses.
Solid waste alternatives considered were burning, chipping,  on-site
landfill ing, and use of Monroe County Landfill.

-------
                                  SUMMARY SHEET (PLANT AND QUARRY  SITE)


Alternatives  for controlling wastewater discharges considered were
clarification basins, vegetative buffers, and quarry pit storage.  Alter-
natives for reclamation of quarry lands were pastureland, timberland,
and  industrial development.

5.   FEDERAL.  STATE AND LOCAL AGENCIES AND INTERESTED GROUPS REQUESTED TO
     COMMENT

                            FEDERAL AGENCIES
Bureau of Outdoor Recreation
U.S. Coast Guard
Corps of Engineers
Department of Commerce
Department of Energy
Department of Health, Education and Welfare
Department of Interior
Department of Transportation
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Economic Development Administration
Federal Highway Administration
Fish and Wildlife Service
Food and Drug Administration
Forest Service
Geological Survey
National Park Service
Office of Federal Activities
Soil Conservation Service

                          MEMBERS OF CONGRESS
Honorable John J. Sparkman, United States Senate
Honorable James B. Allen, United States Senate
Honorable Jack Edwards, United States House of Representatives

-------
                                  SUMMARY SHEET (PLANT AND QUARRY SITE)
                             STATE  AGENCIES
Alabama Air Pollution Control  Commission
Alabama Department of Conservation  and Natural  Resources
Alabama Forestry Commission
Alabama Water Improvement Commission
Alabama State Docks Department
Alabama State Highway Department
Bureau of Environmental Health

                            STATE OFFICIALS
Honorable George Wallace, Governor of Alabama
L.D. Owens, Alabama State Senator
Mike Perl off, Alabama State Senator
L.W. Noonan, Alabama State Senator
Bill Roberts, Alabama State Senator
John McMillan, Alabama State Representative
J. Henry McCulley, Alabama State Representative
Dal C. Younce, Alabama State Representative
Cain J. Kennedy, Alabama State Representative
James E. Buskey, Alabama State Representative
J. Tommy Sandusky, Alabama State Representative
H.L. Callahan, Alabama State Representative
Nat Sonnier, Alabama State Representative
Gary Cooper, Alabama State Representative
Doug Johnstone, Alabama State Representative
Bob Glass,  Alabama State Representative

                             LOCAL  AGENCIES
Mobile City Commission
Mobile County Commission
Board  of Water  and Sewer Commissioners  of  the  City  of  Mobile
Mobile County Board  of Health
South  Alabama Regional Planning  Commission

-------
                                  SUMMARY SHEET (PLANT AND QUARRY SITE)
                   INTERESTED GROUPS AND INDIVIDUALS

Alabama Bass Chapter Federation
Alabama Conservancy, South Alabama Representative
Alabama Environmental Council
Alabama Federation of Women's Clubs
Alabama Ornithological Society
Alabama Wildlife Federation
Baldwin County Wildlife and Conservation Association
Bon Secour Fisheries, Inc.
Coastal Area Board
Ducks Unlimited
League of Women Voters, Baldwin Chapter
League of Women Voters, Mobile Chapter
Marine Environmental Science Consortium
Mobile Area Chamber of Commerce
Mobile Bass Masters Club
Mobile Bay Audubon Society
Mobile County Wildlife and Conservation Association
Mobile United
Save Our Bay Club
Sierra Club
South Alabama Seafood Processors
Wildlife Management Institute
6.  This draft EIS was made available to the Office of Federal
    Activities (OFA) and the public on May 19, 1978.
                                  8

-------
INTRODUCTION

-------
                                   PROJECT BACKGROUND (PLANT AND QUARRY)
                              INTRODUCTION
                           PROJECT BACKGROUND

Ideal Basic Cement Division of Ideal Basic Industries,  Incorporated, of
Denver, Colorado, plans to construct and operate a cement manufacturing
facility near Mobile, Alabama, and a limestone quarry near Monroeville,
Alabama (see Figure 1).  The cement plant will use limestone from the
quarry as its principal raw material.  The plant and quarry water
discharges, which are described in the Water Resources/Geotechnical
sections of this document, will be subject to the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) new source effluent  limitations and
permit requirements.  As a prerequisite to granting the required new
source NPDES permits, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency  (EPA) is
required by the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969  (NEPA) to
evaluate all potential environmental impacts of the proposed project.
In order to fulfill NEPA requirements, this Draft Environmental Impact
Statement (DEIS) has been prepared and will be reviewed by other local,
state, and .federal agencies, and by concerned individuals  and public
interest groups.  During the public comment period and  at  the public
hearing, comments on the environmental effects of these two facilities
and  on EPA's action of issuing the NPDES permits will be  received.  A
Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) will respond  to these
comments and present EPA's decision on the issuance of  the permits  for
the  proposed project.

This Draft Environmental Impact Statement deals with expected signi-
ficant effects of the construction and operation of the proposed
facilities on the natural and  social environment.  The  EIS also
considers:
     1.  Practical alternatives to the proposed projects;
     2.  Adverse environmental impacts of the proposed  projects; and
     3.  Possible mitigating actions that could be taken  to  lessen  these
         adverse impacts.

-------
                                  MONTGOMERY
                  QUARRY SITE
                                                                         QUARRY SITE
           CLAY AND SAND QUARRY
                                       CLAY AND
                                                      MOBILE
                                                      BAY I
                                                     PLANT SITE
Figure 1
PROPOSED CEMENT PLANT AND QUARRY SITES
(EXISTING CLAY AND SAND QUARRY ALSO SHOWN)
                               0     40    M
                               SCALE IN KILOMETERS
SOURCE:  Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc., 1977.
REGION IV
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
STATEMENT FOR IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES
   PROPOSED CEMENT MANUFACTURING
   PLANT THEODORE INDUSTRIAL PARK
    AND PROPOSED GAILLARD QUARRY
                                             10

-------
                                   PROJECT BACKGROUND (PLANT AND QUARRY)


In order to expedite the preparation of the Environmental  Impact State-
ment, Ideal Basic Industries has chosen the option of entering  into a
third-party arrangement with an independent consultant to  prepare the
DEIS under EPA supervision.  EPA approved the consultant selected and
has retained sole responsibility for the technical content and
environmental assessments contained in the document.  Environmental
Science and Engineering, Inc., of Gainesville, Florida has served as the
third party consultant.

The DEIS has been prepared before detailed plans for the proposed Ideal
Basic Industries project have been finalized in order to be responsive
to the comparative evaluation of possible alternatives and mitigating
measures.  The description of the proposed project incorporates the
information available at the present time, and the assessment deals with
the worst-case condition in terms of environmental impact.  No  future
alterations will be incorporated in the project unless they involve
either improvement or no significant change in environmental quality.

This summary document presents in abbreviated form sufficient informa-
tion for understanding all  significant project impacts.  Most of the
discussion is organized according to environmental disciplines  (e.g.,
air, water resources, ecology) in order to permit a cohesive treatment
of each area of impacts.  For every discipline there is discussion of
baseline environmental  conditions; relevant project actions, including
environmental safeguards to be taken by Ideal Basic Industries;
environmental impacts (positive and negative); possible mitigative
measures for some negative impacts; and practical project  alternatives.
More detailed information is provided in the technical support  documents
which contain the following information:
     Appendix A (Volume I). Project Description—A description  of the
     proposed project with detailed information on air, noise,  solid
     wastes, water usage, wastewater discharges, and socioeconomic
     factors.
     Appendix B (Volumes II and III). Baseline—A report of the findings
     of an intensive data survey of the existing (1977) environmental
                                  11

-------
                                   PROJECT  BACKGROUND  (PLANT  AND  QUARRY)
     and socioeconomic conditions at both sites.  In addition, future
     conditions (1992) without the proposed project are projected.  This
     appendix covers the following discipline areas:  Climatology and
     Meteorology, Air Quality, Noise, Solid Waste, Geotechnical, Water
     Resources, Archaeology, Ecology, and Socioeconomics.
     Appendix C (Volume IV), Impacts—An assessment of the expected
     positive and negative impacts of the proposed projects relative to
     the baseline conditions.  Each impact is rated according to
     magnitude, significance, duration (long- or short-term), reversi-
     bility, and avoidability.
     Appendix D (Volume IV). Mitigating Measures—An analysis of the
     possible actions that could be taken by Ideal Basic Industries to
     lessen the effects of the adverse impacts.
     Appendix E (Volume IV), Alternatives—An environmental assessment
     of the practical alternative actions which could be taken in place
     of the proposed actions.  The proposed project is reviewed
     according to the no-action alternative (project not allowed), as
     well as the site location, process and resource, and pollution
     abatement alternatives.  The rationale for selection of the
     specific project action over the possible alternatives is given.

The figures used in all documents (summary and technical support) are
given in both metric and English units for easier review.  The English
units are given in parentheses.

The impacts, mitigating measures, and alternatives are summarized in the
next section to give the reader a quick overview of the project.  The
draft NPDES permits and other federal and state agency approvals and
notices currently available are presented in the Permit and Approval
section of this document.

The bibliography for the Summary Document and all the appendices is
presented at the end of this document.
                                  12

-------
                            ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (PLANT AND QUARRY)
                SUMMARY OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

The proposed project of constructing and operating a cement plant and
limestone quarry has been investigated in relation to adverse impacts,
possible mitigating actions, and practical  alternatives.  The signifi-
cant aspects of these three factors are summarized in Table 1.  In
order to better understand the assessment methodology, a brief review
is presented in the following paragraphs.

Impacts, which are classified as either primary (direct) effects of the
proposed action or secondary (indirect) effects, are rated according
to:
      1.  Magnitude—a quantification based on some measurable physical
          property, assessed in degrees of low, moderate, or high.
      2.  Significance—a consideration of the importance of the mag-
          nitude, duration, and reversibility of the impact relative to
          expected area conditions.  Significance is assessed in terms
          of low, moderate, or high.
      3.  Duration—persistency of the impact, assessed as long-term
          (greater than several years) or short-term (less than several
          years).
      4.  Reversibility—rates the ability of the environment to nat-
          urally return to existing conditions without a major direct
          action of man.  Impacts are rated as either reversible or
          irreversible.
      5.  Avoidability—assesses the possibility of an adverse impact
          being completely eliminated by some alternative action.  The
          effects are rated as avoidable and unavoidable.

Mitigating actions are possible measures that could be taken  by the
applicant to reduce adverse impacts.  These measures could be performed
in addition to the proposed action and environmental safeguards.
(Environmental safeguards are those actions taken by the applicant
specifically to lessen potential effects of their project and are con-
sidered  in assessing the expected adverse impacts.)
                                 13

-------
                                                                                                                   PLANT SITE

Table 1.  Summary of Significant Adverse Environmental Impacts, Proposed Mitigating Measures, and Practical Alternatives
Action
PLANT SITE
Air Quality
1. Controlled Burning of
Land-Clearing Wastes

2. Fugitive Dust


3. Particulate Emissions




4. Sulfur Dioxide Emissions
5. Nitrogen Oxide Emissions
6. Use of PSD Increment
Noise
1. Construction Activities
2. Plant Operations


Solid Wastes
1. Landfill ing
2. Disposal of Dredged
Material
3. Landfill ing

Socioeconomlcs
1. Traffic

2. Land Value
3. Truck Traffic
Phase*


C


C


0




0
0
0

C
0



C
C

0


C

C
0
Magni-
tude


Low


Mod


Low




Low
Low
Mod

Mod
Mod



Low
Mod

Low


Mod

Mod
Mod
Signi-
ficance


Low


Low


Low




Low
Low
Low

Low
Low



Low
Low

Low


Low

Low
Low
Revers-
ible


Yes


Yes


Yes




Yes
Yes
Yes

Yes
Yes



Yes
No

Yes


Yes

Yes
Yes
Dura-
tion
(Term)


Short


Short


Long




Long
Long
Long

Short
Long



Long
Long

Long


Short

Short
Long
Avoid-
able


Yes


No


No




No
No
No

No
No



No
No

No


No

No
No
Mitigating Measures


None


Chemical
stabilizers; wind
breaks; paving roads
Higher stack heights




Lower sulfur fuel
None
None

None
Noise suppression on
baghouse fans;
enclose facilities

None
None

None


Reschedule work
shifts
None
Reschedule truck
Alternatives


On- site burial ; fire-
wood; use In pulp mills
and waste wood boilers
None


Scrubbers; cyclones;
electrostatic precipl-
tators; enclosing fugi-
tive dust sources and
venting to baghouses
None
None
None

None
Change facility layout
to minimize noise
Impact

On-slte burial
None

On-slte burial;
use as fill

None

None
None
4. Land Value
Mod
Low
Yes
Long
No
shipments
None
None

-------
                                                                                                                                      PLANT SITE
                  Table 1.  Summary of Significant Adverse Environmental Impacts, Proposed Mitigating Measures, and Practical  Alternatives
                            (Continued, page 2 of 3)
                           Action
                                                              Dura-
                                    Magni-  Signi-  Revers-   tion   Avoid-
                            Phase*   tude  ficance   ible    (Term)   able
                                            Mitigating Measures   Alternatives
in
                  PLANT SITE, cont.

                  Water Resources and Geotechnical
1. Erosion/Sedimentation
   from Land Clearing,
   Grading, and Access
   Roadway
2. Dredging
3. Oil Spills
4. Oil Spills
5. Wastewater Discharge
   to Ship Channel
6. Stormwater Discharge
   to Freshwater Marsh
                  Ecology

                   1. Loss of Pine Forest
                      and Wildlife Habitat
                   2. Loss of Wetlands for
                      Access Corridor

                   3. Loss of Habitat for
                      Special Species
                   4. Dredging
                   5. Noise Effects
                   6. Erosion/Sedimentation
                   7. Oil Spills
                   8. Noise Effects
                   9. Oil Spills
                  10. Stormwater Discharge
                      to Freshwater Marsh
                  11. Wdstewater Discharge
                      to Ship Channel
Mod     Low      Yes     Short    No        Minimize slopes;
                                            soil stabilizers;
                                            buffers; artificial
                                            structures
                                            None
                                            None
                                            None
                                            Chemical treatment

Low     Low      Yes     Long     Yes       Chemical treatment
c
c
0
0
Mod
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Short
Short
Short
Long
No
No
No
No
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
0
0
0
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Long
Long
Long
Short
Short
Short
Short
Long
Short
Long
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
No
None
None
                                     Low
        Low
Yes
Long
No
No
                                                                                                                          None
                                                None
                                                None
                                                None
                                                Discharge  to marsh or
                                                use outfall  in Bay
                                                Discharge  to ship chan-
                                                nel or  to  marsh  and  ship
                                                channel
None

Access from Dauphin
Island Parkway; bridg-
ing the marsh
None

None
None
None
None
None
None
See Water Resources/
Geotechnical
See Water Resources/
Geotechnical

-------
                                                                                                                  QUARRY SITE
 Table  1.   Summary  of Significant Adverse Environmental Impacts, Proposed Mitigating Measures, and Practical Alternatives
           (Continued,  page 3 of 3)
Action
QUARRY SITE
Air Quality
1. Fugitive Dust

2. Controlled Burning of
Vegetative Wastes
3. Fugitive Dust--Quarry
Area
4. Fugitive Dust—Other
Areas
Noise
1. Construction Activities
2. Plant Operation
Solid Waste
1. Landfill ing
2. Landfilling
Phase*


C

C

0

0


C
0

C
0
Magni-
tude


Low

Low

Mod

Low


Low
Low

Low
Low
Signi-
ficance


Low

Low

Low

Low


Low
Low

Low
Low
Revers-
ible


Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes


Yes
Yes

Yes
Yes
Dura-
tion
(Term)


Short

Short

Long

Long


Short
Long

Long
Long
Avoid-
able


No

Yes

No

No


No
No

No
No
Mitigating Measures


Chemical stabili-
zers; wind breaks
None

Chemical stabi-
lizers
None


None
None

None
None
Alternatives


None

Landfilling; on-slte
burial
None

Enclosing and venting
to control devices

None
None

On-slte burial
On-site burial
Mater Resources and Geotechnical
1. Erosion and
Sedimentation
2. Discharge of Runoff

3. Drainage
4. Groundwater
Ecology
1. Loss of Existing
Vegetation
2. Loss of Habitat
for Existing Species
3. Loss of Habitat for
Special Species
4. Erosion and Sedimentation
5. Dust and Noise Effects
6. Topography and Drainage
7. Waterway Traffic
C

0

0
0

CSO

C«0

CSO

CSO
CSO
0
0
Low

Low

Low
Low

Low

Low

Low

Low
Low
Low
Low
Low

Low

Low
Low

Low

Low

Low

Low
Low
Low
Low
Yes

Yes

No
No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Short

Long

Long
Long

Long

Long

Long

Long
Long
Long
Long
No

No

No
No

No

No

No

No
No
No
No
Greater use of
erosion controls
None

None
None

None

Create ecological
blend areas
None

None
None
None
None
None

Vegetative buffers;
quarry pit storage
None
None

None

None

None

None
None
None
None
•Phases:  C = construction
          0 = operation
 jurce:  Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc., 1978.

-------
                           ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (PLANT AND QUARRY)
Alternatives are practical actions that could be taken In place of the
proposed action.  The alternatives are rated according to their spe-
cific environmental impacts and economic feasibility.

As indicated in Table 1, the adverse impacts of the project are typi-
cally considered to be of low to moderate magnitude and low signifi-
cance; reversible, and unavoidable.  The construction impacts will
usually be short-term, whereas the operational impacts will persist
throughout the project life of 50 years (long-term).  The irreversible
impacts relate to permanent effects on land, such as dredging, land
clearing, and drainage patterns.  The avoidable impacts have viable
alternative actions that do not affect the same environmental parame-
ters.  The only avoidable impacts are considered to be the burning of
vegetative wastes and the discharging of general stormwater runoff to
the freshwater marsh.  Burning could be completely replaced by chipping
or landfill ing methods, and stormwater runoff could be discharged to
the ship channel.  In both these cases, the impact on air quality and
wetland vegetation would be eliminated by these replacement actions.

Ideal Basic Industries has proposed numerous environmental safeguards
that should effectively reduce the potential impacts to the low level
of impact shown in the table.  Possible mitigating measures are limited
because of these planned safeguards.  Measures that could be taken to
further reduce the adverse impacts are listed in the mitigating mea-
sures column of Table 1.

In addition to the adverse impacts associated with the project, there
will be several important positive impacts.  The economic stimulus of
the construction and operation of the cement plant will be of a high
magnitude and moderate significance in the Mobile area.  Similar  eco-
nomic effects of moderate magnitude and significance will occur in the
Monroe County area because of the limestone quarry.  These effects are
discussed in the socioeconomic sections.
                                 17

-------
                           ENVIRONMENTAL  ASSESSMENT  (PLANT AND  QUARRY)
Practical alternative actions that would modify the adverse impacts are
presented in the last column of Table 1.  Other alternatives not shown
but assessed in the document are:

      1.  Environmental characteristics of air quality, noise levels,
          water quality, aquatic and terrestrial communities, and land
          uses 15 years in the future (1992)  without the proposed
          project being constructed and operated;
      2.  Twenty-seven possible plant locations;
      3.  Possible quarry sites;
      4.  Three types of the main raw material—limestone, oyster
          shells, and aragonite;
      5.  Two types of cement manufacturing processes (wet and dry);
      6.  Fuels and resources that could be utilized;
      7.  Possible arrangements of facility layout; and
      8.  Reclamation of quarried areas to pastureland, timberland, or
          industrial use.

The information in this section gives a brief overview of the proposed
project's effects on the environment.  Detailed analyses are presented
in the following sections of this summary document and the various
appendices.
                                 18

-------
                                      PROJECT HISTORY (PLANT AND QUARRY)
                            PROJECT HISTORY

Ideal Basic Industries, Inc. was founded by Charles Boettcher, a Denver
entrepreneur who acquired controlling interest in a small cement plant
near Portland, Colorado, in the late 1890's.  The cement company formed
by Mr. Boettcher expanded into the southcentral and plains states, and
after World War II established facilities in the southeastern states and
the far west.  The present Ideal plant at Mobile, purchased in 1946, was
an operation designed during the war to process low-grade aluminum ore.

Potash Company of America was merged with Ideal Cement Company in 1967,
and the corporate name became Ideal Basic Industries.  The company has
also acquired a short-line railroad, two natural gas pipeline companies,
a marine cement transport operation, a sand and gravel company, a lime-
stone producing operation, and a coal production company.  Through
subsidiaries, the company engages in real estate development at several
locations.  The Potash Division is the largest producer of potash in the
United States and the second largest in North America.  The Cement
Division is the largest manufacturer of cement in the country, with an
annual productive capacity of 5.9 million metric tons (6.5 million
tons).

The proposed Ideal Basic Industries manufacturing plant in Theodore
would be the largest facility of its kind ever constructed in a single
stage in the United States.  The plant, which would utilize a dry-
process suspension preheater system designed for maximum thermal
efficiency, would involve the expenditure of more than $20 million for
air and water pollution abatement.  The two projects will cost over
$200 million (in 1977 dollars) and will provide over $7.9 million (in
1977 dollars) annually in direct and indirect salaries.
                                 19

-------
                                       SITE SELECTION (PLANT AND QUARRY)
                             SITE SELECTION

This section describes the plant site selection and limestone supply
studies performed by Ideal Basic Industries.  Although these studies
were not conducted as part of the EIS, they demonstrate that the final
site selections for the plant and quarry are environmentally sound.

The proposed Theodore project is the outcome of a 5-year planning
process.  Market studies conducted in 1972 identified a strong demand
for cement manufacturing capacity to serve the Gulf Coast market.  This
market was defined to include the coastal areas of Louisiana, Alabama,
Mississippi, and Florida that were also served by Ideal's plant and
terminal facilities at New Orleans, Baton Rouge, Lake Charles, Mobile,
and Tampa. The magnitude of demand was placed at 1.4 million metric tons
(1.5 million tons) of cement per year.  The options available for
meeting this demand were:
     1.  Modernization and expansion of existing plants,
     2.  Multiple new plant locations, and
     3.  Consolidated capacity at a single new location.

Upgrading of existing facilities was evaluated for the Ideal Basic
Industries plants at Ada (Oklahoma), Okay (Arkansas), Baton Rouge, and
Mobile.  Investigations conducted in 1972 and 1973 concluded that the
Ada and Okay plant sites could accommodate additional production, but
that the advantages of these sites would be negated by problems arising
from their locations geographically removed from the Gulf Coast market.
Neither the Mobile nor Baton Rouge operations could be upgraded without
demolishing the present facilities; this step would be highly
undesirable in view of demolition costs, the loss of revenues during
construction, and the potential loss of market position.

The second option considered would have involved two new 700,000 metric
ton (750,000-ton) per year plants rather than a single plant.  This
possibility was ruled out by differentials in capital and operating
costs.  Even allowing for the transportation cost savings with two
                                  20

-------
                                       SITE SELECTION (PLANT AND QUARRY)
 plants, the single-plant option would be roughly 25 percent lower than
 the multiple-plant option in terms of the total cost of sales.

The evaluation of potential  sites for a single new cement plant was a
lengthy process involving three levels of screening.  The major site
selection criteria were the following:
     1.  Site availability;
     2.  Physical suitability and engineering feasibility;
     3.  Access to deep water transportation;
     4.  Location with respect to expected markets;
     5.  Location with respect to raw material supply sources;
     6.  Capital and operating costs;
     7.  Highway, rail, and other supporting facilities;
     8.  Environmental compatibility;
     9.  Community resources;
    10.  Land use compatibility; and
    11.  Natural hazards.

The criteria involving transportation (Items 3 through 5 above) were
attributed great importance.  Cement and its component materials are
high in weight relative to value, so that moderate differentials in the
distances or unit costs of transport can be critical to the overall
profitability of a cement manufacturing operation.  Water transportation
is generally cheaper than other available modes and is more flexible
than rail in terms of scheduling and ownership of equipment.  Therefore,
access to water transportation was considered a limiting prerequisite
for any potential site.  Because of the cost advantages of deep-draft
vessels relative to shallow-draft barges, a high premium was placed on
sites with access to deep water [10-meter (30-foot) depth or more].

Twenty-seven potential plant sites were identified in 1973 and 1974 with
the assistance of state and local development agencies, port authori-
ties, chambers of commerce, and utility companies.  These included 12
sites in Alabama, 5 in Mississippi, 6 in Louisiana, 3 in Florida, and
1 in Georgia.  A first-level screening based on the above criteria
                                  21

-------
                                       SITE SELECTION (PLANT AND QUARRY)


resulted in the elimination of 19 sites from further consideration.  Six
of the eight remaining candidate sites were located in Alabama.

One of the Alabama sites surviving the first cut was the Monroe County
Gail lard tract which was already partially owned by Ideal Basic
Industries.  The Gaillard tract was under consideration as a source of
limestone, whether or not it was also selected as the plant location.
The remaining Alabama sites included:  a property in Jacintoport; the
old shipyard site in Chickasaw; Blakely Island in Mobile; a bayfront
property adjacent to the route of the Theodore Ship Channel; and the
Barrett property, located inland on the ship channel.  The second-level
screening eliminated the two sites outside Alabama (at Pascagoula and
Lake Charles) and all of the Alabama sites except the Gaillard tract and
the Barrett property.  Physical constraints upon site development were
important in several cases.

Further analysis of the Gaillard tract and the Barrett property as
potential plant sites revealed many points of difference.  However,
there was no'decisive advantage for either site in terms of cost-
effectiveness, since the lower capital and operating costs of production
at Gaillard would be offset by the need to build and operate a
distribution terminal in Mobile.  The critical factors leading to
rejection of the Gaillard tract were potential problems involving
equipment delivery, labor force availability, construction of
transportation facilities, navigability of the Alabama River during
extreme conditions, availability of specialized industrial services, and
flexibility in securing raw materials and marketing plant outputs.  A
preliminary analysis of environmental impacts suggested that some
detrimental effects would occur at either location and that the impacts
of the plant would be somewhat less severe on the whole at the Theodore
site.  Therefore, the Barrett property was acquired by Ideal Basic
Industries and designated as the preferred location of the new
manufacturing facility.
                                  22

-------
                                       SITE SELECTION (PLANT AND QUARRY)
In addition to the plant site selection process, various alternatives to
the use of limestone from the Gail lard tract have been considered.
At least two other calcium carbonate (calcareous) materials, oyster
shells or aragonite, could serve as the principal ingredient of cement.
The existing Ideal Basic Industries plant in Mobile utilizes oyster
shells dredged from Mobile Bay.  Oyster shells, however, would not be a
feasible source of calcium carbonate for the Theodore facility, since
the existing supply is limited and would not be available for the entire
50-year estimated life of the cement plant.

Aragonite is a high purity calcareous sand that is precipitated from sea
water.  The only economically recoverable deposits known to exist are
found in the Bahamas, roughly 1,300 kilometers (800 miles) from Mobile.
The chemical properties of aragonite are highly favorable for cement
manufacturing, but the use of this material would involve several
disadvantages.  There would be risks of price fluctuation, disruption of
supply, and increase in ocean freight rates.  The most significant
disadvantage is that aragonite materials contain chlorides which would
have to be removed by a washing operation involving 2 to 13 million
liters (0.5 to 3.5 million gallons) of water per day.  Such an operation
could overtax the capacity of water supply facilities at the Theodore
Industrial Park and could create a wastewater disposal problem. There-
fore, because of environmental and economic considerations, aragonite
has been rejected in favor of limestone as the calcium carbonate
source.

Ideal Basic Industries searched the Gulf Coast area for sources other
than the Gaillard tract which could supply a suitable amount of lime-
stone per year.  Most potential sites were rejected because of limestone
characteristics, difficulties in quarrying, site acquisition problems,
or excessive transportation costs.  The best location other than the
Gaillard tract was a site near Crystal River, Florida.  The ultimate
selection of Gaillard was primarily an economic decision based on the
accessibility of the site by barge and its relative proximity to
Theodore.
                                   23

-------
PLANT SITE

-------
                                                   LOCATION  (PLANT  SITE)
                               PLANT SITE
                                LOCATION

The proposed cement plant site Is located In south Mobile County just
beyond the southern edge of the city limits of Mobile, Alabama (see
Figure 2).  The 70.8-hectare (175-acre) site is within the Theodore
Industrial Park, a 1,800-hectare (4,400-acre) area.  Completion of the
federally-authorized Theodore Ship Channel will provide deep water
access for industries within the park.

Development of the Theodore Industrial Park began in the 1960's with a
purchase by the Alabama State Docks Department of federal lands which
formerly had contained an ammunition depot.  Roadways and utilities were
extended into the area, and water access was provided by construction of
a 3.7-meter (12-foot) deep barge canal along the approximate alignment
of the Middle Fork Deer River.  The barge canal is soon to be replaced
by the Theodore Ship Channel, a waterway of 12-meter (40-foot) depth
which will extend from the Mobile Bay Channel to Rangeline Road.  Over
one-half billion dollars already has been invested by manufacturing
firms in Theodore Industrial Park, and a high rate of development is
projected for the future.

The Ideal Basic Industries plant site, which is part of the Theodore
Industrial Park, is bounded on the south by the barge canal; on the west
by the Airco plant site; on the east by the Dauphin Island Parkway; and
on the north by a narrow strip of land bordering the State Docks
Terminal Railway (see Figure 3).  The property is uninhabited and is
covered primarily by remnant pine and scrub vegetation that has been
affected by previous (1974) lumbering activity.  The North Fork Deer
River, bordered by freshwater and saltwater marsh systems, crosses the
central portion of the property.  The proposed cement manufacturing
facility would occupy only the area located south of this river.
                                  25

-------
Figure 2
THE PROPOSED PLANT SITE RELATIVE TO
MOBILE, ALABAMA
                                                            PROPOSED CEMENT MANUFACTURING
                                                             PLANT THEODORE INDUSTRIAL PARK
                                                                          MOBILE, ALABAMA
SOURCE. USGS, 1974.
                                          26

-------
Figure 3
THE THEODORE INDUSTRIAL PARK SITE
(Adapted from Mobile Area Chamber of Commerce, 1976)
                            0              1000
                              SCALE IN METERS
SOURCE: Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc., 1978.
REGION IV
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
STATEMENT FOR IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES
   PROPOSED CEMENT MANUFACTURING
     PLANT THEODORE INDUSTRIAL PARK
                    MOBILE, ALABAMA
                                                  27

-------
                                        PROJECT DESCRIPTION (PLANT SITE)
                          PROJECT DESCRIPTION
PLANT LAYOUT

The layout of the proposed cement manufacturing facility at Theodore is
depicted in Figure 4.  Only the southern portion of the Ideal Basic
Industries property and an access corridor extending along the western
edge of the property will be developed.  The wetland areas bordering the
North Fork Deer River will be undisturbed except for the access corridor
crossing in the freshwater portion of the wetlands.  There will be no
encroachment into the brackish portion of the wetlands.  Along the
eastern property line bordering the Dauphin Island Parkway, a strip of
wooded land about 90 meters (300 feet) in width will be left undevel-
oped.  This vegetated strip, plus the wooded northern portion of the
Ideal property and the ship channel to the south, will all serve as
natural buffers between the cement plant and the developed areas along
these boundaries.  A 20-meter (65-foot) high dead-storage pile of
limestone will be formed  along the eastern side of the facility.
Besides providing the plant approximately a 60-day supply of reserve
limestone, the dead-storage pile will reduce noise effects east of the
plant site.

The entire waterfront at  the plant site [about 716 meters (2,350 feet)]
will be developed as a dock area for  loading, unloading, and holding of
marine equipment.  The docking facility for unloading raw material will
accommodate barges berthed two abreast.  The facility's depth  of water
will vary depending  upon  draft requirements; however, a conservative
depth of 12 meters (40 feet) below mean sea level  (msl) has  been
projected to coincide with the depth  of the future ship channel.  The
marine terminal will have a concrete  wharf elevated  to the  level of  the
plant site, approximately 4.6 meters  (15 feet) above msl.

The process areas will be clustered  in the central portion  of  the  plant
site.  The tallest structures will be two 90-meter  (300-foot)  high
stacks and two 76-meter  (250-foot) high suspension preheaters.  A  rail-
car unloading and staging area will  be located  in the  northern portion
                                  28

-------
       I     T*
                      FUTURE | '
                      BUHNER I'BURNER
                      BUILDING! teuiLDiwc
            I/T\
        a,
 FUTURE  V >\ %*.„'; -
m(CAt.CIN[B^J--,r--ltO
 BUILDING     *•• FAh
    H E;=iTlSiJ'''i  ««» i—
    ;:wdL3«J  Ls^Ta
    !  ii k
    !  !! IFUTU.E
    1  II IBAGHOUSES
    w
 ELECTRICAL
  BUILDING
iNER BUILDING
              ooooooo

GYPSUM
COAL
CLAV
SILICA
IRON
ORE

HIT " ^
Of EN
LIMESTONE
STORAGE
Of EN \'
LIMESTONE
STORAGE A
^R ,''
1
1






                                                                  RESERVE
                                                                  LIMESTONE
                                                                  STORAGE
                       J>

Figure 4
PROPOSED PLANT PLOT PLAN
                          0                    100
                            SCALE IN METERS
SOURCE:  Ideal Basic Industries, 1977.
                                                     REGION IV
                                                     U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
                                                     AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
                                                     STATEMENT FOR IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES
                                                         PROPOSED CEMENT MANUFACTURING
                                                          PLANT THEODORE INDUSTRIAL PARK
                                                                          MOBILE, ALABAMA
                                                    29

-------
                                        PROJECT DESCRIPTION (PLANT SITE)
of the site, with rail access provided by a track extending north along
the western property boundary to the State Docks Terminal Railway.
Non-process areas of the plant site will be landscaped wherever
practical.  The proposed layout has been designed to accommodate future
expansion of the plant's production capacity, as shown in Figure 4.

The project plan includes a 150-car employee parking lot and a 7.3-meter
(24-foot) wide access road, both of which will be paved with concrete.
The access road and railroad spur line will form a corridor about
47.2 meters (155 feet) from the western boundary line and will extend
north to the connection with the State Docks Railroad.  The access road
will continue north and intersect Island Road (Hamilton Boulevard).

A 380,000-liter (100,000-gallon) aboveground fuel oil tank will  be
on-site.  Although coal is the principal fuel to be  used in the  process,
oil will be used to preheat the kiln  and to produce  a pilot flame  for
the coal burners.

A portion of the plant  site will be utilized  for storage of raw
materials.  Approximately 604,000 metric tons (665,000 tons) of  lime-
stone will be stored  on-site, of which  all but  110,000 metric  tons
(120,000 tons) will be  in dead storage.  About  4,200 metric tons
(4,600 tons) of wet clay will be stored  near  the docking facility.   A
covered  storage area  will be  provided for  approximately  3,300  metric
tons (3,600 tons)  of  dried clay; 4,200 metric tons  (4,600  tons)  of wet
sand; 4,200 metric tons (4,600 tons)  of iron  ore  (wet  basis);
27,000 metric tons (30,000 tons) of gypsum (wet basis);  and
45,000 metric tons (50,000 tons) of coal  (wet basis).

The stormwater  runoff from the uncovered storage areas  will  be drained
to  a settling basin  and mixed with the  stormwater  runoff from the con-
tainment area around  the  oil  storage  tank  and with  wastewater from
cooling  tower blowdown and various  process wash areas.   The  wastewater
will be  treated for  reduction of  suspended solids  before being dis-
charged  to  the  ship  channel.   The  approximate capacity of the basin  will
                                   30

-------
                                        PROJECT DESCRIPTION  (PLANT SITE)
be 16 million liters (4.2 million gallons).  The average daily flow from
the basin is expected to be 341,000 liters (90,100 gallons).

Another physical feature of the plant design is that the site will be
graded so that storm water will drain to the north into an approximately
2-hectare (5-acre) catchment area.  This area, which will be formed
during construction by grading and berming the low side of the area,
will contain the first flush from a rainstorm and will reduce the
suspended particulate loading of the runoff prior to discharging it into
the freshwater marsh.

PLANT CONSTRUCTION

Construction of the cement manufacturing plant is scheduled to start
in the third quarter of 1978 and will last approximately 30 months.  The
facility will have an effective operating life of about 50 years and
will be constructed at a cost of over $165 million (in 1977 dollars).
The construction labor force will average 360 workers during the
construction period, with a peak of 700 workers.  The total construction
payroll will be approximately $15,000,000 in 1977 dollars, and another
$10,000,000 will be spent for local purchases of construction materials.
Approximately 80 to 85 percent of construction workers involved  in the
project at Theodore will be local hires, i.e., workers already living in
south Alabama who will commute to the site on a daily basis.

The first stage of construction will involve clearing and grading of the
access corridor and a site area of about 20 hectares  (50 acres).  Land-
clearing debris (wood and brush) will be disposed of  by three methods:
burning in an air-blower type pit burner; chipping for use on-site as
mulch; and hauling to the Irvington Landfill.  Since  the area was logged
in 1974, there will be a minimum of large trees to be cleared.   About
130,000 cubic meters (170,000 cubic yards) of soil will be moved during
the grading  period, with cut and fill activities balanced so that there
is no excess excavation material.
                                  31

-------
                                      PROJECT DESCRIPTION (PLANT SITE)
Later construction activities will include erection of structures and
equipment, installation of utility connections, final grading, and
revegetation.  Approximately 14,000 to 16,000 piles will be driven to
provide adequate foundations for structures.  Construction of the dock-
ing facility will require dredging approximately 500,000 cubic meters
(650,000 cubic yards) of material.  It is anticipated that this material
will be disposed in one of the approved spoil disposal areas to be used
for the ship channel project.

CEMENT MANUFACTURING PROCESS

The dry process manufacturing plant proposed by Ideal Basic Industries
requires limestone, sand, clay, and iron ore to be ground and mixed in
specific proportions.  The mixture is fed into a rotating furnace, or
kiln, where high temperatures fuse the materials into marble-sized
granules called clinker.  The clinker is then mixed with gypsum and
ground again to form cement.  The end product is a fine powder which is
shipped primarily in bulk.  A flow diagram of the cement manufacturing
process is presented in Figure 5.

Three general characteristics of the proposed dry cement manufacturing
process are the efficient use of waste heat, a high degree of material
recycling, and the use of air pollution control equipment in the
material-handling and recycling functions of the plant.  Because the
manufacturing process involves handling of dry, finely-ground materials,
a potential environmental problem is the emission of  particulate matter
to the atmosphere. These emissions are controlled by  venting dust-laden
gas streams through fabric filter collectors known as baghouses, which
have collection efficiencies of over 99 percent and have been approved
by EPA as the best available control technology (see  Air Quality
section).  All materials collected by these devices are recycled into
the cement manufacturing operation, thus conserving resources and
preventing accumulation of solid wastes.

-------
           RAW MATE RIAL
            UNLOADING
           AND STORAGE
                     7
                                       CLAY
                                       DRYER
       RAW MATERIAL
           FEED
                          CLAY
                          SILICA
                          IRON ORE
                          LIMESTONE
                                                   COAL
            GYPSUM
                 RAW MILLS
                REGRIND
                    1
   DRY
LIMESTONE
  	1
LIMESTONE
 STORAGE
  SILOS
               KILNS/CLINKER
                 COOLERS
                FINISH MILLS
      COAL GRINDING
        AND DRYING
                                                                   COAL DISTRIBUTION
                                                                        SYSTEM
GYPSUM
STORAGE
 SILOS
I
\
HOUSE >
__/
^
r
RAIL AND
TRUCK
SHIPPING



]
MAR
SHIP!

Figure 5
FLOW DIAGRAM OF PROPOSED PLANT PROCESS
                                 REGION IV
                                 U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
                                 AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
                                 STATEMENT FOR IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES
                                                                PROPOSED CEMENT MANUFACTURING
                                                                  PLANT THEODORE INDUSTRIAL PARK
SOURCE:  Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc.. 1977.
                                                         , ALABAMA
                                             33

-------
                                      PROJECT DESCRIPTION (PLANT SITE)
The raw materials, which will be received at the plant by rail or water
transportation, will be unloaded and stored In specific areas.  The
coal, gypsum, iron ore, sand, and clay (after it is dried) will be
stored in the covered stockpile area.  The wet limestone and clay will
be placed in uncovered storage piles.  The raw materials have a high
natural moisture content (roughly 21 percent) which should reduce the
dust generation potential.  However, a water spray dust suppression
system is planned for use on conveyor transfer points and storage piles.

The major components of the proposed dry cement manufacturing process
are the following:
     I.  Raw mills,
     2.  Regrind mill and kiln feed system,
     3.  Kiln suspension preheaters,
     4.  Kilns and precalciners,
     5.  Clinker coolers, and
     6.  Finish mills.
Starting in the raw mill circuit, most elements of the production pro-
cess are divided into two parallel systems, each designed to handle half
the plant's process weight (i.e., there are two raw mills, two kilns,
two clinker coolers, etc.).  Another design option is the substitution
of a single-kiln system as shown in Figure 4.  The process parameters of
a single kiln system, such as the process rate, fuel burning rates,
exhaust volumes and emissions, should be approximately the same as the
total from the two-kiln system.

The purpose of the raw mill  is to dry the raw materials, grind them to  a
fine consistency, and store them in silos for use  in the next  area.   The
drying and grinding is accomplished in airswept mills that utilize the
hot exhaust gases from the kiln and clinker cooler circuits, with
additional heat provided by  separate coal furnaces.

Next, the raw mix is fed into a regrind circuit for fineness control.
An air separator allows fines to pass through the  circuit while over-
sized material is returned for regrinding.  The raw mix  is blended for
                                  34

-------
                                      PROJECT DESCRIPTION (PLANT SITE)
proper consistency and is transported into kiln suspension preheaters
which utilize the kiln exhaust gases to heat the material.  Just prior
to entering the kiln, the raw mix is heated to about 840°C (1550°F) in a
coal-fired precalciner.  This additional heating reduces the size
requirements for the kiln.  Inside the kiln, the raw mix is thermally
transformed into clinker at about 1480°C (2,700°F).  The clinker is
dropped from the kiln onto an enclosed grate and cooled with ambient
air in the clinker cooler.

In the finish mills, the clinker is ground and mixed with gypsum to form
Portland cement.  If dry limestone is also mixed with the clinker  and
gypsum, a masonry cement is produced.  Six grades  of cement are planned
to be produced:  five portland cements and one masonry cement.

The finished product is conveyed to two storage areas—marine  silos for
bulk cement shipments by water and land silos for  all other shipments.
The land silos  serve the bulk rail car and truck loading  facilities and
also supply a packhouse that will bag approximately 5 percent  of the
total cement output.

RESOURCE UTILIZATION

Each day's operation of the  Ideal Basic  Industries cement plant will
require about 9,900 metric tons  (10,900 tons) of wet  raw materials and
coal to produce 4,600 metric tons (5,100  tons)  of  dry cement.   Limestone
will be obtained from  Ideal's Gaillard  quarry at  an average rate  of
7,788 metric tons  (8,585  tons) per  day  on a  wet basis.   An existing clay
quarry operated by  Ideal  Basic Industries at 24-Mile Bend on  the  Alabama
River, roughly  60  kilometers  (40 river  miles)  from the  plant  site, will
supply 645 metric  tons  (711  tons) of clay and 325  metric tons (358 tons)
of sand per day.  The  clay reserves  at  the quarry amount to only  a
5-year supply,  so  that  another source of material  must  eventually be
found.
                                   35

-------
                                      PROJECT DESCRIPTION (PLANT SITE)
Iron ore and gypsum, consumed at rates of 68 metric tons (75 tons) and
212 metric tons (234 tons) per day, respectively, will be obtained by
Ideal Basic Industries from commercial suppliers.  About 841 metric tons
(927 tons) per day of coal will be required, depending upon heat
content.  The coal will have a maximum sulfur content, by weight, of
1.5 percent.  The sulfur limitation is required for proper operation of
the kiln suspension preheaters.  Coal will be obtained on a contract
basis from a supplier.

Electric service to the plant will be provided at 13.8 kilovolts  by
Alabama Power Company.  Approximately 30 megawatts will be required for
normal plant operations.  Present plans for the transmission system
indicate that aboveground power lines will be located within the  plant's
access corridor.

The daily requirements  for  potable and process cooling make-up water
will be 1,080 cubic meters  (285,000 gallons), which will be supplied by
the Board of Water and  Sewer Commissioners of the City of Mobile.

The  plant will  follow a 24-hour-per-day schedule for  manufacturing oper-
ations.  However, because of maintenance  requirements  and other  factors,
only an 85  percent operating rate for the pyroprocesses  (kiln  and raw
mill) is projected.   A total of 135 workers,  including 26 supervisory
personnel,  will  be employed at the plant. Most  of the  plant workers
will be transferred  from  the existing Ideal  Basic  Industries facility  in
Mobile.  The clay and sand  quarry  in  north Mobile  County will  employ 10
additional  workers,  and the marine operations  needed  to  support  the
Theodore  plant  will  create  approximately  50  jobs.

TRANSPORTATION

Marine  transportation will  be  utilized  for an estimated 57.5  percent  of
all  outbound  shipments, by weight.   Tentatively, all  marine shipments
will  be destined for Ideal's terminal facilities in  Louisiana  and
Florida.   It  is presently undecided  whether Ideal  Basic Industries will
                                   36

-------
                                      PROJECT DESCRIPTION (PLANT SITE)
own and operate its own marine equipment, or whether independent
contractors will be utilized.  Truck transportation will account for
31.9 percent of outbound cement shipments, and rail transportation for
10.6 percent.  Outside contractors will be used in both cases.  The
specifications of the land fleet vehicles and the number of workers
involved in land transportation are indefinite at present.
                                  37

-------
                                                 LAND USE (PLANT SITE)
                            LAND USE SETTING

PRESENT LAND USE

A map of the present land use in the vicinity of the Ideal Basic Indus-
tries plant site is presented in Figure 6.  This area includes Theodore
Industrial Park, the Hollingers Island community, and the Dauphin Island
Parkway corridor from Deer River to Laurendine Road.  A large proportion
of the area consists of land that is currently vacant, i.e., not used
for any purpose other than possibly hunting and harvesting of forest
products.  The other major land use categories represented are industry,
residence, and transportation.

Most of the land west and southwest of the plant site either is held by
manufacturing firms or is being marketed actively for industrial use.
Less than half of this land is occupied by industrial establishments at
the present time.

Residential land is predominant to the north, east,  and south of the
proposed plant site, but the overall density of settlement is low.  A
field count of dwelling units in 1977 revealed that  the area within
4.8 kilometers (3 miles) of the plant site contained 974  dwelling units,
with an average density of one dwelling unit for every 8  hectares
(19 acres).  Residential development is concentrated in waterfront areas
(Alligator Bayou, Dog River, Mobile Bay) and in the  Hollingers  Island
community east of the Dauphin Island Parkway.  The  residential
properties closest to the proposed Ideal Basic Industries plant site are
located on the southern portion of San Marino Drive, on the Dauphin
Island Parkway directly across from the site, on Deer River Road, and  in
the area south of the barge canal but north of Baker Sorrel 1 Road and
Claudia Lane.

The land used for transportation includes street and highway  rights-of-
way, the State Docks Terminal Railway, and the barge canal.  The major
highways in the area are Rangeline Road,  Island Road (also known as
Hamilton Blvd.), and Dauphin Island Parkway.  The  use of  these  three
                                  38

-------
ISLAND ROAD

 I I  I  I I
                                            NOT TO BE
                                            »NOEVELOPEDj


                                            BrtOrtCCn^J
                                           PROPOSED^
                                           PLANT SITE j
                                                                        ROW
                                                   CLAUDIA LANE v
                                            BQ
   | RESIDENTIAL

    COMMERCIAL
                                                                MOBILE    BAY
    INSTITUTIONAL

   l AGRICULTURAL

    NURSERY

   | INDUSTRIAL
 Figure 6
 PRESENT LAND USE IN THE VICINITY OF THE
 PROPOSED IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES PLANT SITE
REGION IV
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
STATEMENT FOR IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES
                     o     o.s    i
                    SCALE IN KILOMETERS
 SOURCE. Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc., 1977.
   PROPOSED CEMENT MANUFACTURING
     PLANT THEODORE INDUSTRIAL PARK
                   MOBILE, ALABAMA
                                                 39

-------
                                                 LAND USE (PLANT SITE)
highways provides the main north-south route through the Theodore
Industrial Park.  The State Docks Railway, which will provide rail
access to the proposed cement plant, extends from the State Docks
Terminal facility on Mobile Bay to the Louisville and Nashville line
near Theodore.

The area contains a number of plant nurseries, the largest being an
establishment at Island Road and Dauphin Island Parkway.  Institutional
land uses are limited to five small churches at various locations on the
Parkway and the Hoilingers Island Elementary School on Hammock Road.
There are fewer than ten commercial establishments in the area, plus
several small marinas and boatyards.  The only recreational land within
4.8 kilometers (3 miles) of the plant site is a Bay Road park area which
belongs to the Hoilingers Island Community Association.

FUTURE LAND USE

Land use changes will occur near the plant site as a result of the
Theodore Ship Channel project and general pressures for industrial and
residential development.  A forecast of land use in the year 1992 is
presented in Figure 7.

Land takings for the ship channel will result in the elimination of two
boatyards and a number of dwellings located near the present barge
canal.  It is expected that some additional residential properties will
be converted to industrial use.  Figure 7 incorporates the assumption
that by 1992 less than five dwelling units will remain between the ship
channel and Baker Sorrel1 Road or Claudia Lane, with the exception of
units fronting on Claudia Lane.

A large proportion of land within 4.8 kilometers (3 miles) of the Ideal
Basic Industries plant site is expected to convert to  industrial  use,
with possibly some commercial development along Island Road and Dauphin
Island Parkway.  The anticipated land use conversions  are  not dependent
upon the  presence of the cement  plant.  Without the  proposed project,
                                  40

-------
ISLAND ROAD I

 I  I I  I  I





                                                NOT TO BE
                                                .DEVELOPED^
               ; PROPOSED BARCe'
                                           Hiilp PROPOSED^
                                              PLANT SITEj
                                                                             ROAD
11.-.;! RESIDENTIAL

Kf<\3 COMMERCIAL

                                   lilllii


                  ill! i
                        !iij!iiil!lllijj!illli:ll|
                  111!
                                                                          HEODORE SHIP CHANNEL
                                                                              RIGHT-OF-WAY
                                                                    MOBI
Ut-y::! INSTITUTIONAL

|^"^.| AGRICULTURAL


fgJ3 NURSERY

roa INDUSTRIAL
 Figure 7
 PROJECTED LAND USE IN THE VICINITY OF THE
 PROPOSED IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES PLANT SITE.
 1992
                         0     0.5     1
                        SCALE IN KILOMETERS
 SOURCE. Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc., 1977.
REGION IV
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
STATEMENT FOR IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES
   PROPOSED CEMENT MANUFACTURING
     PLANT THEODORE INDUSTRIAL PARK
                    MOBILE, ALABAMA
                                                    41

-------
                                                 LAND USE (PLANT SITE)
It Is probable that the property, because of Its value as waterfront
land, would be developed by some other Industrial firm.

Four important highway improvements in the Theodore Industrial Park area
will be completed by 1985.  These are:  (1) the widening of Island Road
(Hamilton Blvd.) to three lanes (by 1980); (2) the construction of
Range!ine Expressway (by 1982); (3) the improvement of the Rangeline
Road-Island Road intersection and conversion of Rangeline Road to four
lanes between this intersection and Deer River; and (4) conversion of
the Dauphin Island Parkway to four lanes from Perch Creek to Island
Road.

Land use changes will occur near the plant site as a result of the
Theodore Ship Channel project.  The ship channel project (see Figure 8)
will involve:
     1.  A channel of 12-meter (40-foot) depth and 90-meter (300-foot)
         bottom width, occupying a right-of-way up to 300 meters
         (1,000 feet) wide;
     2.  A bay cut of 122-meter (400-foot) bottom width providing deep-
         water access to the Mobile Bay channel;
     3.  A 17-hectare (42-acre) turning basin at the end of the ship
         channel near Rangeline Road;
     4.  An extension of the existing canal with 4-meter (12-foot) depth
         west of Rangeline Road.

A second turning basin at the mouth of the land cut has been  authorized
but will not be included in the initial construction program. Construc-
tion will take place during approximately the same time period as the
proposed cement plant construction project.
                                  42

-------
   "S>^
 MOBILE  CO.
                     MOBILE
                                                          BALDWIN CO.
                                                                  ROBERTSDALE
               PROPOSED
           IDEAL BASIC CEMENTS
               PLANT SITE
           r	
tlSLAND   i
                                          APPROACH CHANNEL
BARGE CANAL
                                       Si:** DISPOSAL
                                         *!:  ISLAND
             PROPOSED^
             THEODORE
           SHIP CHANNEL
                           IP CHANNE
                          ROJECT AR
                                                                     SCALE IN KILOMETERS

  Figure 8
  PLAN VIEW OF PROPOSED CORPS PROJECT-
  ENTIRE HARBOR
 SOURCE: U.S. Army Engineer District, Mobile Corps of
         Engineers, 1975.
                  REGION IV
                  U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
                  AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
                  STATEMENT FOR IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES
                    PROPOSED CEMENT MANUFACTURING
                      PLANT THEODORE INDUSTRIAL PARK
                                  MOBILE, ALABAMA
                                           43

-------
                                              AIR QUALITY (PLANT SITE)
                              AIR QUALITY

BASELINE CONDITIONS

Mobile County is an industrialized urban area with over 180 permitted
point sources of air pollutants.  These sources include paper mills,
chemical manufacturers, the power industry, and various other industries
located primarily in waterfront areas near the Mobile River and Mobile
Bay.  Permitted sources were responsible for the emission of 6,800
metric tons (7,500 tons) of particulate matter and 79,800 metric tons
(88,000 tons) of sulfur dioxide during 1976.  In addition, 4,500 metric
tons (5,000 tons) of particulate matter emissions were attributable to
population-related activities (e.g., automobiles, home heaters,
fireplaces, open burning).

Ambient air quality in Mobile County has improved since 1972, due
largely to the development and implementation of an Air Quality
Maintenance Plan for the county.  The Division of Air Pollution Control
of the Mobile County Board of Health has monitored particulate matter
levels at stations in the county since 1972.  Since that time, the
average of the annual geometric mean suspended particulate matter
concentrations recorded at these stations declined by 33 percent.
Ambient sulfur dioxide concentrations have been monitored less
intensively; data are available only from a downtown Mobile station and
from the Big Sniffer station in the Theodore Industrial Park.  This
information indicates that sulfur dioxide levels do not exceed standards
in Mobile County and that conditions are substantially better in the
Theodore Industrial Park area than in downtown Mobile.

The State of Alabama has reviewed Mobile County for attainment status
with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards.  Two areas, downtown
Mobile and north of Mobile, have been determined the only areas of the
county in non-attainment for particulate matter.  The entire county has
                                  44

-------
                                              AIR QUALITY (PLANT SITE)
been determined to be in attainment for all the other standards except
oxidants.  The high oxidant levels measured in the county are believed
to be primarily caused by automobile emissions and natural conditions,
not industrial sources.

Air quality in the Theodore Industrial Park area currently is affected
by emissions from two chemical plants, a metallurgical processing plant,
a small refinery, and vehicular traffic.  One Mobile County monitoring
station for particulate matter is the Big Sniffer station on Rangeline
Road near Deer River.

In addition, a three-station ambient monitoring network  is currently in
operation by Ideal Basic Industries to collect samples of suspended
particulate matter.  As shown in Figure 9, Station 1 is  located north of
the proposed plant site near Island Road, Station 2 is near Baker
Sorrel 1 Road south of the plant site, and Station 3 is on the eastern
boundary of the Ideal Basic Industries property.

The sampling results from all four stations are presented in Table 2 and
are displayed in Figure 10.  The lower portion of the table shows the
primary and secondary Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS).  The
secondary standards, which are more stringent, apply to  all of Mobile
County.

The data show that the air quality in the park area has  been within the
standards for particulate matter since the monitoring was initiated.

RELEVANT PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS

During construction activities, fugitive dust emissions  will be reduced
by the use of water sprays on roads and other areas where heavy
equipment is used.  In addition, the main access road will be surfaced
as soon as possible to reduce the dust potential.
                                  45

-------
         IDEAL SITES
         MOBILE COUNTY SITE
Figure 9
LOCATIONS OF AMBIENT MONITORING STATIONS IN
THE VICINITY OF THE PROPOSED CEMENT PLANT,
THEODORE, ALABAMA
SOURCE: Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc., 1977.
PROPOSED CEMENT MANUFACTURING
 PLANT THEODORE INDUSTRIAL PARK
              MOBILE, ALABAMA
                                           46

-------
Table 2.  Summary of Existing Ambient Total Suspended Particulate Matter Levels (ug/m3) in the
          Vicinity of the Proposed Ideal Basic Industries Plant Site, 1976 and 1977

Station Description
Mobile Big Sniffer
County #11
Ideal #1 Nursery
Ideal #2 Weaver's
Residence
Ideal #3 Lift Station


Number
of
Time Period Observations
1976 56
1977 50
5/28/77 to 12/31/77 47*
5/28/77 to 12/31/77 47*
5/28/77 to 12/31/77 47*
Primary Standard
Secondary Standard

Geometri
Mean
48
43
42
35
31
75
60
24-Hour
c Second
Max Highest
156 148
161 90
179 134
93 89
94 90
260
150
Standard
Geometric
Deviation
N/A
1.63
1.62
1.55
1.62


NA = Not Available.

*Sampling and analysis by Federal Reference Method (Code of Federal Regulations, Part 50,
 Appendix B).  Continuous 24-hour sampling was conducted every third day from May 28 to August 31,
 and every sixth day thereafter.

Sources:  Mobile County Board of Health, Division of Air Pollution Control, 1977.
          Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc., 1977.

-------

JT* 120-
E
5
O 100-
JE 90-
111
0 80-
Z
0 70-
z
••• CH—
•5 OU~
0
OC 50-
LU
o 40"
UJ
O
Uj 30-
0
OC 20-
Ul
< 10-

^
0_










PRIMARY STANDARD


SECONDARY STANDARD

^^^•^^
^**l*^*>*11^ ^**^«**»^^
BIG SNIFFER ^
o
o



O IDEAL STATION 1
O IDEAL STATION 2
O 'DEAL STATION 3

l 1 1 l 1 l
1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977
YEAR



-
-
_

_





-

-


-

-




•
Figure 10
AMBIENT TOTAL SUSPENDED PARTICULATE MATTER
CONCENTRATIONS AT STATIONS NEAR THE
PROPOSED IDEAL CEMENT PLANT, MOBILE COUNTY.
1975-1977
SOURCE: Mobile County Board of Health, 1978.
        Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc., 1978.
REGION IV
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
STATEMENT FOR IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES
   PROPOSED CEMENT MANUFACTURING
    PLANT THEODORE INDUSTRIAL PARK
                 MOBILE, ALABAMA
                                           48

-------
                                              AIR QUALITY  (PLANT SITE)
The burning of land-clearing wastes will be performed  with  an  air-blower
type pit burner to reduce potential smoke emissions.   Burning  will  be
conducted under the conditions of the permit from the  Mobile County
Board of Health, and only during favorable dispersion  conditions.
Burning will be supervised at all times.

The design of the cement plant has inherent features which  will  reduce
the potential for air pollution emissions.  A  suspension  preheater
requires use of a coal with no more than 1.5 percent sulfur content due
to potential sulfate deposits forming and blocking  flow of  material  and
kiln exhaust gases.  The use of the kiln/raw mill system  and combined
baghouse control provides less fuel usage and  allows intimate  contact of
the sulfur dioxide in the exhaust with the alkaline raw materials.   This
contact could reduce the amount of sulfur dioxide emissions by an
estimated 75 percent (U.S. EPA, Office of Air  Quality  Planning and
Standards, 1975).

In addition, about 60 percent of the coal usually burned  in the kiln
will be fired in the precalciner.  This system reduces the  amount  of air
passing through the hot zone of the kiln and could  act to reduce
formation of nitrogen dioxide (Bauer, 1977).

The operation of the cement plant has the potential for  emissions  of
particulate matter, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, hydrocarbons,  and
carbon monoxide, as shown in Table 3.  The allowable quantities of
particulate matter and sulfur dioxide shown are based  upon  EPA deter-
mination of use of the Best Available Control  Technology  (BACT) and
compliance with the Prevention of Significant  Deterioration (PSD)
requirements.

The use of  baghouses  (fabric filter dust collectors) on  all process
exhausts and the use of 1.5 percent sulfur coal (by weight) have been
determined  to be BACT for this proposed project (see Permit and Approval
section).   Typically, a baghouse  reduces the amount of particulate
matter emitted  by  greater than 99 percent.  The collected dust is
                                  49

-------
                                             AIR QUALITY  (PLANT SITE)
Table 3.  Maximum Allowable Atmospheric  Emissions  from  the Proposed
          Cement Manufacturing Plant for Particulate Matter  and
          Sulfur Dioxide and Estimated Quantities  of Other Pollutants:
          Nitrogen Oxides, Hydrocarbons, and Carbon Monoxide
                                             Allowable
                                      Grams/             (Ibs/
Pollutant/Source                       Sec               hour)
Particulate Matter

Raw Mills/Kilns/Coolers* and
 Clay Dryer                            12.4               98
Regrind Mill                            0.6                4
Kiln/Cooler System**                    0.8                6
Gypsum Storage and Unloading            0.2                2
Finish Mills                            2.6               21
Clay Handling System                    0.2                2
Coal Drying System                      2.9               23
Shipping
  Marine                                0.6                5
  Land                                  0.3                2
  Packhouse                             0.3             	3

     TOTAL                             20.9              166
Sulfur Dioxidet

Raw Mi 11/Kiln/Clay Dryer              249.4            1,980
Coal Dryer                             22.7              180

     TOTAL                            272.1            2,160
                                  50

-------
                                              AIR QUALITY (PLANT SITE)
Table 3.  Maximum Allowable Atmospheric Emissions from the Proposed
          Cement Manufacturing Plant for Particulate Matter and
          Sulfur Dioxide and Estimated Quantities of Other Pollutants:
          Nitrogen Oxides, Hydrocarbons, and Carbon Monoxide
          (Continued, page 2 of 2)
                                             Estimated
                                      Grams/            (Ibs/
Pollutant/Source                       Sec              hour)
Nitrogen Oxides

Raw Mi 11/Kiln/Clay Dryer              131.5
Coal Dryer                             20.8

     TOTAL                            152.3             1,209
Hydrocarbons

Raw Mi 11/Kiln/Clay Dryer                0.3                 3
Coal Dryer                              0.1                 _!_

     TOTAL                              0.4                 4


Carbon Monoxide

Raw Mi 11/Kiln/Clay Dryer                1.1                 9
Coal Dryer                              0.4                _3

     TOTAL                              1.5                12
 *KiIns/coolers exhaust through raw mill.
 •(•Calculated based upon 1.5 percent sulfur coal, 100 percent conversion
  of S to S02.
**Excluding kiln/cooler emissions (included in raw mill estimates) for
  raw mix and clinker exhausts.

Sources:  H.K. Ferguson Associates, 1975.
          Ideal Basic Industries, 1977.
          Prevention of Significant Deterioration Application, Volumes I
          and II, 1977.
                                  51

-------
                                              AIR QUALITY (PLANT SITE)

returned to the process and thereby a potential solid waste problem Is
eliminated.

The other criteria pollutants from the plant are not subject to the BACT
and PSD requirements and are listed as estimated, not allowable.  The
hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide emissions are of small quantities,
while the nitrogen oxide emissions are somewhat higher.  The nitrogen
oxides are a direct function of the amount of air used in combustion of
the coal and the high temperatures involved.  The nitrogen in the air
(about 78 percent) is oxidized at high temperatures to form various
types of nitrogen oxides.  While direct control is not practical nor
available, the process parameters of excess air and kiln temperature are
to be maintained within the operational constraints required for the
cement manufacturing process to act as a limiting factor to the forma-
tion of nitrogen oxides.

Another potential air emission is fugitive dust from the handling and
storage of the raw materials.  However, in order to reduce this emission
potential, the barge unloading, conveyor transfer points, and storage
piles will utilize water spray dust suppression systems on various
sources of dust; some transfer points will be enclosed and vented
through baghouses; and the coal, dried clay, iron ore, sand, and gypsum
storage area will be covered.  About 85 percent of the raw materials
(the limestone and clay) have moisture contents of roughly 22 percent,
which helps to suppress dust emissions from their handling and  storage.

IMPACTS

The majority of the fugitive dust generated during the construction
phase of the proposed project should settle out close to the source
(Kosky and Wanielista, 1975).  The remaining dust could cause short-term
but reversible impacts of a moderate magnitude, but the impact  is
expected to be of a low significance in the area.  The emission of smoke
due to burning of land-clearing debris will also contribute to  air
quality impacts.  However, assuming the worst  case of  burning all the
                                 52

-------
                                              AIR QUALITY (PLANT SITE)

wastes rather than chipping or landfill ing, the impact is expected to be
of a low magnitude due to the use of the air-blower type pit burner and
burning only during favorable dispersion conditions.  Therefore, the
significance is considered low, the duration very short, and the effect
reversible.  The adverse impact of burning is avoidable by using the
other proposed methods of disposal:  chipping and landfilling.

The impacts of permanent operations at the Ideal Basic Industries plant
upon sulfur dioxide and suspended particulate matter concentrations have
been analyzed through mathematical modeling of atmospheric dispersion
processes.  The projected changes in average annual concentrations of
these pollutants due to the proposed plant are plotted in Figures 11 and
12.

The importance of air quality impacts  resulting from the proposed facil-
ity can best be evaluated in terms of  the Prevention of Significant
Deterioration  (PSD) review process.  It  involves demonstrating  that the
following two conditions will be met:
     1.  Ambient Air Quality Standards  (AAQS) must  not be exceeded at
         any location as a result of the proposed new  source.   These
         standards pertain to the following air quality measures:
           Sulfur dioxide
           (a)  annual arithmetic mean  concentration;
           (b)  second highest 24-hour concentration  in an annual
                period;
           (c)  second highest 3-hour  concentration in an annual  period;
           Suspended particulate matter
           (a)  annual geometric mean  concentration;
           (b)  second highest 24-hour concentration  in an annual
                period.
     2.  Allowable federal increments  in air  pollutant concentrations
         must  not be exceeded.  These  increments  represent fixed  limits
         upon the amounts by which the air quality  measures  listed  above
         can change relative to 1974,  the  baseline  year.  All  sources  of
         air quality degradation are included,  not  just the  proposed  new
                                  53

-------
                                                      PROPOSED CEMENT MANUFACTURING
                                                       PLANT THEODORE INDUSTRIAL PARK
                                                                   MOBILE. ALABAMA
POINT OF PREDICTED MAXIMUM INCREMENTAL
CONTRIBUTION (1.2ug/m')    /     /
Figure 11
ISOPLETHS OF THE INCREMENTAL CONTRIBUTIONS
TO PREDICTED ANNUAL AVERAGE GROUND-LEVEL
SULFUR DIOXIDE CONCENTRATIONS (ug/m3),
PROPOSED CEMENT PLANT ONLY, THEODORE,
ALABAMA, 1980
SOURCE: Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc., 1977.
                                       54

-------
     0.4
                               0.6
  ISLAN
               ROAD
                                FININI
                           0.8
                       KERF
                                     'on/.
                 DEGl
                       1.0
                                r«/vj
                                ^1.5
              0.6
                                      '0fpLAN^
                                          ;ITE
                                                     0.8
                                                                     0.4
  LAURENDINE
    0    0.5    1
   SCALE IN KILOMETERS
                 ROAD
POINT OF PREDICTED MAXIMUM INCREMENTAL
CONTRIBUTION (2.3 ug/m')
                                                               O&LZ   BAY
                                                                             LJ
Figure 12
ISOPLETHS OF THE INCREMENTAL CONTRIBUTIONS
TO PREDICTED ANNUAL AVERAGE GROUND-LEVEL
SUSPENDED PARTICULATE MATTER CONCENTRATIONS
(ug/m3), PROPOSED CEMENT PLANT, THEODORE,
ALABAMA, 1980
SOURCE: Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc., 1977.
                                                     REGION IV
                                                     U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
                                                     AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
                                                     STATEMENT FOR IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES
                                                       PROPOSED CEMENT MANUFACTURING
                                                         PLANT THEODORE INDUSTRIAL PARK
                                                                     MOBILE, ALABAMA
                                       55

-------
                                              AIR QUALITY (PLANT SITE)
         source.  As In the case of AAQS, the new source must be shown
         not to violate the allowable increment at any location, under
         expected worst-case meteorological conditions.  The purpose of
         the increments is to prevent significant air quality
         deterioration in areas where the 1974 ambient concentrations
         were substantially below the applicable standards.

The forecast year used in the present case is 1980, which represents the
start-up of the cement plant.  The estimated baseline conditions reflect
the actual air pollutant emissions that occurred in 1974, whereas the
forecasts for 1980 pertain to a hypothetical situation in which all
sources are emitting at the maximum allowable or permitted rates (except
for a few cases in which this would not be theoretically possible).  The
cement plant emissions used in the modeling were based on an alternative
process design no longer viable and were roughly 10 percent greater than
the totals shown in Table 3.  In addition, the sulfur dioxide emissions
do not reflect any reduction because of contact with the alkaline dust.
These factors mean that the results of the modeling overestimate the
plant's contribution to ambient levels.

In order to determine whether the PSD requirements will be met and to
show the maximum impact of the cement plant, it is necessary to consider
ambient air quality for three types of receptor concentrations for each
standard:
      1.  Maximum pollutant concentration from all sources in 1980;
      2.  Maximum degradation in air pollutant concentrations between
          1974 and 1980 due to all sources;
      3.  The maximum contributions of the cement plant to pollutant
          concentrations in 1980.

For each air quality measure, the maximum concentration represents the
worst case in terms of compliance with Ambient Air Quality standards,
the maximum degradation is used for determining compliance with allow-
able federal PSD increments, and the maximum contribution of the cement
plant relates to its worst-case impact.
                                  56

-------
                                              AIR QUALITY  (PLANT SITE)
A summary of the PSD evaluation results for the proposed  Ideal Basic
Industries project is presented in Table 4.  The air quality  concentra-
tions shown have been estimated by mathematical modeling  based on
meteorological conditions known to have occurred.   In  comparing  these
numbers, it should be remembered that the maximum  values  for  the air
quality parameters generally occur at different locations,  depending on
specific meteorological conditions relative to the  desired  standard.
The 24-hour and 3-hour concentrations are actually  the highest (maximum)
of all the second highest concentrations predicted  for the  five  years  of
meteorological conditions used.  This highest, second  highest concept  is
needed in order to assess compliance with the ambient  air quality
standards that cannot be exceeded more than once per year.

Each of the maximum values projected to occur in 1980  with  the proposed
project in operation (first row) is less than the  respective  air quality
standard, shown at the bottom of the table.  This  indicates that the
standards will not be exceeded at any location affected by  the proposed
plant.  As shown in the last column, the 24-hour suspended  particulate
standard will nearly be exceeded.  However, this condition  exists  only
in a very localized area near a present emission source (unrelated to
the Ideal project) and will not be affected by the  emissions  from  the
cement plant under the meteorological conditions represented.

The central portion of Table 4 deals with the locations of  maximum air
quality degradation, or the change between 1974 and 1980.  The largest
degradation should occur with the sulfur dioxide highest, second highest
24-hour standard (second column) since only 12 percent of the PSD
increment should remain.  The cement plant will use 31 percent of  the
increment, the other portion will be consumed by other sources in  the
area.

The maximum usage of a PSD increment by the cement  plant  should  occur
with respect to the highest, second highest 24-hour suspended particu-
late standard (last column).  About 62 percent of  the  PSD increment will
be used by the plant.  In all cases shown in Table  4,  maximum
                                  57

-------
Table 4.  Summary  of PSD  Evaluation  Results  for the Proposed Ideal  Basic Industries Cement Manufacturing
            Plant
                                                  Ambient  Ground-Level  Concentration (ug/m^)
Emission Situation

Annual
Arithmetic
Mean
Sulfur Dioxide
Second
Highest
24-Hour
Period
Suspended Particulates
Second
Highest
3-Hour
Period
Annual
Geometric
Mean
Second
Highest
24-Hour
Period
POINTS OF MAXIMUM CONCENTRATION
   1980 With Ideal *                20
      Percent of Standard              25%

   Ideal Impact(Contribution)       <1

POINTS OF MAXIMUM DEGRADATION
   1974 Baseline                    8
   1980 With Ideal t                20
   Degradation                      12
      Increment Remaining           8
      Percent of Increment Remaining   40%
   Ideal Impact(Contribution)
      Percent of Increment
<1
                  90
                     25%
                  28
                  10
                  90
                  80
                  11
                     12%
28
                     31%
               315
                   24%
               146
                32
               315
               283
               229
                   45%
146
                   28%
                 46
                    77%
                 44
                 44
                  0
                 19
                   100%
<1
            149
                99%
             45
             68
             23
             14
21
                38%
                                 57%
MAXIMUM IMPACT OF IDEAL **
Ideal Impact
Percent of Increment
Increment Remaining
Allowable Federal Increment
Federal Primary Standard
Federal Secondary Standard
1.2
6%
15
20
80
NA
38
42%
53
91
365
NA
199
39%
<313
512
NA
1300
2
12%
21
19
75
60
23
62%
26
37
260
150
*  Concentrations from all sources  at  points  of  maximum impact  from all  sources combined.
t  Concentrations from all sources  at  points  of  maximum degradation since 1974.
** Concentrations from Ideal  at  points  of maximum  Ideal  effect.
                                                                               73

                                                                               JO
                                                                                                                   •o
Source:  Environmental Science  and Engineering,  Inc.,  1977.

-------
                                              AIR QUALITY (PLANT SITE)
degradation since 1974 will  not occur at the same locations as the
maximum Impact of the cement plant.

The emissions from the sources modeled may be somewhat conservative
because of the use of permitted emission rates that are typically higher
than actual rates, and the cement plant's sulfur dioxide emissions
should be substantially lower than the values used.  In addition, for
each meteorological condition, the concentrations everywhere else will
be lower than the values at the points described in Table 4.

The extent to which the proposed cement plant might limit allowable
emissions by other new sources (also subject to PSD review) and thereby
might influence future industrial growth could be a serious community
impact, since much of the land near the Ideal Basic Industries plant
site is intended for industrial development.  The detailed air quality
forecasts indicate that the proposed project will not  place significant
limitations upon future growth.

The growth limitation issue relates primarily to short-term air quality
increments, since the proposed project does  not place  significant stress
upon annual increments or annual ambient air quality standards.  An
important characteristic of short-term air quality measures is that the
maximum values tend to involve highly specific combinations of emission
sources, geographic areas, and meteorological conditions.  As an
example, the  point of maximum consumption of the 24-hour  sulfur dioxide
increment  (88 percent total consumption, 31  percent due to Ideal) is  a
location northwest of the proposed  plant site near  Island Road.  A  high
consumption of the 24-hour suspended particulate matter increment
(54 percent total consumption, 22  percent due to Ideal) also  occurs near
this point.   The  reason is that  this location is aligned  with two
existing emission  sources as well  as Ideal,  so that winds  from the
southeast  can cause the location to be  impacted  by  all three  sources.
However, there are few sites where an industry could  locate  an
additional emission source that  would contribute to this  impact.  The
critical areas for the 24-hour  particulate  increment  (where  total
                                   59

-------
                                              AIR QUALITY (PLANT SITE)
utilization by all sources In 1980 will exceed 50 percent) are situated
close to the plant site, except for the location discussed In the
previous paragraph.  The suspended particulate matter increment probably
will not be subject to additional stress in these areas.  In the case of
the 24-hour sulfur dioxide increment, all of the high-utilization areas
other than the above-mentioned location will be affected only slightly
by the proposed cement plant.

Therefore, the utilization of the PSD increments by the proposed plant
is considered to be of a moderate magnitude, but of low overall signi-
ficance to the future growth of the industrial park.  The impact is
long-term and reversible.  The PSD review has been completed and the
"Authority to Construct" has been issued for the cement plant (see the
Permit and Approval section of this document).

The impact of the particulate matter and sulfur dioxide on the ambient
air quality levels emissions will be of a low magnitude based on the
modeling analysis performed.  The significance is also rated low because
of the small area affected; impacts will be long-term, but reversible.

Since the estimated quantities of hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, and
fugitive dust are very low, impacts should be negligible.  Modeling of
the nitrogen oxide emissions determined that the levels will be well
below the National Ambient Air Quality Standards.  Therefore, the
magnitude of the nitrogen oxide concentrations is considered low and the
overall significance in the area is also considered low.  The related
impact is long-term and reversible.

MITIGATING MEASURES

Watering of exposed areas will be employed as an environmental safeguard
to lessen fugitive dust impacts during the construction phase.  Some
possible mitigating measures would be:
      1.  Use of chemical soil stabilizers;
      2.  Adoption of techniques to reduce wind speeds across exposed
          surfaces; and
      3.  Paving of construction roads.
                                  60

-------
                                               AIR  QUALITY (PLANT SITE)


Over 100 chemical products can be  used  as  soil  stabilizers,  some of
which are applied to the land surface and  some of  which are  incorporated
into the soil.  The major disadvantages of chemical  stabilizers are the
expense involved and the fact that traffic and other activities can
break down the stabilizing layer.  This control  tends to be  effective
only for inactive areas, which typically have  small  emission rates
relative to active areas.

Reductions in wind speed across exposed surfaces,  as a means of mini-
mizing wind-entrained dust, can be achieved by enclosures, coverings, or
placement of tall vegetation.  Such control measures ordinarily are not
feasible for construction projects of short duration, however.   The
option of paving all construction  roads, rather than just the principal
access road, could reduce fugitive dust emissions  significantly.  This
approach is considered impractical because movements of heavy machinery
and equipment would break up the road surfaces  and thus necessitate
frequent repaying.

With reference to burning the portion of land-clearing wastes not
chipped or taken to a landfill, there are  no mitigating actions that
could be performed to lessen the projected impacts.

The environmental safeguards that will be  employed to control  emissions
of particulate matter from permanent operations  at the Ideal  Basic
Industries plant will account for approximately $20  million  of  the
overall  project cost.  The use of baghouse dust  collectors to control
stack emissions, which is considered BACT, will  reduce emission rates to
below the allowable rates.  It is not economically feasible,  nor tech-
nically practical, to control stack emissions  of particulate matter to  a
greater degree.

Impacts involving sulfur dioxide could be  mitigated  by the use  of lower
sulfur coal; however, the resulting decrease would be slight  given  the
inherent reduction by contact with the alkaline  raw  materials in the
proposed process.
                                  61

-------
                                              AIR QUALITY (PLANT SITE)
Impacts associated with pollutant emissions from the kiln/cooler/raw
mill system will be mitigated by the use of stacks [90 meters (300 feet)
high] for release of the exhaust gases.  These high stacks will
facilitate dispersion and dilution of emissions before the effluent
plume reaches ground level and also minimize the possibility of plume
downwash.  As a mitlgatlve measure, higher stacks could be utilized for
other sources (along with the continued use of baghouse control).  This
approach has not been considered practical for all sources because the
emission rates of most sources are too small to justify the use of
higher stacks.

ALTERNATIVES

The major project alternatives affecting air quality are:
      1.  The no-action alternative, under which the proposed project
          would not be built;
      2.  The use of a wet rather than a dry cement manufacturing
          process; and
      3.  The use of air emission controls other than baghouses.

Future air quality in the absence of the proposed Ideal Basic Industries
project would be dependent upon general industrial development and the
alternative use of the Ideal property.  The air quality modeling study
suggests that ambient air concentrations will tend to increase in the
Theodore Industrial Park area over the next 15 years, but that air
quality standards and allowable increments will not become seriously
limiting on future growth.  The factors responsible are the high levels
of emission control required for new sources and the relatively low
spatial density of industrial development in the industrial park area.

An alternative which would affect the operating characteristics of the
proposed cement plant would be the substitution of a conventional wet
process for the proposed dry process plant.  In a wet process  plant, the
raw materials are mixed with water before grinding to form a slurry,
                                   62

-------
                                              AIR QUALITY (PLANT SITE)
which Is then fed to the kiln.  Wet and dry process plants cost about
the same to build and have similar emissions of particulate matter
(U.S. EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, 1975).
However, overall fuel usage per ton of clinker produced is approximately
twice as great for a wet plant as for a dry plant.

Higher fuel usage with the wet plant would tend to result in greater
emissions of sulfur dioxide.  The higher exhaust gas volumes with the
wet plant would also contribute to higher air pollution control costs.

A wet plant would have the potential for greater wastewater discharges
and more maintenance problems due to its use of the slurry kiln feed.
Therefore, a wet process plant, although a practical alternative to the
dry process, would be less desirable because of energy, environmental,
and maintenance factors.

Several alternatives to baghouse technology for control of pollutant
emissions from cement manufacturing include cyclones, wet scrubbers, and
electrostatic precipitators.  Multicyclones are effective in removing
the larger particles contained in gas streams, but do not capture the
finer dusts.  Therefore, cyclones are usually limited to the role of
pretreatment devices.  Wet scrubbing devices can achieve a high degree
of particulate control, but involve wastewater problems, high  energy
requirements, high operating costs, and waste products  that are
difficult to recycle.

Electrostatic precipitators would be economically  feasible only for the
large volume exhaust gas streams of the kiln/cooler/raw mill system.
Their potential shortcomings relative to baghouses  include:
      1.  Explosion  potential because of combustible gases and coal dust
          in the gas stream; and
      2.  The need for conditioning of gases prior  to entry  into  the
          precipitator.
                                  63

-------
                                              AIR QUALITY (PLANT SITE)
Therefore, baghouses were chosen over the other devices because of
their higher collection efficiencies and lack of comparable operating
problems.

An alternative to the use of water sprays on sources of fugitive dust,
such as conveyor drop and transfer points, would be enclosing the
location and venting displaced air to a baghouse.  The difference in the
levels of emissions does not warrant the use of this alternative action.
                                  64

-------
                                                      NOISE (PLANT SITE)
                                 NOISE

BASELINE
INTRODUCTION

Environmental noise commonly is measured in decibels (dBA) on a scale
that matches the receptive characteristics of the human ear (the
A-scale).  Since sound levels tend to vary from moment to moment,
various statistical measures are needed to characterize overall noise
conditions.

The Leq(24) represents the equivalent sound level equal in cumulative
energy to all time-varying noise produced during a 24-hour period.  The
L((jn) is the equivalent sound level for day and night based'upon the
Len(24)» but is biased high to account for greater potential noise
sensitivity during the night.

The U.S. EPA has suggested noise levels requisite to protect the public
against hearing loss or activity interference (EPA, 1974).  These values
are for long-term exposures and consider the cumulative effects of
noise, but are not intended to be used as standards nor discrete
numbers.  The outdoor annual energy equivalent sound levels are as
follows:
      1.  55 dBA (L(jn)—could interfere with normal outdoor activi-
          ties, such as speech communication at about 3 meters
          (10 feet).  The level is suggested for residential areas, but
          is typically exceeded in metropolitan areas of the U.S.

      2.  70 dBA (Leq24)--could cause a hearing loss in 96 percent
          of the population by 40 years of continual exposure.
                                  65

-------
                                                      NOISE (PLANT SITE)

PRESENT CONDITIONS

Baseline noise monitoring was conducted at 12 stations near the proposed
Ideal Basic  Industries  plant site.  Three stations were located on the
Ideal property; the  other nine stations were located at noise-sensitive
sites such as schools and residences, and at strategic points near noise
sources.  Traffic was the dominant noise source in the area.  Other
sources that were important at some stations included two manufacturing
plants and a drydock area on the barge canal.  The highest noise levels
were measured at two stations on Island Road, one station on Range!ine
Road, and one station on the south bank of the barge canal.  These
stations had Leq(24) values between 59 dBA and 66 dBA, and Ldn values
ranging from 65 dBA  to  72 dBA.  The lowest equivalent sound levels were
at the Dauphin Island Parkway crossing of North Fork Deer River.  These
levels were 48 dBA (Ldn) and 45 dBA [Leq(24)].


RELEVANT PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS

During construction  of  the proposed Ideal Basic Industries manufacturing
plant, noise will be generated by the heavy equipment used for earth-
moving, lifting, welding, paving, pile driving, and transportation.  At
the time of peak construction activity, there will be a variety of heavy
equipment on-site.

Based on estimates of the number of pieces of construction equipment to
be used at anytime,  a worst-case situation was modeled for the area.
Figure 13 shows the  expected equivalent sound level contours [L/dn)]
during the most active  three-month period of construction.  These levels
are from only the plant activities and do not include background levels.
[It is important to  remember that sound levels are not directly cumula-
tive.  Adding 55 dBA to a background of 55 dBA (doubling the sound
energy) will produce a  level of 58 dBA.  In addition, adding 75 dBA to a
background of 55 dBA will produce a level of approximately 75 dBA].
Therefore, a background level should not substantially increase noise
levels from those shown in Figure 13 unless the background level is
greater than the level  shown for the cement plant.
                                  66

-------
                                                      NOISE  (PLANT  SITE)
During permanent operations of the cement plant, noise will be generated
by process equipment, raw material handling, finished product handling,
and vehicular traffic.  Noise from process equipment will be generated
continuously during operating hours, whereas noise from employee traf-
fic, waterway traffic, haul trucks, and rail operations will be produced
on an intermittent basis.

In order to obtain a proper understanding of the sound levels that could
be generated at the proposed plant, a noise survey has been performed at
an existing cement plant.  This facility utilizes a dry process similar
to the Ideal Basic Industries plant, but has only one-third the
production capacity.  Noise levels were recorded at 20 locations around
the plant in order to gain information on the noise effects typically
associated with dry process cement manufacturing.

The noise information for the other dry process plant was used to
forecast the effects of the Ideal Basic Industries operation by assuming
that the sound power levels from the Ideal facility would be roughly
three times as great.  A number of adjustments were made for factors
such as topography and vegetation.  The results are depicted in
Figure 14, which shows the sound level contours (L^) resulting from
just the operation of the proposed cement plant.  The sphere of influ-
ence is slightly smaller than that associated with the construction of
the cement plant.

IMPACTS

In relation to the EPA suggested equivalent sound levels during
construction, there should be about 75 existing residences  inside the
55 dBA contour shown in Figure 13.  By 1980, the number of  residences
affected should be about 60 due to property takings for the ship channel
project.  Within this zone of influence, the construction activities
will increase sound levels to equal to, or greater than, the 55 dBA
C-(dn)) suggested for interference with outdoor speech communication
                                  67

-------
Figure 13
EQUAL SOUND LEVEL (Ldn) CONTOURS DUE TO
WORST CASE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES FROM
THE PROPOSED PLANT ONLY
                                                          PROPOSED CEMENT MANUFACTURING
                                                           PLANT THEODORE INDUSTRIAL PARK
                                                                       MOBILE, ALABAMA
Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc., 1977.

-------
                                                       NOISE  (PLANT  SITE)
at about 3 meters (10 feet).  As mentioned previously, these levels are
similar to levels in typical metropolitan residential areas in the
United States.

Due to the expected levels, the noise impact from plant construction is
considered of moderate magnitude, short-term, and reversible.  The sig-
nificance in the area is rated low because:
     1.  Most construction activities will occur only during daylight
         hours, which should approximately coincide with normal working
         and school hours.
     2.  The projections are for the worst 3-month period out of the
         30-month construction schedule.  At all other times the equi-
         valent sound levels will be lower.
     3.  The noise levels from plant construction outside of this zone
         of influence (55 dBA), although probably perceptible, should
         not disturb outdoor communication or activities.
     4.  The levels suggested by EPA are for outdoor activities; the
         projected levels will be significantly attenuated (lower)
         inside residences.

During the initial plant operations (1981), there should be about
20 residences within the 55 dBA zone of influence shown in Figure 14.
This is a decrease of 12 residences from existing conditions and repre-
sents the effect of the property takings for the right-of-way of the
ship channel. By 1992, it is expected that another 14 residences will be
sold for industrial or commercial land use (see Land Use section).

The noise impact from operating the cement plant is considered of moder-
ate magnitude, long-term, and reversible.  The significance is rated low
because of the small number of residences to be affected as compared to
the total number of residences in the area.

The noise impact should be  less than that shown on the eastern side of
the plant because after the modeling was performed, the 20-meter
                                  69

-------
                              •AKEH SORRELLROAO
               LAURENDINE ROAD
Figure 14
EQUAL SOUND LEVEL (Ldn) CONTOURS DUE TO PLANT
OPERATIONS ONLY
                                                             PROPOSED CEMENT MANUFACTURING
                                                              PLANT THEODORE INDUSTRIAL PARK
                                                                           MOBILE, ALABAMA
SOURCE: Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc., 1977

-------
                                                      NOISE (PLANT SITE)
(65-foot) high dead storage pile of limestone was added to the plant
layout.  This pile will  attenuate the noise generated from most of the
ground-level facilities.

MITIGATING MEASURES

In order to minimize noise impacts during construction, equipment with
effective noise suppression devices complying with the Walsh-Healy
Act and Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations
will be used.  Construction activity will be limited to daylight hours
as much as possible.  During permanent operations at the plant, the
following environmental  safeguards will apply:
      1.  Most of the process equipment (with the exception of portions
          of the kilns as required for heat dissipation) will be
          enclosed within buildings.
      2.  Noise impacts will be lessened by the presence of vegetation,
          particularly the vegetated buffer strip along the eastern
          property boundary.
      3.  The access road will be located away from residential areas.
      4.  The 20-meter  (65-foot) high dead storage pile of limestone
          will be located along the eastern edge of the facility.

A noise study will be performed by Ideal Basic Industries in order to
determine appropriate measures and requirements regarding enclosures,
barriers, and machinery arrangement.

Additional  actions could be taken to help mitigate the  noise impacts.
First, noise suppression equipment could be installed on the various
fans used with the baghouses for controlling air emissions.  Second,  all
process components and/or the entire facility could be  completely
enclosed.

The aspects of noise suppression for fans could be investigated during
the proposed noise study.  However, completely enclosing the facility
would  be  impractical for a plant of this size.
                                  71

-------
                                                      NOISE (PLANT SITE)

ALTERNATIVES

The no-action alternative indicates that noise levels in the Theodore
Industrial Park area will increase in the future whether or not the
proposed cement plant is constructed.  The major factors responsible for
long-term changes in noise levels will be:  (1) increased highway
traffic; (2) larger volumes of waterway traffic; and (3) new industrial
development.  An additional factor that will be very important in the
short-term is the construction of the Theodore Ship Channel, which will
be accomplished by deep dredging along the route of the present barge
canal.

Future noise levels without the Ideal Basic Industries project have been
modeled mathematically for the year 1992.  It was not possible to take
into account other new industrial development.

As would be expected with increased road and channel traffic, the
equivalent noise levels should increase along Rangeline Road [L(,jn) of
81 dBA and Leq(24) of 75 dBA], Island Road [L^n) of 71 dBA and Leq(24)
of 68 dBA], and the ship channel [L(dn) ofr 64 dBA and Leq(24) °f 57 dBA].
No change from 1977 levels is projected for the location of the crossing
of the Dauphin Island Parkway and North Fork Deer River.

The 1992 baseline noise projections have included estimates of highway
traffic impact based upon a mathematical model developed by the Highway
Research Board (Gordon, jt eil_., 1971).  Noise effects due to waterway
traffic on the ship channel have been estimated using information
contained in the environmental impact assessment of the ship channel
project (USC, Incorporated/Consulting Engineers, 1974).  The modeling
has assumed that waterway traffic will amount to ten round trips of tug
and tow per day.  In summary, the projected 1992 noise levels without
the cement plant are higher than present levels in all areas near the
                                  72

-------
                                                       NOISE  (PLANT SITE)
ship channel and In areas adjacent to Rangeline Road and Island Road.
Little change is expected elsewhere.

The plant layout has been modified for various process and environmental
reasons.  The present facility plan utilizes a physical barrier (dead
storage pile of limestone) and natural buffers (greenbelt to the east,
natural vegetation to the north) to reduce noise impacts on the
surrounding area.

An alternative to this action would be to relocate the main facilities
as far west as possible and to place noise barriers to the north, south,
and east.  This arrangement would move the noise sources farther away
from the residential areas and possibly attenuate the noise more
effectively.

The proposed plant layout with its natural buffers does not differ
greatly from this alternative, but is more desirable as a practical
balance of process requirements and ecological effects.  However, the
design consultants are continuing their study to determine noise
reduction effects of layout and equipment changes.  If specific types of
equipment are determined to generate lower noise levels, have  practical
operating requirements, and are cost-effective, they will be used.
                                  73

-------
                                               SOLID WASTE (PLANT SITE)
                            SOLID WASTE

BASELINE CONDITIONS

Most solid waste generated at the Ideal Basic Industries plant site will
be disposed in an approved off-site landfill.  Therefore, a field  inves-
tigation of landfills in Mobile County has been conducted to survey
present conditions and establish the availability of landfill capacity
in 1980.  The three principal landfills in Mobile County which operate
under the supervision of state and local agencies are the Irvington,
Kushla, and Mobile sites.

The closest landfill to Theodore Industrial Park is the Irvington  site
which is owned by Mobile County and operated under contract to Mobile
Waste Company.  A trench method of disposal is utilized, in which  a
dragline digs a trench in the clay soil and the wastes are deposited on
a 3 to 1 slope.  Each trench is about 15 meters (50 feet) wide and
23 meters (75 feet) long.  The wastes are compacted and covered  each day
with a layer of clay.

The wastes accepted at the Irvington Landfill are restricted to  garbage,
non-bulk refuse, industrial containers, etc.  Bulky items are not
acceptable unless they are cut to a size that allows for easy compaction
by a dozer.  The remaining life of the landfill is estimated as  greater
than 15 years.

The Kushla Landfill is also owned by Mobile County and operated  by
Mobile Waste Company.  This site is approximately one-third the  size of
the Irvington Landfill and has a relatively short remaining life.

At the City of Mobile Landfill, located at the end of Hickory Street,  a
lift method of waste disposal is used.  This landfill handles only non-
putrescible wastes  (i.e., wastes not containing decomposable organics).
The life of the Mobile landfill is presently estimated to be 5 years,
                                  74

-------
                                               SOLID WASTE (PLANT SITE)
based on the assumption that only several more lifts are  practical  for
the  site.

An additional site which could be utilized  is an old clay quarry  owned
by Ideal and located about 32 kilometers (20 miles) north of  Mobile.  A
pit  is currently being filled with waste from Ideal's existing wet
process cement plant in Mobile.  The pit is imbedded in impermeable
clays and there is sufficient land to continue such operations for  at
least 15 years.

Mobile County does not have a municipal incinerator or resource recovery
facility, and such facilities do not appear likely in the near future.
However, recent state and federal legislation dealing with the disposal
of hazardous and toxic substances may lead to the development of  special
regional facilities (e.g., sealed or leachate-treated landfills,  or high
temperature incinerators) in Mobile County or elsewhere.   The Mobile
County Board of Health issues permits for burning of wastes from  land
clearing, with provisions governing air pollution emissions.

RELEVANT PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS

The construction phase of the proposed Ideal Basic Industries project
will  generate three major types of solid waste:  debris from  land
clearing, dredged soil  materials, and general construction wastes.

Approximately 20 hectares (50 acres) of modified longleaf pine forest
will  be cleared during the first three months of construction.  Three
types of disposal  methods are under consideration for partial or
exclusive use:   chipping for mulch,  controlled burning, and landfill ing.

The small-sized wastes could be chipped and used for mulch and erosion
control.  The larger wastes could be burned in an air-blower type pit
burner (see Air Quality section).  All  of the land-clearing wastes could
be taken to the Irvington Landfill  for burial.  The actual use of any
one or all  of these methods would be based on the practical application
                                 75

-------
                                                SOLID WASTE (PLANT SITE)
 of  each  method within the time constraints  of the construction
 schedule.

 Grading  of the plant site and construction  of stormwater clarification
 basins will  not yield excess  soil  materials,  because of a balancing of
 cut and  fill  activities.   However,  about  500,000 cubic meters (650,000
 cubic yards)  of material  will  be  removed  from the site during dredging
 of  the waterfront area.   It  is anticipated  that this material will  be
 taken to the  approved disposal sites  used by  the Corps of Engineers for
 dredged  material  from the ship channel  project.

 Construction  wastes resulting from the  erection of structures and site
 cleanup  will  include lumber,  concrete,  brick, cardboard, and metal
 scraps.  This material  will  be conveyed to  the Irvington Landfill for
 disposal by  a private contractor.

 Permanent  operations at  the  Ideal  Basic Industries cement plant will
 yield approximately 1,043 metric  tons (1,150  tons) of solid waste per
 year.  The largest sources of solid waste will  be the refractory linings
 of  kilns and  suspension  preheaters.   During the course of normal opera-
 tions, portions of the  refractory brick lining deteriorate and must be
 replaced.  The debris removed in  this process will amount to 667 metric
 tons (736  tons) per year.

 The raw  materials and coal received by  the  plant may contain pieces of
 rock, wood, or metal, which  must  be removed.   These will contribute
 approximately 248 metric  tons (274  tons)  per  year of waste material.
 Bag breakage  in the packhouse will  account  for 14 metric tons (16 tons)
 of  paper waste per year,  and  scraps and oily  maintenance waste from the
 shop area  will  amount to  34 metric  tons (37 tons) per year.  Approxi-
 mately 11  metric  tons (12 tons) of  paper  waste will  be produced every
year by  the company lunchroom and  office  area.

 Sediment will  accumulate  in the stormwater  catchment area and the
wastewater settling basin.  This  material must  be removed to avoid  loss
                                  76

-------
                                               SOLID WASTE (PLANT SITE)
of storage capacity, yielding about 68 metric tons (75 tons) of sediment
(dry basis) per year.  The sediment will be re-introduced, if possible,
to the raw material piles, but otherwise must be removed by the disposal
contractor.

All of the materials listed, with the exception of recyclable metal
scraps, waste oil, and paper, will be hauled to the Irvington Landfill.

Special regulations under the recently-enacted Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) classify hazardous or toxic wastes.  Although
hazardous and toxic materials under RCRA have not yet  been defined
precisely, the cement plant wastes will probably not be included.

IMPACTS

Disposal of general construction debris at the Irvington Landfill will
not  involve any special problems other than  utilization of  available
landfill capacity.  Burning of vegetative wastes could have  some
intermittent effects on air quality,  as discussed  in the Air Quality
section.  These disposal  activities are assigned low magnitude  and
significance as environmental impacts.  Disposal of dredged  materials
from the waterfront  area  is an impact of moderate  magnitude due to  the
quantities  involved, but  low  significance  since  an approved  site  will  be
utilized.   The  impact  is  long-term and  irreversible.

The solid  waste load from the Ideal Basic  Industries  plant  will shorten
slightly  the active life  of the  landfill.   The magnitude  and signifi-
cance of  these  solid waste disposal activities,  as environmental
impacts,  are considered low.  Centralized  land  disposal  of solid  waste
is a long-term, but reversible action because of the  many possibilities
for re-use of  landfill  sites.
                                   77

-------
                                               SOLID WASTE (PLANT SITE)
MITIGATING MEASURES

A general class of actions which will minimize resource utilization and
potential problems associated with solid waste disposal will be the
practice of recycling all possible materials (e.g.* spillage, oily
wastes, scraps) either Internally or through sales to dealers.  Environ-
mental safeguards with regard to controlled burning have already been
discussed.  There are no mitigating measures for the disposal of solid
wastes.

ALTERNATIVES

The no-action alternative would involve marginal, short-term air quality
benefits due to the absence of burning of vegetative waste at the con-
struction sites and in the long run would decrease slightly the utiliza-
tion of public landfill capacity.

The land-clearing wastes are to be burned, chipped for mulch, or taken
to the Irvington Landfill for disposal.  Alternative actions Include
public use as firewood; use in local pulp mills or waste wood boilers;
and on-site burial.

The use of the wastes for firewood, paper pulp, or fuel are sound
environmental alternatives.  Their major disadvantage, which is shared
somewhat with the proposed action of chipping and landfill ing, is the
extra commitment of time and money during the beginning of the
construction schedule.  All other construction-related activities would
be delayed if the clearing operation was extended beyond its projected
three-month period.  While these are not environmental criteria, they
are important factors since controlled burning is only slightly less
desirable on an environmental basis.  The on-site burial alternative
might cause a soil stability problem when the wood decays and would
require clearing of additional land to serve as a disposal site.
                                  78

-------
                                               SOLID  WASTE  (PLANT SITE)
The proposed disposal actions for construction wastes  are environment-
ally acceptable and the most practical for the construction contractor
to Implement.

During plant operatons, the solid wastes not being recycled will be
taken to the Irvington Landfill.  Alternatives to this  action are burial
on-site and partial use as fill off-site.  The majority of the waste,
such as bricks, scraps, and sediment, could be used as  fill material
without presenting an environmental problem.  The putrescible and
maintenance wastes would require proper burial techniques as practiced
at a sanitary landfill.

The three proposed waste disposal techniques, if properly performed,
would be environmentally sound actions.  The two alternatives would
eliminate or reduce the use of available land at the Irvington Landfill.
However, the on-site landfill alternative would require development of
an additional portion of the plant property that would  be sufficiently
above the groundwater table and out of the wetlands.   Also, the practi-
cal necessities of daily cover material, equipment, and personnel would
have to be provided.  From an environmental viewpoint,  proper disposal
could be better achieved on a regular basis by trained  operators at a
public landfill.

The off-site use of some of the wastes as fill material 1s a viable
action that could be used if an acceptable area could  be found.
                                  79

-------
                               WATER RESOURCES/GEOTECHNICAL  (PLANT SITE)
                 WATER  RESOURCES AND GEOTECHNICAL ASPECTS

BASELINE  ENVIRONMENT

The  proposed  plant  site  is  situated in the Southern Pine Hills sub-
province  of the  East Gulf Coastal Plain.  The area is characterized by
low,  smooth hills developed on floodplain, terrace, and beach deposits.
The  plant site is on Quaternary alluvium (silt and sand deposits).  Test
holes at  the  site reveal at least 41 meters (135 feet) of unconsolidated
sands,  silts, and clays. Nearby wells indicate that at least 200 meters
(656  feet) of unconsolidated sediments lie below the area.  Because of
the  thick section of clayey material, some settling of the land surface
can  be  expected  to  result from compaction under heavy loads.  The area
is not  technically active  (earthquakes or ground tremors) and is
classed in the lowest  seismic risk category.

Groundwater supplies are available in Mobile County from permeable sand
layers.   Twelve  wells  within an 8-kilometer (5-mile) radius of the
proposed  plant site range in depth from 15 to 150 meters (50 to 500 feet
and tap either alluvial or  Miocene-Pliocene aquifer beds.  The latter
units generally  yield  good  quality soft water, but local groundwater
quality problems are known  to occur.  There is some evidence of salt-
water intrusion  near Mobile.

Elevations on the site range from 6 meters (20 feet) above mean sea
level near the barge canal  to sea level  along the canal waterfront and
marsh areas.  Most  of  the plant site (the portion of the property
proposed  for development) drains north to the marsh, with the remainder
draining  directly to the barge canal.

The surface water bodies of primary importance for the proposed project
are the Deer River/Barge Canal  and the North Fork Deer River (see
                                  80

-------
                               WATER RESOURCES/GEOTECHNICAL (PLANT SITE)
Figure 15).  The barge canal was created In 1968 by dredging the Deer
River bed to a depth of 3.7 meters (12 feet) and a width of 90 meters
(300 feet).  Some sections of the river that were bypassed now remain as
marshy bayous.  The dead-end barge canal extends inland a distance of
3.2 kilometers (2 miles) and receives little freshwater inflow because
of its limited drainage area.  As a result, there is relatively little
water circulation, which allows stagnant bottom conditions to develop,
especially during the summer months when salinities in the barge canal
and bay are high.  Because the system has little assimilative capacity
for additional oxygen-demanding materials, the South Alabama Regional
Planning Council has recommended that no point discharges to the canal
be permitted unless the effluent is demonstrably better in quality than
the existing water in the canal (SARPC, 1977).  This recommendation  is
being implemented by EPA in the review of NPDES permit applications.

The North Fork Deer River, which bisects the Ideal Basic Industries
property, is bordered by both saltwater and freshwater marsh systems
(see Figure 16).  The freshwater marsh system, which is along the
river's western reach, appears to have a substantial capacity for assim-
ilating pollutants.  However, the marsh appears to have been degraded in
the past by industrial-related discharges.

Both the barge canal and the North Fork Deer River are characterized by
high summer water temperatures, low to moderate color, and low  alkalin-
ity.  Nutrient levels are sufficiently high to support very  productive
phytoplankton populations,  and concentrations of lead are periodically
high in the North Fork Deer River.

RELEVANT PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS

During construction of the  plant there will be stormwater runoff  and
disturbances  in the existing bodies of water.  The cleared areas  will
have a potential for erosion which will cause sedimentation  and
turbidity  effects in both the North Fork Deer River  and the  ship
channel.   Early in the construction period, a permanent stormwater
                                  81

-------
Figure 15
SURFACE WATER BODIES
                              SCALE IN KILOMETERS
SOURCE: Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc., 1977.
PROPOSED CEMENT MANUFACTURING
 PLANT THEODORE INDUSTRIAL PARK
               MOBILE, ALABAMA
                                              82

-------
              EAST VIEW
              WEST VIEW
Figure 16
PHOTOS OF THE THEODORE PLANT SITE ALONG THE
NORTH FORK DEER RIVER FROM THE BRIDGE ON
DAUPHIN ISLAND PARKWAY
SOURCE: Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc., 1977.
REGION IV
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCV ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
STATEMENT FOR IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES
   PROPOSED CEMENT MANUFACTURING
    PLANT THEODORE INDUSTRIAL PARK
                MOBILE, ALABAMA
                                        83

-------
                               WATER RESOURCES/GEOTECHNICAL (PLANT SITE)

catchment area will be built to reduce the solids content of the water
prior to discharge into the wetlands.  The site grading will maintain a
northernly drainage to reduce runoff directly into the ship channel.

The access roadway will cross the North Fork Deer River with a 15-meter
(50-foot) long bridge and the railroad will trestle across both the
river and wetlands.  The construction of these structures will include
the use of temporary berms and barriers to reduce the effect on the
water quality in the river.

The docking facilities will require about 500,000 cubic meters (650,000
cubic yards) of material to be dredged.  It is anticipated that this
activity will occur during dredging of the ship channel and that spoil
from constructing the dock will be taken to the approved disposal areas
used by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

During operations the cement plant will use about 1,080,000 liters
(285,000 gallons) per day of potable water supplied by the Board of
Water and Sewer Commissioners of the City of Mobile.  The water will be
used for cooling tower make-up, sanitary requirements for 135 employees,
truck and floor wash areas, and process cooling systems.

The sanitary wasteloads of 20,000 liters (5,000 gallons) per day will be
pumped to the new McDuffie Island treatment plant (during plant con-
struction portable toilets will be provided and serviced by a local
contractor).

There are four sources of  industrial wastewater projected for the plant:
       1.  The runoff from the uncovered raw material piles,
       2.  Truck and car wash and floor washes,
       3.  Process cooling tower blowdown, and
       4.  The runoff from the aboveground fuel oil tank's containment
           berm.
                                  84

-------
                               WATER RESOURCES/GEOTECHNICAL (PLANT SITE)
The daily average flow expected from the two uncovered stockpiles of
limestone and clay will be 166,000 liters (43,800 gallons) per day.
Simulated leachates were collected from samples of all the raw materials
(limestone, clay, gypsum, sand, iron ore, and coal) and subjected to
chemical analysis and fish bioassays.  The results showed that the
materials are nontoxic and their leachates, when diluted with the other
wastewaters, should be of acceptable water quality meeting Fish and
Wildlife Standards.

Approximately 6,600 liters (1,750 gallons) per day of wastewater is
expected from the truck and car wash, and another 17,700 liters (4,680
gallons) per day is anticipated from the various floor wash areas.  This
wastewater, like the stockpile leachates, will be nontoxic since it will
contain the same materials.

The cooling system is to be a noncontact type in which the cooling tower
will vent or blow down some of its water in order to maintain desired
suspended solids content.  The vented water is to be replaced by potable
"make-up" water.  The blowdown will contain suspended solids and an
algicide that is not yet specified, but must be approved by EPA prior to
use.  The blowdown will partially evaporate and will leave about
140,000 liters (36,000 gallons) per day that will enter the settling
basin.

The aboveground fuel oil tank and its containment berm will have an
average daily flow of 700 liters (190 gallons) from runoff and direct
rainfall.  This stormwater will be drained to the settling basin to pro-
vide full capacity of the containment berm in case of a tank failure.

The settling basins will be designed to meet the effluent requirements
of 50 mg/1 of total suspended solids, and a pH within the range of
6.0 to 9.0 (the draft NPDES permit presented in the Permit and Approval
section of this document contains more detailed effluent  requirements).
The settling basin will have a storage capacity of 16 million  liters
                                  85

-------
                                WATER  RESOURCES/6EOTECHNICAL  (PLANT SITE)
 (4.2 million  gallons) which  is  double  the  runoff  expected  from  a
 10-year,  24-hour storm  event.

 The stormwater  catchment  area will collect  and  retain the  initial  flush
 of most  storms.   The 2-hectare  (5-acre) area will consist  of two  bermed
 basins in series.   The  berm  height will be  0.9  to 1.5 meters (3 to
 5 feet)  and will  have a storage capacity of 12  million  liters
 (3.3 million  gallons).  This storage capacity is  roughly equivalent to
 the runoff from the plant  site  area during  the  first 50 minutes of a
 10-year,  1-hour storm event.  The catchment area  will discharge the
 runoff into the freshwater marsh.  The average  daily flow  from  the
 catchment area  is  expected to be 910,000 liters (240,300 gallons).  The
 area, which will  provide  reduction of  the suspended solids  level  in the
 runoff,  is considered by  EPA as a best management practice  (see Permit
 and Approval  section).  In addition, the discharged water will  undergo
 natural  treatment  in the  wetlands prior to  entering the ship channel via
 North Fork Deer River.

 IMPACTS

 Land clearing and  grading  activities on about 20  hectares  (50 acres) of
 the Ideal  Basic  Industries property will result in land erosion and
 sediment  transport  during  storm events.  However, except for a  short
 period prior  to  construction of the stormwater  catchment area,  the
 sediment  loads  to  the North Fork Deer  River should be small because of
 the reduction of  solids provided and the additional filtering action of
 the marsh  vegetation.   Sediment transport to the  ship channel should be
minimal because  only a  small portion of the plant site drains to  the
 south. Construction of  the rail trestle and access roadway  over the
 North Fork Deer River will cause localized  sediment and turbidity
effects of moderate magnitude.  However, all of these erosion-related
effects are attributed  low significance as  water  resource  impacts
because of their short  duration and reversible  nature.
                                  86

-------
                               WATER RESOURCES/6EOTECHNICAL (PLANT SITE)
Construction of docking facilities on the ship channel waterfront will
affect turbidity and suspended solids concentrations  in the immediate
vicinity of the Ideal Basic Industries property.  Although this effect
will be moderate in magnitude, its significance is considered low
because of the small portion of the channel affected  and because the
action is short-term and reversible.

Diesel fuel oil used to power heavy equipment could conceivably be
spilled during construction.  However, a berm will surround the fueling
area and most spills could be easily contained.  The  magnitude of pos-
sible contamination of surface waters is thus considered very low.  The
significance is considered low since the amount of water affected would
be small.  The impact would be short-term and reversible.

Permanent operations at the plant site can affect surface water
resources through general stormwater discharges, industrial wastewater
discharges, and oil spills.  As described earlier, the discharge of
process wastewaters from the settling basin will meet all applicable
water quality standards.  The magnitude and significance of the effluent
as a water resource impact are thus considered low, long-term and
reversible.

The stormwater runoff from the plant site into the freshwater marsh will
approximately double the existing runoff for the same size storm.  The
catchment area and wetland filtration will reduce the suspended soils
levels so that the effect on the water quality of the North Fork Deer
River should be of low magnitude and significance.  The impact is con-
sidered long-term but reversible.  The impact is avoidable by
discharging the stormwater runoff directly into the ship channel.

The present design of the plant shows a 380,000-liter (100,000-gallon)
aboveground fuel  oil storage tank with a containment  berm.  The berm is
sized to hold all  of the oil in case of a spill or tank failure.  The
probability of any oil  reaching the North Fork Deer River is slight due
to the northward grading into the stormwater catchment area.  If a spill
                                 87

-------
                               WATER RESOURCES/GEOTECHNICAL (PLANT SITE)
did reach the ship channel, it would not quickly disperse because of the
poor flushing action of the channel  and should be easily contained and
removed.  Therefore, the water quality impact from a potential  oil spill
is considered low in magnitude as well as significance; short-term and
reversible.

MITIGATING MEASURES

The environmental safeguards to be employed during construction will
include the stormwater detention basin, the placement of berms and
barriers at the bridge/trestle construction site, and the temporary
surfacing of access roadways and the use of chipped wood wastes for
mulch to reduce erosion.

Mitigating measures which could reduce erosion/sedimentation effects
are: (1) grading of the site to minimize slope lengths; (2) temporary
soil stabilization measures such as netting and chemical binders;
(3) natural or installed buffers, such as vegetated strips; and
(4) artificial structures including inlet filters, sediment traps,
dikes,  and ditches.  Most of these measures would be feasible during at
least some stages of the project, but are not considered necessary  in
addition to the proposed safeguards to achieve adequate environmental
protection.

Water resource impacts during  permanent  operations will be lessened by
four major environmental safeguards—the industrial wastewater settling
basinr  the stormwater detention area, the coverage of  raw material
stockpiles, and the berm around the fueling  area.

The mitigating measure which  could  be employed  in addition to these
safeguards would be to  provide chemical  treatment of  industrial
wastewater and/or stormwater  as  part  of  the  clarification  process (e.g.,
through the use of  flocculants,  coagulants,  etc.).  This  step  is
feasible,  but at the  present  time it  is  not  considered necessary to
preserve environmental  quality and  to meet all  water  quality  standards.
                                   88

-------
                               WATER RESOURCES/GEOTECHNICAL (PLANT SITE)
ALTERNATIVES

The no-action alternative relates to the expected conditions of the ship
channel and North Fork Deer River.  The most important determinant of
water resource characteristics in 1992 will be the Theodore Ship Channel
project.  The water quality problems now observed in the barge canal may
also characterize the proposed ship channel.  Modeling studies have con-
cluded that the rate of flushing will be too slow to remove waste from
the channel effectively, so that water quality could degrade from
existing levels.  A possible solution is to have industrial wastewater
dischargers use the proposed common outfall into Mobile Bay and thereby
eliminate direct discharge into the ship channel.  An Environmental
Impact Statement is being prepared for the Corps action of reviewing the
construction applications for the outfall line.

The water quality of North Fork Deer River could degrade in the future
because of existing and additional industrial discharges.  It  is most
likely that in 1992 the river will experience moderate water quality
degradation.

The alternatives to discharging the industrial wastewater to the ship
channel would include:  (1) discharge of the settling basin effluent
into the freshwater marsh; and (2) utilization of the proposed common
wastewater outfall in Mobile Bay.  The major advantage of discharging
the industrial wastewater effluent into the marsh system is that the
effluent would receive additional treatment and purification by natural
processes prior to reaching open water.  The possible disadvantage  is
that the assimilative capacity of the marsh might become overloaded,
resulting in long-term damage.

The common wastewater outfall project, which has been proposed by the
Board of Water and Sewer Commissioners of the City of Mobile,  would
involve an outfall extending approximately 5.6 kilometers (3.5 miles)
into Mobile Bay.  Utilization of this facility by Ideal Basic  Industries
would be environmentally acceptable; however, this step does not appear
                                  89

-------
                               WATER RESOURCES/6EOTECHNICAL (PLANT SITE)
necessary as a means of preventing Impacts In the ship channel by the
effluent from the cement plant.

Alternatives to discharging the general stormwater runoff into the
freshwater marsh during the construction and operation phases are
diverting all or part of the general runoff from the site to the ship
channel.  A benefit of discharging treated stormwater to the ship
channel rather than to the North Fork Deer River would be to increase
the flushing of the channel by providing additional flow.

From an environmental viewpoint, as long as the runoff characteristics
to the wetlands are not reduced from existing conditions, the alterna-
tive actions would be feasible and essentially equivalent to the pro-
posed action.  However, discharging all or part of the runoff to the
ship channel would require a catchment basin close to the waterfront
area.  Under present facility layout and grading plans, these
alternatives would not be very practical due to space limitations.
                                   90

-------
                                              ARCHAEOLOGY (PLANT SITE)
                              ARCHAEOLOGY

BASELINE CONDITIONS

The archaeological-historical inventory of the Ideal Basic Industries
plant site has included a review of historic literature, topographic
maps, aerial photographs, and previous site surveys.  A review of the
National Register of Historic Places has indicated that there are no
certified historic sites within the vicinity of the Ideal property.

An on-site "walk-over" archaeological-historical survey was conducted
under the supervision of the University of South Alabama.  All roads,
ditches, creek banks, and cleared or eroded areas were investigated for
possible features and artifacts.  Vegetation was examined, since cal-
ciphile vegetation in an otherwise acid soil is often an indicator of
buried sites.  No archaeological or historical sites were recorded dur-
ing the survey.  Artifacts present on the site represent debris that has
been deposited there within the last ten years.

Research and on-site investigation indicate that no sites of archaeo-
logical-historical interest will be impacted by either construction or
operation of the proposed cement plant.  The Alabama Historical
Commission, state historic preservation office, has concluded that the
development will have no adverse effect on any cultural resources
included in, or eligible for, the National Register of Historic Places.
However, in the event that a site of potential interest is uncovered
during construction, the Commission will be notified to appraise the
discovery.
                                  91

-------
                                                    ECOLOGY (PLANT SITE)
                                ECOLOGY

BASELINE CONDITIONS
STRUCTURE OF TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEMS

The two major vegetative communities found at the proposed plant site
are a modified longleaf pine forest and a marshland which has gum and
titi swamps at its perimeter.  A map of these communities is presented
in Figure 17.  The upland pine forest areas have an overstory of long-
leaf pine with a well-developed understory of hardwoods.  The mature
pines were last harvested in 1974, and the use of controlled burning for
forest management has been discontinued.  As a result, hardwoods have
developed rapidly and there is a greatly increased abundance of weedy
and/or disturbed area species (e.g., broomstraw, muhly, meadowbeauty,
throughwort).

The marsh areas at the proposed plant site include a tidally-influenced
brackish marsh, a freshwater marsh, and an intermediate forested area of
somewhat higher land.  The brackish marsh is composed primarily of
sawgrass.  The intermediate marsh is characterized by the presence  of
overstory species (titi, black willow, red maple) which are small in
stature but clearly define the upper limit of saline influence.
Upstream from the intermediate zone, overstory species become sparse and
are replaced by grasses and other low-lying vegetation (goldenrod,  dog
fennel, pickerel weed, arrowhead).  Higher in the freshwater marsh, near
the property boundary, the vegetation is almost entirely cattail and
reeds.

The animal community in the longleaf pine upland area is characterized
by a number of exclusives (species occurring in a single habitat),  which
include nuthatches, warblers, squirrels, flatwoods salamanders, and
black pine snakes.  Animal species most frequently observed at the
proposed plant site are cardinals, quail, doves, red-bellied
                                  92

-------
          I MODIFIED LONGLEAF
          PINE FOREST
          I BRACKISH MARSH

          I FRESHWATER MARSH
                                   INTERMEDIATE MARSH
                                   ZONE
                                   DEVELOPED
                             SCALE IN METERS
WATER          |  ROADS

RAILROAD     ~~  IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES
                 PROPERTY BOUNDARY
Figure 17
VEGETATION MAP FOR THE PROPOSED PLANT SITE
SOURCE: Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc., 1977.
                                                                  REGION IV
                                                                  U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
                                                                  AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
                                                                  STATEMENT FOR IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES
                                                                     PROPOSED CEMENT MANUFACTURING
                                                                      PLANT THEODORE INDUSTRIAL PARK
                                                                                     MOBILE, ALABAMA

-------
                                                     ECOLOGY  (PLANT  SITE)
woodpeckers,  raccoons,  and  rabbits  (cottontail  and  swamp).   The  bog
areas, consisting  of  relatively  small, moist  depressions  in  the  land
surface,  are  frequented by  reptiles  and  amphibians  such  as the scarlet
kingsnake and flatwoods salamander.

An aquatic-associated  group of birds, mammals,  reptiles,  and amphibians
are represented  on the  site because  of the  presence of wetland areas.
The exclusives found  in the marshes  include marsh wrens,  rails,  rice
rats, nutria,  and  salt  marsh snakes, all  of which are adapted to the
periodic  inundation of  marsh vegetation.  Other species  (e.g., barn
owls, fish crows,  raccoons,  and  skunks)  utilize the marsh as well  as a
wide variety  of  other  habitats.  The most commonly  observed  vertebrate
animals are swallows,  snipe, sharptailed sparrows,  and red-wing
blackbirds.   Although  the fresh  and  brackish  marshes have different
vegetation and vary in  terms of  salinity, the animal populations differ
more quantitatively than qualitatively.   For  example, there  were more
red-wing  blackbirds seen in the  freshwater  marsh than in  the brackish
marsh because cattails  provide more  suitable  nesting habitat.

Timbering has reduced  most  of the upland portion of the  plant site to  a
disciimax shrub  and early forest growth  state,  corresponding to  one of
the early serai  stages  of the Southern Mixed  Deciduous Forest
(Quarterman and  Keever, 1962).   The  present disturbed nature of  the site
is characterized by poor nutrient conservation  (erosion,  leaching); poor
microclimate  regulation (drying  of bogs  in  logged and early  regrowth
areas); and relatively  short and unstable food  webs associated with the
early successional  state (Odum,  1971).   The normal  ecosystem functions
of the forested  area,  which  include  soil  retention  and formation as well
as surface water storage and recharge, are  impaired by the disturbed
condition of  the site.   Hunting  for  quail,  rabbit,  and dove  occurs on
the property,  and  there is  some  fishing  for mullet  and trout along the
barge canal.   Prior to  lumbering, significant red squirrel populations
were present  (Athens,  1977).  However, the  site is  not considered a
major hunting  and  fishing area.
                                  94

-------
                                                     ECOLOGY (PLANT SITE)
Wetlands are valuable  resources for water  conservation,  flood control,
and waste recycling  (Wharton, jt ^1_.,  1976).   The  marshes at the plant
site provide these services and in addition  appear to improve the qual-
ity of water delivered from the North  Fork Deer  River drainage area  to
Mobile Bay.  The marsh areas constitute  a  relatively stable system,
which is characterized by high biomass productivity.   Such tidal marshes
serve as important nursery grounds for seafood,  and the  organic material
exported from these  areas to estuarine systems is  very important to  com-
mercial marine organisms.  Peat has accumulated  in the North Fork Deer
River marsh system and is augmented by silt  carried from the uplands.
The effectiveness of the marsh system  in trapping  sediment is indicated
by the fact that the accumulation of gray  silt is  twice  as thick in  the
upper end of the freshwater marsh as in  the  intermediate forested area,
and decreases still  further in the brackish  marsh.

SIGNIFICANT TERRESTRIAL SPECIES

Two categories of plant and animal species have  received special
attention in the field surveys, namely:
      1.  Commercially and recreationally  important species, and
          organisms which are critical to these  species  or to overall
          ecological health; and
      2.  Rare and endangered species.
Commercially important plant species at  the Theodore  site are limited to
pine and oak, which have limited value because of  past cutting and
because the site is too small  for efficient  commercial forestry.  How-
ever, the marsh plants at the site are considered  valuable collectively
for wildlife and fisheries production.  The conditions produced by past
clearance of the upland area also appear favorable  for supporting
populations of some  important faunal  species.

The important animals which occur, or can be expected  to occur, on the
proposed plant site are either fur-bearing animals  (nutria,  raccoons) or
game species (swamp and cottontail rabbit, bobwhite quail, mourning
dove, various rails, common snipe, waterfowl).   Suitable habitat for
                                  95

-------
                                                    ECOLOGY (PLANT SITE)
nutria, raccoon, and opossum Is found at the plant site.  Raccoons
utilize both the upland and marsh areas, and nutria have been observed
In both the freshwater and brackish marsh.  Bobcats are considered
likely at the plant site on the basis of habitat characteristics.  No
signs of beaver, muskrat, mink, or river otter have been observed, but
these species are reported to occur locally.

The entire upland area of the plant site provides good rabbit habitat.
The marsh areas are relatively undisturbed and provide adequate cover
for migratory and resident birds.  Three species of rails have been
observed in both the fresh and brackish marshes.  Habitat analysis indi-
cates the probable use of the marsh and barge canal by wintering ducks
and geese, although few waterfowl breed in Alabama.  Quail, snipe, and
mourning doves are abundant.

One threatened species (the American alligator) and two species of
special concern (merlin and little blue heron) have actually been
observed, all in the marsh area.  On the basis of habitat analysis,
twelve additional special-status animal species are considered likely to
occur at the site.  These include two birds of special concern whose
habitat requirements are not highly restrictive, and ten animal species
that occupy marsh or swamp areas.

A similar analysis of plant species has identified four endangered
species and eleven threatened species that are known to occur in Mobile
County habitats resembling the plant site.  None of these plant species
have been observed at the site, and all except one (a marsh plant) are
assigned a low probability of occurrence due to recent logging of the
upland area.  Therefore, the plant site is not considered an important
part of the habitat of these species.
                                  96

-------
                                                    ECOLOGY (PLANT SITE)
AQUATIC ECOLOGY

The aquatic habitats at the plant site are North Fork Deer River and the
barge canal.  The few bogs on the site and the flora in the wide band of
marsh along the creek are described in the terrestrial section.

North Fork Deer River is a small meandering tidal creek about 6 meters
(20 feet) wide as it crosses the center of the plant site.  Several
industrial wastes are discharged into its upper reaches; however, due to
a peculiar feature of the river, water in the lower reaches is of
relatively good quality.  A raised area forms a small dam across the
marsh as it crosses the Ideal Basic Industries property.  There is  no
channel, and water seeps through this ridge which supports the low
intermediate forest described in the terrestial section.  This seepage
markedly cleans the water.  This ridge also marks the transition between
brackish and freshwater marsh.

The straight barge canal was dredged through the marsh of the meandering
Middle Fork Deer River, and the complete drainage of the Middle Fork
flows through the barge canal.  However, the depth of the canal prevents
mixing, and oxygen levels in the deeper parts of the canal become low,
especially in summer.  For at least four months of the year,  only the
top 2.5 meters (8 feet) of the water column in the canal are  really
useful for fish and wildlife.

The effects of this stagnation are especially clear  in the distributions
of shrimp.  In the spring, brown shrimp (Penaeus aztecus) occur in
Middle Deer River and also in the barge canal, although  in reduced
numbers.   In the summer, brown shrimp are replaced by white  shrimp
(£. setiferus) in Deer River, but white shrimp never appear  in the  barge
canal.

Composition of trawl catches  in Deer River  and the barge canal  is
similar to that for other parts of Mobile Bay.  Anchovies  (Anchoae
mitchilli), menhaden (Brevoortia patronus), spots  (Leiostomus xanthurus).
                                  97

-------
                                                   ECOLOGY (PLANT SITE)
 and Atlantic  croakers  (Mlcropogon  undulatus) are also abundant  through-
 out Mobile  Bay  (Swingle,  1971) and have high commercial  importance
 (Chermock,  1974).   Mullet and blue crabs are other commercially impor-
 tant  species  common at  the plant site  (Environmental Science  and Engi-
 neering,  1977),  but gar and abundant killifishes were also  observed.

 A 5-hectare (12-acre) oyster reef  exists north of the site  at Hollingers
 Island  (May,  1971). Most of the oysters immediately south  of the canal
 were  removed  in  1967,  in  response  to plans for expansion of the canal,
 and no  surveys  have since been conducted.  Pollution forces periodic
 closure of  all  reefs in Alabama (May,  1972); and most of northern Mobile
 Bay,  including  the  area of Deer River, is permanently closed to shell-
 fishing (U.S. Army  Corps  of Engineers, Mobile District, 1977).

 In summary, available data suggest that the aquatic fauna of Deer River
 is comparable to that of  other marshy  creeks bordering Mobile Bay.  The
 barge canal has  a reduced fauna, largely because low flow rates relative
 to depth  and  inadequate mixing result  in stagnation and oxygen  depletion
 during  the  summer.

 RELEVANT  PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS

 In the  proposed  plant layout, about 34.4 hectares (85 acres) of the
 70.8-hectare  (175-acre) property will  be developed.  The land north of
 the North Fork Deer River,  the brackish marsh, most of the  freshwater
marsh,  and  a 90-meter (300-foot) wide  greenbelt along the southeastern
 boundary  will not be developed.  Along the entire waterfront boundary,
dredging will be performed  to provide  a depth of up to 12 meters
 (40 feet) below  msl.  A plant access corridor for a 2-lane  road and
 railroad  trestle will parallel the western property line and be about
47.2 meters (155 feet)  wide.  This corridor will disturb about  0.5 hec-
tares (1.2  acres) of wetlands.  The roadway will cross the  North Fork
Deer River with  a 15-meter  (50-foot) bridge and will fill in about
0.2 hectare (0.5 acre)  of the 3.0-hectare (7.3-acre) freshwater marsh.
The railroad trestle will  consist of twenty 9-meter (28-foot) spans and
                                  98

-------
                                                    ECOLOGY (PLANT SITE)
will cross the river and entire wetlands.  The stormwater catchment area
will be formed just outside the southern edge of the freshwater marsh
and the plant site will be graded to drain into this area.  The proposed
project will increase the volume of both waterway traffic and highway
traffic in the vicinity of the plant site.

IMPACTS

The landclearing of the modified longleaf pine forest represents a loss
of about 50 percent of the trees on the property, but this action is
considered of low magnitude due to the early successional state and dis-
turbed condition of the remnant forest.  This impact will be of low sig-
nificance in the area, but long-term, irreversible, and unavoidable.

In relation to wildlife, these activities will eliminate habitat and
displace animals from the developed portion of the property.  Due to the
commonness of the habitat and the wildlife populations throughout the
surrounding area, the loss is considered of low magnitude and signifi-
cance, but it is a long-term, irreversible impact.  Reducing the
possible habitat of the 11 animals and 14 plants of special status is
considered an impact of low magnitude since there is a low probability
of these species occurring on the site.  This impact is of low signifi-
cance because of the availability of similar habitat in the area and is
long-term and irreversible.

The ecological impacts of disturbing the wetlands are the loss of pos-
sible habitat for the river frog (special concern status) and the suit-
able habitat for the nutria and other marsh-associated species.  Both
impacts are of low magnitude and significance since there is a low prob-
ability of the river frog on-site and due to the small area involved.
These impacts will be long-term and irreversible.

The other construction impacts of dredging, noise, oil spills, and
stormwater discharges are also considered of low magnitude and signifi-
cance.  Dredging effects will be minimal due to the small area involved
and the relationship of the area to the  ship channel project.  Noise
                                  99

-------
                                                    ECOLOGY  (PLANT  SITE)
will affect only  the  undeveloped area and remaining wildlife.  An oil
spill during construction  is of very low probability and an oil spill
would involve only  small quantities from construction equipment or  a
bermed fueling  area.   Prior to construction of the stormwater catchment
area, runoff will be  slowed by use of temporary  berms or ditches and
some settling will  probably occur in a small area of the marsh.  All of
these impacts are considered short-term and reversible.

The discharge of  storm water after collection in the catchment area will
continue during plant  operations and will be a long-term and reversible
impact.  Because  the  system will reduce the solids content of the run-
off, the impact on  the marsh will be of low magnitude and significance.
This impact is  avoidable by discharging the runoff to the ship channel.

The discharge of  the  industrial wastewater from  the settling basin  is
not expected to have  serious ecological impacts.  A basic fish bioassay
has shown the runoff  from  the storage piles to be non-toxic, and any
algicide to be  used in the cooling tower system  must be approved by EPA
prior to use.   Therefore,  the magnitude of the wastewater discharge to
the ship channel  will  be low.  The significance  is also low in compari-
son to the water  quality of the channel.  Any effects from the discharge
will be long-term and  reversible.

Since there will  be an aboveground fuel oil tank on the site, an oil
spill or tank rupture  is possible.  However, the capacity of the tank,
380,000 liters  (100,000 gallons), will be fully  contained in a sur-
rounding berm if  a  tank failure occurs.  The site drainage is to the
stormwater catchment  area; therefore an oil spill at the plant site
would be collected  in  this area and would not enter the wetland area.
The magnitude of  a  spill is considered low due to the safeguards to be
used.  The impact of  a spill should be of low significance, short-term,
and reversible.
                                  100

-------
                                                    ECOLOGY (PLANT SITE)
MITIGATING MEASURES

The environmental safeguards affecting ecological conditions at the
plant site will include all of the measures already discussed to mini-
mize sedimentation, water pollutant emissions, air pollutant emissions,
and noise.

It is significant that only about one-half of the land area owned by
Ideal Basic Industries will be cleared and developed as  part of the
project.  During construction, precautions will  be taken so that the
marshes and other preservation areas will not be disturbed unnecessarily
by heavy equipment operation.

The ecological impacts are typically unavoidable and do  not have pos-
sible additional actions for mitigation.

ALTERNATIVES

The 1992 ecological condition of  the property  under  the  no-action  alter-
native  is expected to  be similar  to existing baseline  conditions.

If the  proposed  cement manufacturing facility  were  not constructed,
there would be no  immediate  loss  of upland  vegetation  or habitat  for
terrestrial species.   Habitat characteristics  would  change gradually,
however,  as succession proceeds.   Mature pine  forests  would  replace  the
existing  scrub vegetation,  and the area  would  ultimately develop  as  a
mixed deciduous  woodland.   The populations  of  many  animal species  would
decline moderately from  present  levels.

By 1992,  without the  proposed cement  plant  in  operation, the cumulative
effects of  the many pollutants presently released into North Fork Deer
River could lead to a deterioration  of the  river and marshes.  However,
barring any further developments affecting  the river or barge canal, it
is expected that the  aquatic fauna in  1992  will  be similar to existing
fauna.  Alternative use  of the Ideal  property could involve other eco-
logical impacts.
                                  101

-------
                                                    ECOLOGY (PLANT SITE)
Because of the secondary and unavoidable nature of the ecological
Impacts, the alternative actions deal only with specific placement of
roadways and facilities.  (The stormwater discharge to the freshwater
marsh is avoidable, and relevant alternatives are discussed in the Water
Resources/Geotechnical section.)

From a practical viewpoint, the facility will be located in the optimum
portion of the property, i.e., out of the wetlands and along the ship
channel.  Alternative access corridors could be from Airco's access
roadway (west), from Dauphin Island Parkway across North Fork Deer River
and the adjacent wetlands (north), or from Dauphin Island Parkway south
of the river and wetlands (east).  Another alternative is the total
bridging of the wetlands by both road and railways.

Using Airco's access roadway to cross the river and wetlands would alle-
viate the portion of the disturbance of the wetlands due to the access
road and bridge (but not the railroad trestle).  However, one access
road for two separate industrial facilities has some undesirable
aspects; e.g., problems of a strike at one plant closing the other
plant, liability, security requirements, ownership rights, etc.  The
action is not considered a practical alternative due to the magnitude of
these problems.

The alternative access route that would cross the wetlands at another
location would not decrease the overall impact on the wetlands.  Access
from the east would eliminate disturbance of the wetlands bordering the
North Fork Deer River; however, in order to use this route, the state-
owned Dauphin Island Parkway to Island Road and its bridge over the
North Fork Deer River would have to be upgraded to withstand the truck
traffic from the operation of the cement plant.  In addition, the
facility layout would have to be redesigned to accommodate this new
access route.

Bridging the entire section of the wetland would reduce the potential
impacts of the use of fill.  However, direct sunlight would be
                                  102

-------
                                                     ECOLOGY  (PLANT  SITE)
eliminated beneath the structure and would cause some  Impacts on the
wetland vegetation.

The proposed action is considered environmentally  acceptable.  The
alternatives of bridging the entire freshwater marsh and  the eastern
entrance from the parkway are also environmentally  acceptable but are
not as practical as the proposed action.
                                 103

-------
                                             SOCIOECONOMICS (PLANT SITE)
                             SOCIOECONOMICS

BASELINE CONDITIONS
PRESENT CONDITIONS

The Mobile metropolitan area, consisting of Mobile and Baldwin Counties,
Alabama, had a 1977 population of approximately 414,000 persons.  The
mainstays of the area economy are the Port of Alabama and manufacturing
activities linked to the region's natural resources and transportation
facilities.  A period of slow growth in the late 1960's, caused by the
phase-out of Brookley Air Force Base, has been followed by  rapid
expansion in nearly all sectors of the economy, resulting in  population
growth rates between 1.0 and 1.5 percent per year since 1970.  With net
in-migration exceeding 1,000 persons per year, the Mobile metropolitan
area has emerged as a locus of economic opportunity for persons living
in south Alabama and neighboring states.

Socioeconomic assessment of the proposed Ideal Basic Industries project
has focused on south Mobile County (census tracts 65 through  73), which
consists roughly of all land in Mobile County located south or southwest
of the Mobile city limit.  South Mobile County contains suburban
residential areas, concentrated near the Mobile city limit  and along the
Interstate 10/U.S. Route 90 corridor, as well as Theodore Industrial
Park, the fishing village of Bayou La Batre, the Dauphin Island resort
community, and very large areas of agricultural and vacant  land.  The
population of south Mobile County has increased by more than  4 percent
per year since 1960, reaching approximately 47,400 persons  in 1977  (see
Table 5).  Although the establishment of Theodore Industrial  Park has
had some influence upon population growth in recent years,  the most
important factors have been residential amenity and land availability
rather than job opportunities in the suburban area.  At present, roughly
25 percent of employed south Mobile County residents work within this
                                  104

-------
                                             SOCIOECONOMICS (PLANT SITE)
Table 5.   Population of the Mobile Metropolitan Area and Component
          Areas, Past and Projected
South Mobile County


1960
1970
1977
1985
1992
2000
Mobile
SMSA*
363,389
376,690
414,000
455,000
476,000
492,000
Mobile
County
314,301
317,308
343,000
380,000
394,000
404,000

Percent of
Number Mobile SMSA
22,846
34,924
47 ,400
57,300
65,400
70,900
6.3
9.3
11.4
12.6
13.7
14.4
* Mobile and Baldwin Counties, Alabama.

Sources:  SARPC, 1977.
          Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc, 1977.
                                  105

-------
                                             SOCIOECONOMICS  (PLANT SITE)


area; 40 percent work  in Mobile; 20 percent work at the Ingalls shipyard
in Pascagoula, Mississippi; and 15 percent work elsewhere.

The population of south Mobile County is predominantly middle  income,
with some relatively affluent communities located near the Mobile city
limit and along the Mobile Bay waterfront.  The occupational
distribution of employed persons is similar to that of the Mobile
metropolitan area as a whole, with a substantial mix of blue-  collar and
white-collar occupations.

An extremely high proportion of all dwelling units (98 percent) consist
of single-family homes and mobile homes.  Over 82 percent of all units
are owner-occupied.  Recent residential growth has occurred  primarily in
the Till mans Corner area and elsewhere along the I-10/Route 90 corri-
dor.  The residential  areas closest to the Ideal Basic Industries
property, namely the Hoi lingers Island community and scattered neighbor-
hoods to the south along the Dauphin Island Parkway, have gained popula-
tion at a relatively modest pace.  During the 1960's, these  residential
areas were heavily oriented toward Brookley Field employees, and thus
were affected very significantly by the Brookley closing.

With the exception of Theodore Industrial Park and the tourist-oriented
facilities at Dauphin  Island, there is a relative lack of non-residen-
tial, developed land uses in south Mobile County.  Retail trade is
limited primarily to convenience establishments and stores on  Route 90
that sell high-bulk items (e.g., cars, furniture).  The area's popula-
tion remains heavily dependent upon Mobile for most services.  There is
no form of local public transportation outside Mobile.

Population growth in South Mobile County has resulted in greatly
increased demands for  public facilities and services.  A highly notice-
able effect has been the increase in highway traffic.  For example,
traffic counts on U.S. Route 90 between Theodore and the Mobile city
limit rose by 60 to 80 percent between 1970 and 1976, and the  comparable
increases for Interstate 10 were 70 to 85 percent.  Increased  school
                                  106

-------
                                              SOCIOECONOMICS (PLANT SITE)

enrollments have created serious  problems  of  overcrowding in south
Mobile County schools.  As of 1975,  five of the  eleven  public schools
were operating above classroom capacity, by amounts  ranging from 7 per-
cent to 61 percent (SARPC, 1976).  No  new  school  buildings have been
constructed in the area since 1975.

Approximately half of all dwelling units in south Mobile  County obtain
water from public systems, but only  about  10  percent  have public sewage.
All public water provided to residential users in south Mobile County  is
obtained from local wells.  Demand is  approaching the capacity of
existing wells in the area near Mobile, but the  water authority
presently serving this area is to be taken over  by the  Board of Water
and Sewer Commissioners of the City  of Mobile, which  has  ample water
supplies.  Public sewer service is provided in the Tillmans Corner area
and Theodore Industrial Park by the  Board  of  Water and Sewer
Commissioners of the City of Mobile, and in Bayou La  Batre and Dauphin
Island by independent systems.  Sewer  service in the  northern area
(which ties into the Halls Mill and McDuffie  Island treatment plants)
and the Bayou La Batre sewer system  are being progressively expanded.

The Mobile County governments, including the  Boards of Education and
Health, constitute the only forms of local government in  south Mobile
County, except for:  (1) the City of Bayou La Batre,  and  (2) the police
jurisdiction of the City of Mobile, which  extends 3 miles beyond the
Mobile city limit.  The mechanisms of  land use control  in south Mobile
County are the exercise of subdivision review by the  City of Mobile
within the Mobile police jurisdiction, and the building permit
requirements for flood-prone areas established under  the  Federal  Flood
Insurance Program.

FUTURE CONDITIONS

The Mobile metropolitan area population is expected to approach a half
million persons by the year 2000 (see Table 5).   A major  growth factor
                                  107

-------
                                              SOCIOECONOMICS (PLANT SITE)

will  be the  completion of the Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway, which will
shorten the  water distances  from Mobile  to  all  points in the United
States interior above Cairo  on the  Mississippi  River.  Other factors
will  be the  continuing industrial investment  in Theodore Industrial Park
and elsewhere,  and possible  large-scale  developments related to petro-
leum  and  natural  gas.  Population growth in south Mobile county is pro-
jected to continue at a gradually decreasing  rate, so that  this area
will  have roughly 65,400 inhabitants  by  1992  and 70,900 residents by the
year  2000.

The most  rapid  residential growth in  south  Mobile County will  probably
occur in  areas  south  and west of Theodore and in the Hollingers Island
community.   Significant development is also expected in the lower
Dauphin Island  Parkway corridor (south of Baker Sorrel 1  Road).   This
development, which has already begun  to  occur,  will  consist of  dwellings
oriented  specifically toward  workers  at  Theodore Industrial  Park.

RELEVANT  PROJECT  CHARACTERISTICS

Most  elements of  the  proposed Ideal Basic Industries project that relate
to socioeconomic  impact have  been mentioned earlier  in  other contexts.
The factors  affecting the local  economy  will  include an average employ-
ment  of 360 workers at the plant site during  the 30-month construction
period, and  a total construction payroll of approximately $15,000,000.
Permanent  employment  of 135 persons at the  Theodore  plant sites will
generate  an  annual  payroll of approximately $3,000,000  in 1977  dollars
(including fringe benefits).   There will also be 50  workers  employed in
maritime  operations who may or may  not be Ideal  Basic Industries
employees. Ideal  Basic Industries will spend  approximately  $10,000,000
locally for materials during  construction and will purchase  a wide
variety of commodities from local suppliers once the plant  is  in
operation, including  transportation,  fuels, electric power,  water and
sewer service,  and equipment  repair services.
                                 108

-------
                                             SOCIOECONOMICS  (PLANT  SITE)

The project will generate substantial volumes of waterway  and  highway
traffic.  Construction activity will be responsible  for  approximately
900 trips per day on the average, with a  peak of about 1,750 trips  per
day (referring always to one-way rather than round trips).   Most
vehicles departing from the plant site during construction will either
travel east on Island Road (Hamilton Blvd.) to  reach Dauphin Island
Parkway or west on Island Road to reach U.S. 90 and  Interstate 10.   Soon
after the plant is in operation, Rangeline Expressway  should be
completed and should serve as the primary access route.  The highway
traffic generated after the plant is in operation will  include roughly
250 auto trips per day (on a 7-day  per week basis) and  an  average of
150 truck trips per weekday.  With  regard to waterborne  traffic on  the
ship channel and nearby waterways,  the Ideal Basic Industries  project
will generate 0.5 to 1.5 trips per  day for cement shipment;  close to 2
trips per day for delivery of limestone;  and an unknown, but much
smaller, number of trips for delivery of  other  raw materials.   Each trip
refers to the arrival or departure  of a tug/barge tow  or possibly some
other type of deep-draft vessel.

IMPACTS

The construction phase of the proposed Ideal Basic Industries  project
will have positive economic impacts of high magnitude  and  moderate
significance. When indirect effects are taken  into account,  the overall
economic impact on the Mobile metropolitan area will amount  to roughly
1,370 person-years of employment and $30  million  in  personal income over
the two-year construction period.   Although the income benefits of the
project will be dispersed throughout the  Mobile area,  it is  expected
that a total of at least $10 million, or  $5 million  per year,  should
accrue to residents of south Mobile County.

The proposed construction project  is not  expected  to have significant
effects upon the housing market, public facilities,  or social  conditions
as  a  result of  labor  importation.   For reasons  discussed earlier, the
number  of workers at  the project who are  newcomers  to Mobile County
                                  109

-------
                                              SOCIOECONOMICS (PLANT SITE)
 (i.e., outsiders who take up residence for periods exceeding a week at a
 time)  should not exceed 150 and should average less than 60 over the
 duration of the project.

 The highway traffic generated by the Ideal  construction project will
 contribute traffic congestion in the industrial  park area.   Based upon
 the estimates of present traffic volumes,  the  following increases are
 expected:
     8.3 percent—Island Road west  to Rangeline  Road,
     1.2 percent—Rangeline Road south,
     7.9 percent—Island Road west  of Rangeline  Road,  and
     3.6 percent—Island Road east  to Dauphin  Island Parkway.
 The average changes for the entire  construction  period will  be
 approximately half these percentages. The magnitude of traffic impact
 caused by  Ideal's construction is rated  moderate,  but  the significance
 is  considered low due to the expected highway  improvements.  This impact
 is  short-term and reversible.

 Permanent  operations at the proposed plant  will  also generate  very
 positive impacts upon the regional  economy.  As  is typical  of
 highly-capitalized manufacturing operations, the indirect effects of
 Ideal  Basic Industries will  exceed  the direct  impacts.   A major example
 of  these indirect effects is that Ideal's  purchases from the trucking
 industry alone will  support  close to 75  full-time  drivers,  exclusive of
 support  and maintenance personnel.   Income  received by the  cement plant
 workers, the related maritime workers, and  the employees of  firms
 providing  services to the plant/will  be  spent  and  respent within the
 local  economy and thus will  create  additional  jobs.   It  is  estimated
 that the total  employment impact  of the  proposed facility within the
 Mobile SMSA will  be  approximately 500 jobs.  This  estimate  assumes an
 employment  multiplier of 2.7,  applied to the 185 jobs  directly created
 in  cement manufacturing and  water transportation.   (The  economic
 analysis of the  Port of Mobile by Dunphy and Chiang (1974)  assumed a
multiplier  of 3.0 for basic  employment in the State of Alabama as a
whole.)
                                  110

-------
                                             SOCIOECONOMICS (PLANT SITE)
The plans for the new facility in Theodore have not assumed necessarily
that the existing Ideal plant in Mobile will  shut down.  However,
computations of economic impact should consider that the new plant is
likely to accelerate the phase-out of the old plant.  The new facility
will employ approximately the same number of persons as the Mobile plant
(depending upon whether or not maritime employees are included), but
will produce three times as much cement.  The indirect economic effects
thus will be substantially greater.  The total employment generated
directly or indirectly by the proposed Theodore plant is estimated to
exceed by more than 100 workers the corresponding employment effect of
the existing facility.  Table 6 indicates the net employment benefits of
the Theodore project under the worst-case assumption that the Mobile
plant will close upon startup of the new facility in 1980, whereas
otherwise the Mobile plant would continue in operation until roughly
1985.  (The assumed employment multipliers are 2.5 for the Mobile plant
and 1.9 for the construction project at Theodore.)  As shown by the last
two lines of Table 6, the new cement plant will generate roughly
5,500 person-years of employment between 1978 and 1992, on a net basis
under the worst-case assumption.  This amounts to an average of 393 jobs
over the 14-year period.  The positive economic impacts of the proposed
project are thus considered high in magnitude and moderate in signifi-
cance in the area.

The truck traffic generated by permanent operations at the proposed
cement plant will represent an impact of moderate magnitude and  low
significance.  About 760 one-way truck trips during a 50-hour work week
are assumed for the operation of the proposed plant.  The magnitude of
this impact should decline in 1982, when Rangeline Expressway is
completed north to Interstate 10.  This impact is considered long-term
and reversible.

In the near future, traffic conditions  in the Theodore  Industrial Park
area will be improved by:  (1) the widening of Island Road  (Hamilton
Blvd.) to three lanes; (2) the completion of Rangeline Expressway;
(3) the  improvement of Rangeline Road from Island Road  (Hamilton Blvd.)
                                  Ill

-------
       Table 6.  Gross and Net Employment Attributable to Ideal Basic Industries Under Worst-Case Conditions;
                 Mobile SMSA
                              Gross Employment Gener-
                                ated by Ideal Basic
                               Industries Operations
                               Direct       Indirect
                             Net Employment Attributable to
                           Proposed New Manufacturing Facility
                            Direct      Indirect        Total
                                                    Comments
ro
       Time Interval

         1978-1980
        (24 months)
         1980-1985
         1985-1992
  510
  185
  185
       Total Man-Years

       Average Employment
       for 14-Year Forecast
       Period
3,240
  550
  315
  315
4,880
  360
   35
  185
2,190
  325
   90
  315
3,305
  685
  125
  500
5,495
                                                         393
Construction phase
for new facility;
existing plant in
operation.

New facility 1n
operation; old
plant shut down as
a consequence of
new facility.

Old plant would be
terminated with or
without the new
facility.
       Source:  Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc., 1977.

-------
                                             SOCIOECONOM1CS (PLANT SITE)

to Deer River; and (4) the conversion of the Dauphin Island Parkway to
four lanes between Perch Creek and Island Road.  These improvements will
minimize the impacts produced by the substantial volume of heavy truck
traffic generated by Ideal.  The impact of auto traffic generated by
permanent operations at the plant will be negligible because of the
24-hour-per-day operation and because there will only be about
300 one-way trips per day.

Other transportation requirements of the proposed cement plant are not
expected to involve significant impacts.  Rail transportation could be
utilized for delivering up to 270,000 metric tons (300,000 tons) of
materials per year to the Theodore site and for shipping as much as
180,000 metric tons (200,000 tons) per year of finished cement.  Rail
traffic to and from the plant site must use a grade crossing of the
State Docks Terminal Railway and Rangeline Road (plus an additional
grade crossing of Island Road if the traffic is northbound).  The
potential disruption of highway traffic is considered a very minor
impact, however, since the tonnage figures cited above would imply an
average of only 2 unit trains per week.

Water transportation, which will involve greater tonnages than either
highway or rail transportation, is not expected to have significant
impacts upon the waterway system.  Ample dockage space will be provided
to allow efficient use of the waterfront area at the plant site.  The
traffic created by the proposed cement plant should be accommodated
without disrupting the other anticipated traffic in the ship channel.
The downriver shipments of limestone, clay, sand, and iron ore will
increase by 5 to 10 percent the total tonnage passing through the Mobile
harbor area and should not create any significant congestion problems.

The construction and operation of the proposed Ideal Basic Industries
manufacturing facility could have both positive and negative effects
upon land value in nearby areas.  The positive effects would relate to
employment opportunities at the plant and the general stimulus to
                                   113

-------
                                             SOCIOECONOMICS (PLANT SITE)

economic growth In the  Industrial park area.  The negative effects would
Involve dust and noise  levels as described in the Air Quality and Noise
sections.  The marketability of residences in the area surrounding the
cement plant has been judged to be good because of the demand for hous-
ing from industrial workers.  The homes which would be subject to the
greatest impact will be taken for the ship channel project or the land
will probably be converted to industrial use.  These takings and con-
versions would occur without the proposed cement plant; therefore, the
impact on land values,  although of moderate magnitude to some remaining
residences, 1s considered to be of low significance in the area.  These
reversible effects will be short-term during construction and long-term
during the operation of the plant.

MITIGATING MEASURES

An aspect of the construction phase which will minimize social impact
will be the recruitment of local construction workers rather than
utilization of an imported labor force.  The feasibility of this policy
is demonstrated by the  past success of Ideal's engineering contractor
(Brown & Root, Inc.) in drawing upon the Mobile area labor force for
other local projects.   An important action associated with permanent
operations will be the  orderly transfer of workers from the existing
Ideal Basic Industries  plant in Mobile to the new facility at Theodore.

An environmental safeguard that will minimize effects of construction
and plant operation upon land use, land value, and residential amenity
will be the preservation of a vegetated buffer strip at least 90 meters
(300 feet) wide along the eastern margin of the property and the
20-meter (65-foot) high limestone storage area between the facility and
this greenbelt.

Possible mitigating actions that could be undertaken by Ideal pertain to
traffic impacts; for example, construction shifts and cement deliveries
conceivably could be scheduled to avoid peak-hour traffic flows on
nearby highways.
                                   114

-------
                                              SOCIOECONOMICS  (PLANT  SITE)

ALTERNATIVES

The no-action alternative would result  in the  loss  of  substantial eco-
nomic benefits to be generated by the cement  plant  project,  with  only
marginal gains in terms of avoiding adverse socioeconomic  impacts.
Other than the site location alternatives discussed in the Site Selec-
tion section, there are no practical alternatives for  the  socioeconomic
aspects of the proposed cement plant.
                                 115

-------
QUARRY SITE

-------
                                SITE LOCATION/DEVELOPMENT  (QUARRY SITE)
                              QUARRY SITE
                                LOCATION

The Gaillard tract, proposed as the limestone quarry  site,  is located on
the Alabama River approximately 180 kilometers (110 river miles) north
of the Theodore plant site.  This 1,633-hectare  (4,035-acre) tract con-
sists of two land parcels under different ownership (see Figure 18).
The 739-hectare (1,826-acre) northern portion was purchased by Ideal
Basic Industries in 1953 and 1959, and until recently consisted of
timberland.  The southern portion of 894 hectares (2,209 acres) is owned
by Mr. Howard McWilliams, a cattle rancher.  Recent agreements between
the two owners have allowed Mr. McWilliams to harvest timber and develop
most of the Ideal Basic Industries property as improved pasture, while
Ideal Basic Industries has acquired quarrying rights to the McWilliams
property.  The conversion of land to improved pasture, which is already
underway, is an independent action not covered by this Environmental
Impact Statement.

The quarry site is on the eastern bank of the Alabama River in Monroe
County, approximately 5 kilometers (3 miles) southwest of the intersec-
tion of Stockton Road (Monroe County Road No. 1) and U.S. Highway 84
(see Figure 19).  The site is very isolated relative to other developed
land uses.  Except for a few houses situated along Stockton Road, the
only land uses found within 5 kilometers (3 miles) of the central
portion of the site are agriculture and woodland.  The geology of the
area is characterized by layers of limestone overlaid by sand and gravel
deposits of varying thicknesses.  The northern portion of the tract is
currently being clear cut and converted to improved pasture, whereas the
southern portion already consists primarily of pasture with a few
planted fields.

On the proposed quarry site, there are four large creeks which flow into
the Alabama River.   In descending order from north to south they are:
McGirts Creek, Thompson Mill Creek (also known as MarshalIs Creek),
                                  117

-------
                                                        IDEAL BASIC
                                                        INDUSTRIES
                                                         PROPERTY
                                                    McWILLIAMS
                                                     PROPERTY
                   I RESIDENTIAL
                   | IMPROVED PASTURE
                   1 AND CROPLAND
                                         FOREST
I IMPROVED PASTURE
' TRANSITION STATE
1 THINNED HARDWOODS
' AND WOODLAND PASTURE
Figure 18
PRESENT LAND USE IN THE VICINITY OF THE
PROPOSED IDEAL-BASIC INDUSTRIES QUARRY SITE
                           0     0.5     1
                          SCALE IN KILOMETERS
SOURCE:  Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc., 1977.
                                             118

-------
 Figure 19
 QUARRY SITE VICINITY
SOURCE: Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc., 1977.
                                                     0         5         10
                                                      SCALE IN KILOMETERS
REGION IV
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
STATEMENT FOR IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES
         PROPOSED GAILLARD QUARRY
          MONROE COUNTY, ALABAMA

-------
                                SITE LOCATION/DEVELOPMENT (QUARRY SITE)
Hoi linger Creek, and Randons Creek.  They are shallow creeks which have
sand and gravel bottoms and flow in a southwest direction.

Bluffs and outcrops occur along the western boundary of the property
adjacent to the river.  Relief moderates considerably to the east as
well as north and south of the site.
                                  120

-------
                                      PROJECT DESCRIPTION (QUARRY SITE)
                          PROJECT DESCRIPTION

CONSTRUCTION

Construction of the limestone quarry facility will last 18 months.  The
construction project will cost $12,000,000 in 1977 dollars and will
employ an average of 133 persons, with a peak employment of
250 workers.

About 40 hectares (100 acres) will be cleared initially for construction
of the access road, main buildings, and stockpile area.  Approximately
570,000 cubic meters (750,000 cubic yards) of material will be moved
during the grading of the cleared areas.  The limestone will be stock-
piled, and most of the overburden (supplemented by clay materials from
several on-site deposits) will be utilized to construct earthen dams for
clarification basins.  Final grade will slope toward the clarification
basins.  Prior to construction of the basins, temporary measures such as
berming and terracing will be used to control sediment.  Roadways and
work areas at the site will be kept moist to suppress dust.  Land-
clearing wastes will be disposed by chipping for mulch and/or by pit
burning. Other construction debris will be hauled to the Monroe County
Landfill.

Conveyors and limestone breakers will be set up in the immediate vicin-
ity of the limestone storage area.  Construction of the docking facility
will not require dredging, as the depth of the Alabama River in the dock
area is already adequate.  The access road to the quarry site will be
surfaced in order to minimize dust emissions and will be constructed
with bridges and culverts to maintain natural drainage of  existing
creeks.  The project will include construction of a 38,000-liter
(10,000-gallon) underground diesel fuel tank and an underground gasoline
storage tank of approximately 23,000 liters  (6,000 gallons).
                                  121

-------
                                      PROJECT DESCRIPTION (QUARRY SITE)
QUARRYING PROCESS

The proposed quarry will extract 2.4 million metric tons (2.7 million
tons) of limestone (wet basis) per year from an average of 14 hectares
(35 acres) of land.  Up to 80 percent of the site can be mined econo-
mically with present quarrying techniques; the recoverable reserves
exceed 136 million metric tons (140 million tons).  Thus, the effective
life of the facility is greater than 50 years.  The overall  quarrying
process will involve the following six types of activities,  which are
diagrammed in Figure 20:
     1.  Overburden removal
     2.  Quarrying
     3.  Crushing
     4.  Storage
     5.  Barge loading
     6.  Reclamation.

Soil overburden will be removed by dozers and scrapers in order to
expose the underlying layers of limestone.  The overburden will be taken
to storage areas, used directly in land reclamation, or used to con-
struct dams for the clarification basins which will provide stormwater
runoff control. Overburden storage areas will be seeded where practical.
Depending upon the mining sequence chosen, material may accumulate in
these areas for up to 5 years until an equilibrium between mining and
reclamation is reached.  Thereafter, quarrying and land reclamation will
proceed at equivalent rates in terms of acreage and the quantities of
overburden handled.

The material quarried will be a combination of Glendon, Marianna, Red
Bluff, and upper Ocala limestones.  Limestone deposits vary up to
28 meters (95 feet) in thickness.  The limestone will be quarried to a
level just above the bottom of the lower Ocala limestone layer (see
Figure B.G.14 in Appendix B, Baseline).  Quarry activities will begin
with the processing of material stockpiled during construction and will
move progressively away from the stockpile area.  Dozers with special
                                  122

-------
 1 ) VEGETATION AND OVERBURDEN REMOVAL
2) QUARRYING
 3) CRUSHING
4 ) STORAGE
                                                                                                         LIMESTONE PILE
  5) BARGE LOADING
6) RECLAMATION
Figure 20
STEPS OF PROPOSED QUARRY PROCESS
                             REGION IV
                             US ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
                             AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
                             STATEMENT FOR IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES
SOURCE: Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc., 1977.
                                                                                                          PROPOSED GAILLARD QUARRY
                                                                                                           MONROE COUNTY, ALABAMA

-------
                                      PROJECT DESCRIPTION (QUARRY SITE)
ripping equipment will be used to loosen the limestone and push it down
slope; blasting is not anticipated.  A total of up to 120 hectares
(300 acres) will be involved in active quarrying and overburden storage
at any given time.

The limestone's natural moisture content of 22 percent should reduce
potential fugitive dust emissions during quarrying operations; however,
a dust suppression system is planned.  In order to control sedimentation
problems, all stormwater runoff from land affected by quarrying,
overburden storage, or unvegetated reclaimed lands will be directed to
clarification basins.  Figure 21 shows the quarry areas and the basins
that could be used during the First 15 years of operation.  The basins
will be formed by constructing earthen dams across low-lying areas.

Front-end loaders, rippers, and dozers will convey the limestone to a
portable breaker located near the quarry face, which will reduce the
material to a size less than 15 centimeters (6 inches).  The crushed
limestone will be conveyed either to storage or directly to the barge
loading facility.  Barge loading (see Figure 22) will be accomplished by
a conveyor with a telescoping boot for control of dust emissions.  Every
20.5 hours a set of four barges will leave for the cement plant.  Unlike
the quarrying operations, which normally will be limited to a 40-hour
work week, barge loading may require two 8-hour shifts per day in order
to keep pace with the arrival of a new set of barges.  On an average
basis, the quarry will supply 7,788 metric tons (8,585 tons) of wet
limestone per day.

RECLAMATION

The objective of the reclamation program will be to grade and vegetate
the area for use as pastureland.  The most significant aspects of the
reclamation plan are:
     1.  Controlling soil erosion;
     2.  Controlling water runoff;
     3.  Developing wildlife habitat;
     4.  Monitoring environmental quality.
                                  124

-------
       CLARIFICATION \
         BASIN 4
      CLARIFICATION
         BASIN 3
      QUARRY PLANT
           AREA
      CLARIFICATION
         BASIN 2 —
    CLARIFICATION
        BASIN  1
                                     III
IV
                                                   CLARIFICATION^
                                                   X BASIN 5
                                                    VII
                   ACCESS,
                                      VI
Figure 21
MINING AREAS
(FIRST FIFTEEN YEARS)
            0        0.5          1
              SCALE IN KILOMETERS
SOURCE: Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc., 1977.
        REGION IV
        US ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
        AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
        STATEMENT FOR IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES
                PROPOSED GAILLARO QUARRY
                 MONROE COUNTY, ALABAMA
                                     125

-------
                                                                    UNDERGROUND
                                                                     FUEL TANKS
                                                                     MAINTENANCE
                                                                      BUILDING
                                        FLOATING
                                         DOCKS
                        I
                        i
                                   BARGES<
                                                   CONVEYOR TO
                                                   | /BARGES
Figure 22
SCHEMATIC LAYOUT OF WATERFRONT DEVELOPMENT
                   0                    1000
                      SCALE IN METERS

SOURCE: Brown & Root, Inc., 1977.
                                                              REGION IV
                                                              U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
                                                              AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
                                                              STATEMENT FOR IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES
                                                                        PROPOSED GAILLARD QUARRY
                                                                         MONROE COUNTY, ALABAMA

                                              126

-------
                                      PROJECT DESCRIPTION (QUARRY SITE)
After the fifth year of quarrying, approximately 14 hectares (35 acres)
will be reclaimed each year.  Soil on reclaimed land will be compacted
to ensure soil stability and graded to minimize erosion.  Contour
grading will be used on the steeper slopes when necessary.  Reclaimed
areas will be seeded and will  be drained into clarification basins until
the area is revegetated.

The removal of limestone will  lower the land elevations  in quarried
areas by an average of 7.6 meters (25 feet), and the cumulative effect
of quarrying and reclamation will be a moderate reduction in land sur-
face gradients.  Transitional  zones between disturbed and undisturbed
areas will be graded to minimize slope differences, with no slopes
exceeding 3 to 1.

RESOURCE UTILIZATION

Up to 80 percent of the 1,633 hectares (4,035 acres) may be quarried
during the active life of the project.  Quarrying will constitute a
temporary use of the land, in that the land will be returned to its
previous use—improved pasture.  However, some slope and elevation
characteristics will be altered.

The quarry will have 4.18 kilovolt electric service supplied by the
Alabama Electric Cooperative or the Alabama Power Company and will uti-
lize 3.0 megawatts of electricity.  An aboveground transmission system
is planned to be located within the access roadway corridor.  Potable
water for sanitary facilities will be supplied by a deep well with a
pumping capacity of 40 liters (10 gallons) per minute.   Water for dust
suppression will be obtained from the clarification basins.  The quarry
will generate about 1,800 liters (475 gallons) per day of sewage which
will be disposed on site by means of a septic tank and soil absorption
system.  Quarry operations will employ a total of 19 persons and will
generate about $400,000 per year in direct salaries.  The quarried lime-
stone will be transported to the cement plant at the average rate of
7,788 metric tons (8,585 tons) per day.
                                  127

-------
                                      PROJECT DESCRIPTION (QUARRY SITE)
TRANSPORTATION

The limestone will be loaded onto barges for transportation down river
to the cement plant.  A tow consisting of four barges will leave the
site each day and will follow a seven-day-per-week schedule.
                                  128

-------
                                                 LAND  USE  (QUARRY  SITE)
                            LAND USE SETTING

PRESENT LAND USE

As shown In Figure 18, the present land use In the vicinity of the
proposed quarry site consists of forested lands, Improved pasture and
croplands, Improved pasture (transitional state), thinned hardwoods, and
woodland pasture.  There are several single family residences in the
area, but by comparison to the other land uses, they represent a very
small proportion of the total land area.

Most of the residential units are located along Stockton Road.  All
dwellings on this road are at least 1 kilometer (0.6 mile) from the
closest proposed areas which will be quarried during the next 15 years.

The property is presently devoted to agricultural use.  Much of the
southern half is improved pasture with some fodder crops.  The north-
central portion of the site has been recently cleared and is in the
transitional state to improved pasture.  North of this  area and along
the bank of the river are thinned hardwoods.  Although  some of the hard-
wood areas have been harvested more than others, they are all fenced and
accessible to grazing cattle.  Improved pasture and croplands are scat-
tered around the perimeter of the property to the north, east, and
south.  All other lands within a 2- to 3-kilocneter (1-  to 2-mile)
radius of the Ideal property are heavily forested.

FUTURE LAND USE

Present land use trends are expected to prevail in the  future (1992),
with most lands in the vicinity remaining predominantly in agricultural
and forest uses.
                                  129

-------
                                             AIR QUALITY (QUARRY SITE)

                              AIR QUALITY

BASELINE CONDITIONS

The quarry site Is located in a remote area of western Monroe County
which has very little industrial activity.  Several  small  stationary
air pollution sources are in operation in Monroe County; however, none
of these sources is in the immediate vicinity of the quarry site, and
only very small quantities of particulate matter are emitted.  Several
small sources of sulfur dioxide and particulate matter emissions are
located in Clarice County, to the east of the quarry site.   None of
these sources is located within 24 kilometers (15 miles) of the site.

Because of the lack of major industrial  activity near the  quarry site,
ambient sulfur dioxide levels at the quarry site should be near zero.
Ambient total suspended particulate matter (TSP) levels should be
between 20 and 30 ug/m3, approaching natural background levels for
the southeastern United States.  Figure 23 plots the suspended particu-
late concentrations at the two ambient air quality monitoring stations
closest.to the quarry site.  These are stations located at Evergreen in
Conecuh County and at Grove Hill in Clarke County.  No significant pat-
terns are indicated other than relatively low concentrations overall.
In the future, sulfur dioxide and TSP levels at the quarry site will
probably increase slightly due to the influence of the pulp mill  being
constructed approximately 11 kilometers (7 miles) north of the site.

RELEVANT PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS

Construction activities such as land clearing, grading, roadway con-
struction, excavation, and other heavy machinery operations, are
potential sources of fugitive dust.  Other pollutant sources during
construction are burning of vegetative wastes and vehicular exhausts.
The emission sources associated with permanent quarry operations
                                  130

-------

n
E
3
z
o
H-
cc
^
•
UJ
o
z

0

UJ
0
cc
UJ
0
UJ
o
UJ
0
DC
UJ
<


120-

110-

100-
90-


80-

70-

60-

50-

40-


30-
20-

10-










PRIMARY STANDA


SECONDARY STAND
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••I


GROVE HILL
<^ ^*"^^^^^™c^^
^^^^^
^ ^^^^
"" EVERGREEN ^~ — ' 	 *•



1972 1973 1974 197S
YEAR
                                                                 I •••••••••••
                                                           1976
               1977
Figure 23
TRENDS IN AMBIENT TOTAL SUSPENDED PARTICULATE
MATTER CONCENTRATIONS. RURAL ALABAMA IN THE
REGION OF THE PROPOSED IDEAL QUARRY SITE,
1972-1977

SOURCE. Alabama Air Pollution Control Commission, 1978.
REGION IV
US. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
STATEMENT FOR IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES
        PROPOSED GAILLARD QUARRY
         MONROE COUNTY, ALABAMA
                                        131

-------
                                                     AIR  (QUARRY SITE)

include the processes of quarrying, crushing, conveying,  storing,  and
loading of limestone.  As  at the plant site, effective methods  of  fugi-
tive dust control, such as water sprays, will be utilized  during both
construction and operations.

IMPACTS

Construction activities at the  proposed quarry  site  are expected to
have short-term air  quality  impacts in the  immediate  vicinity of the
area being developed.  The major effects will be fugitive dust  from
clearing activities  and smoke from burning  of land-clearing wastes.
Levels of suspended  particulate matter are  expected  to  increase;
however, Ambient Air Quality Standards should not  be  exceeded.  These
impacts are rated  low  in magnitude and significance  because of  their
short-term, reversible nature and the  isolation of the  construction
area from sensitive  land uses.  The impact  of burning is  considered
avoidable since other  means  of  disposal are available.

In evaluating  the  air  quality  impacts  of permanent operations,  a  dis-
tinction is drawn  between  dust  emissions from the  quarrying areas  and
emissions from the other areas  (i.e.,  breakers, conveyors, stockpile,
and barge loader).  Water  sprays can  be utilized effectively in the
latter case, but  not in the  quarry areas.   Therefore, the magnitude  of
air quality impacts  is  rated as moderate for quarrying  activities  and
low for other  activities at  the site.  Significance  is  considered  to  be
low in both cases  due  to the lack  of  receptors, i.e.» the isolation  of
the area.  The impacts  will  be  long-term  (life  of  the quarry)  but
reversible.

It appears that  the PSD requirements  will  not  be applicable to the
quarry operations  because  the  potential emissions  are less than 227
metric tons  (250  tons  per  year).   A  review of  the  air permit
applications  should be completed  prior to  conducting the public hearing
for this  project.   If  the  PSD  requirements are determined to be
applicable,  it is  expected that the  associated impacts on air quality
and the  selection of control equipment will not be significantly
different  than those stated in  this  document.
                               132

-------
                                                      AIR (QUARRY SITE)

MITIGATING MEASURES

Aside from the effects of burning during construction, the important
air quality impact associated with the  proposed  quarry is the emission
of fugitive dust.  The inherent moisture content of the wet limestone
rock to be quarried will reduce significantly the potential fugitive
dust emissions.  In addition, the use of water sprays and the use of
"boot" type loaders at the  barge loading facility will lessen fugitive
dust impacts in the local area.  The surfacing of the access road will
limit fugitive dust emissions from that source.   The disturbed but
non-active areas will be revegetated to reduce the amount of area with
a dust-generation potential.

The adverse effects of burning will  be  reduced by conducting this
activity only during  periods of favorable  atmospheric dispersion.  The
use of an air-blower  type pit burner will  burn the materials more effi-
ciently and with less smoke than typical open burning.  Chipping of
some of the wastes for mulch will reduce the amount of material to be
burned.

Mitigating measures that could  be taken during construction and
operation are the use of chemical stabilizers and wind breaks to
decrease fugitive dust emissions.  These measures are appropriate to
use in inactive areas but are not practical  for use in the quarry
areas.

ALTERNATIVES

The expected air quality levels  in  the  area  in 1992 (the  no-action
alternative) should be similar  to  present  conditions, with a possible
slight increase  in particulate  matter  and  sulfur dioxide  from the
Parsons and Whittemore pulp mill.   The  alternative actions related  to
air quality  impacts are  landfilling  vegetative wastes either on-site or
at the Monroe County  Landfill and enclosing  and venting  conveyors to a
particulate matter control  device  (baghouse).
                                 133

-------
                                                      AIR (QUARRY SITE)

Landfill ing of the wastes  would  eliminate  the  expected smoke emissions.
However, on-site  burial  would  disturb  additional  land areas and would
create an unstable surface contour  due to  the  decomposition of the
waste.  This area would  not  be stable  and  could  not  be used for
pastureland.  Hauling  the  wastes  to  the Monroe County Landfill  would
involve approximately  an 80-kilometer  (50-mile)  round trip per load,
and access on-site during  the  first  few months of construction might be
a problem.

Enclosing conveyors  and  treating  dust  emissions  would achieve a higher
degree of removal than water sprays, but their costs would not be
warranted since the  impact of  the proposed  system is already considered
low.

The proposed actions are considered  to be  environmentally acceptable
and more practical than  the  alternatives.
                               134

-------
                                                   NOISE (QUARRY SITE)

                                 NOISE

BASELINE CONDITIONS

The proposed quarry site Is an uninhabited tract of land that Is being
progressively converted from forest to improved pasture.  The only
noise sources are wildlife, natural phenomena such as wind and water,
infrequent river traffic, and a light-duty public road that crosses the
extreme eastern section of the tract.  Noise was monitored at three
stations in the southern, central, and northeastern portions of the
site (shown on Figure 24).  The levels monitored were low and related
to the natural phenomena mentioned above.  These measured noise levels
probably would not increase in the future (by 1992) without the
proposed quarry operation.

RELEVANT PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS

Noise during quarry construction will originate from earthmoving and
building of structures, conveyors, improvement of docking facilities,
roads, and clarification basins.  Noise will also be generated by
commuter traffic of the construction workers.

For purposes of projecting noise levels at the quarry site, the effects
of the equipment were combined into nine large theoretical point
sources (see Figure 24 for projected noise levels).

Operational noise from the quarry will originate primarily from the
removal of overburden, quarrying, limestone handling, and barge
loading.  Automobile commuter traffic to and from the quarry site and
tugboat traffic due to movement of the limestone barges will be addi-
tional noise sources.  However, the primary source of operational noise
will be the equipment used in the active quarry areas.  Figure 25
projects the boundary of the 55 dBA sound contour expected during the
first 15 years of operations.
                                  135

-------
                                                      (7) RANDONS CREEK

                                                       2  EAST OF QUARRY SITE

                                                          NORTH OF QUARRY SITE
Figure 24
EQUAL SOUND LEVEL (Ldn) CONTOURS SURROUNDING
THE QUARRY SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES
                       0      0.5      1
                      SCALE IN KILOMETERS
SOURCE:  Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc., 1977.
REGION IV
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
STATEMENT FOR IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES
        PROPOSED GAILLARD QUARRY
         MONROE COUNTY, ALABAMA
                                       136

-------
Figure 25
ESTIMATED BOUNDARY OF SOUND LEVEL, Lrfn of
55 DECIBELS. SURROUNDING THE QUARRY SITE
DURING OPERATION       ^^^ES^^^S
                           0       0.5      1
                          SCALE IN KILOMETERS
SOURCE:  Environmental Science and  Engineering, Inc., 1977.
                REGION IV
                U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
                AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
                STATEMENT FOR IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES
                         PROPOSED GAILLARD QUARRY
                          MONROE COUNTY, ALABAMA
137

-------
                                                   NOISE (QUARRY SITE)
IMPACTS

The sphere of noise influence due to quarry construction extends some-
what less than 1 kilometer (0.6 mile) from the construction area, with
somewhat greater noise transmission to the west than elsewhere because
the river does not attenuate noise levels.  The only off-site effects
will involve the land directly across the river from the quarry site,
which is an uninhabited floodplain area.  The noise impacts of
construction are considered low in magnitude and significance,
short-term and reversible.

The sphere of noise influence due to initial quarrying operations will
be similar to the noise impacts during construction.  However, the zone
of influence will migrate along with quarry operations, rather than re-
maining centered near the river.  No existing residences are projected
to be impacted by a noise level greater than 55 dBA from the quarrying
activities.  Therefore, the magnitude and significance of noise impacts
during permanent operations will be low.  Impacts will be long-term but
reversible.

MITIGATING MEASURES

Equipment with noise suppression systems, complying with the Walsh-
Mealy Act and the requirements of the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA) and the Mining Enforcement and Safety Administra-
tion (MESA) will be used.  There are no feasible mitigating measures
that would reduce noise levels at the quarry site.

ALTERNATIVES

If the quarry is not constructed (the no-action alternative), the 1992
noise levels at the site should be similar to present conditions.
There are no practical alternatives related to noise generation during
construction and quarrying activities.
                                138

-------
                                              SOLID WASTE (QUARRY SITE)

                              SOLID WASTE

BASELINE CONDITIONS

Only one approved sanitary landfill exists In Monroe County.  The site
is located near Monroeville and handles putrescible, non-putrescible,
and bulky wastes.  The site, which is approximately 10 hectares
(25 acres) in area, operates a multi-lift system of disposal.  The site,
which has been in operation since 1972, has an estimated 2 to 3 years of
capacity remaining.  The county plans to use surrounding property for
future operations once the present site is depleted.  Since the area is
rural, there is adequate land for well over 15 years use.  Burning of
land-clearing wastes is permitted by the Alabama Air Pollution Control
Commission.

RELEVANT PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS

Solid wastes will be generated during the following phases of quarry
construction:  land clearing, grading, and erection of structures and
equipment.  Approximately 40 hectares (100 acres) will be cleared for
the access road, main building, and stockpile area.  The vegetative
wastes, consisting of trees and undergrowth, will be chipped for mulch
and/or burned.  The amount of wastes that will be chipped will depend on
the size of the pieces and the related time and expenses.  The burning
will be performed in an air-blower type pit burner and conducted only
during favorable dispersion conditions.  Grading of the cleared areas
will involve moving 570,000 cubic meters (750,000 cubic yards) of over-
burden and limestone.  Most of the removed material will be used for
construction of clarification basin dams and roadways, or stockpiled to
supply limestone for initial crushing operations.  The remaining over-
burden will be stored for later reclamation use.  Construction debris
from the erection of structures and buildings, consisting of lumber,
                                   139

-------
                                              SOLID WASTE (QUARRY SITE)
concrete, paper wastes, and metal scraps, will be disposed off-site in
the Monroe County Landfill.

Operation of the proposed quarry is expected to generate 137 metric tons
(151 tons) of solid waste per year.  About 2.5 metric tons (2.7 tons) of
paper and lunchroom waste will be disposed off-site at the county
sanitary landfill.  Another 1.7 metric tons (1.8 tons) will consist of
wastes from the equipment maintenance shop.  The oil and metal wastes
will be separated and sold for recycling.  The remainder of this waste
will be taken to the county landfill.  The majority of the solid waste
[132 metric tons (146 tons)] will consist of settled soil and rock
particles that have been removed from the clarification basins in order
to maintain capacities.  This sediment will be used for reclamation.

IMPACTS

The impacts of burning of vegetative waste are discussed in the Air
Quality section.  Disposal of construction debris at the Monroe County
Landfill should not have undesirable effects except to deplete slightly
the available life of the landfill.  These impacts are rated low in
magnitude and significance, long-term, reversible, and avoidable.

No major impacts are expected to result from disposal of the solid
wastes generated during quarry operation.  The use of sediment from the
settling basins is consistent with the other reclamation activities and
should have a negligible impact.  An advantage of disposal at the county
site is that landfill ing will be performed by a qualified staff working
with quantities of other wastes  large enough to promote proper disposal
techniques.  The overall magnitude and significance of solid waste
disposal impacts during permanent operations are expected to be low.
The impact is considered long-term but reversible since the land could
be reclaimed to other land uses.
                                 140

-------
                                              SOLID WASTE  (QUARRY SITE)
MITIGATING MEASURES

No mitigating measures for solid waste disposal have been  Identified.

ALTERNATIVES

The alternative of not constructing and operating the quarry would
increase slightly the effective life of the county landfill area.  No
significant differences are expected.

Landfill ing, which is the alternative action for chipping  and/or burning
of the vegetative wastes, is discussed in the Air Quality  section.

The solid wastes generated during construction and permanent operations
at the quarry could be disposed at an on-site landfill area rather than
the county-approved landfill.  Because of the large size of the quarry
tract, a suitable disposal area could be found, and ecological problems
are not expected.  However, it is not considered very practical for
Ideal Basic Industries to maintain an on-site landfill.  The commitment
of heavy equipment and labor necessary for proper operation of a
sanitary landfill would be excessive given the required disposal of only
4.2 metric tons (4.5 tons) of office, lunchroom, and maintenance wastes
per year.
                                  141

-------
                             WATER RESOURCES/GEOTECHNICAL (QUARRY SITE)
                WATER RESOURCES AND GEOTECHNICAL ASPECTS

BASELINE CONDITIONS

The Alabama River is formed by the juncture of the Coosa and Tallapoosa
rivers near Montgomery, Alabama, and flows southwest across the state to
join eventually the Tombigbee River and form the Mobile River.  The
closest river gage to the proposed quarry site is 37 kilometers
(23 miles) upstream at the Claiborne Lock and Dam.  The Alabama River
drains approximately 57,000 square kilometers (22,000 square miles) at
this point and has an annual average discharge of 921 cubic meters per
second (32,540 cubic feet per second).  The flow regime of the river is
marked by extreme variability.  The recorded maximum and minimum dis-
charges differ by a factor of more than 50, and water surface elevations
at the quarry site can vary as much as 10 meters (30 feet) within a
single year.

Present freight traffic on the Alabama-Coosa river  system consists
largely of sand and gravel shipments originating in the lower reaches of
the river.  The 1976 traffic through the Claiborne  Lock and Dam, which
should reflect conditions at the quarry site, included an average of
only one  barge tow and 2.5 other vessels passing either up or down per
day.

The proposed  quarry  site  is situated along the  outside of a meander on
the east  side of  the Alabama River.  Elevations  on  the  property  range
from 3 meters (10 feet) above mean  sea level to  over 60 meters
(200 feet), with  the greatest  relief occurring  in the  area  near  the
river. Surface drainage of the  site  is generally  southwest  to the  river
by way of McGirts Creek,  Thompson  Mill Creek  (Marshalls Creek),  Hoi-
linger Creek, Randons  Creek,  and  four  small  intermittent  watercourses
designated as Alabama  River Tributaries  1, 2, 3,  and 4  (see  Figure 26).
                                  142

-------
——  QUARRY PROPERTY BOUNDARY  ^'
_	WATERSHED BOUNDARY
	  STREAM
     1  INTERMITTENT STREAM
\S
Figure 26
WATERSHED MAP: McGIRTS CREEK, THOMPSON MILL CREEK, HOLLINGER CREEK,
RANDOMS CREEK, ALABAMA TRIBUTARIES 1, 2, 3, AND 4
SOURCE: Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc., 1977.
         0          2
       SCALE IN KILOMETERS
                                             REGION IV
                                             U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
                                             AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
                                             STATEMENT FOR IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES
                                                                                               PROPOSED GAILLARD QUARRY
                                                                                                MONROE COUNTY, ALABAMA

-------
                             WATER RESOURCES/GEOTECHNICAL (QUARRY SITE)
Thompson Mill (MarshalIs) Creek has an overall  drainage area of
1,777 hectares (4,392 acres), which includes 385 hectares (952 acres) in
the northern area of the proposed quarry site.   A substantial  portion of
this land Is being timbered and cleared for pastureland.  The streambed
of Thompson Mill Creek within the quarry site is characterized by a
relatively steep gradient (0.97 percent), a substrate of gravel and
limerock, perennial flow, and very steep banks.

Hoi linger Creek has a smaller overall drainage area [874 hectares
(2,160 acres)] than Thompson Mill Creek, but drains a larger portion of
the proposed quarry site [592 hectares (1,462 acres)].  Present land use
in the watershed consists primarily of pastureland, with ongoing con-
versions of timberland to improved pasture.  Relative to Thompson Mill
Creek, Hoilinger Creek has a somewhat lower channel gradient, more
fine-grained bed material, a lower base flow, and a wider floodplain
near the Alabama River.

Randons Creek is much larger than the streams just mentioned in terms of
drainage area [14,324 hectares (35,394 acres)].  Only 4 percent of the
watershed [506 hectares  (1,251 acres)] is located within the quarry
site, so that conditions in Randons Creek can be affected to only a
limited degree by land use and land management in this area.  The domi-
nant influences in the watershed are agricultural land and urban land
located to the east.  Randons Creek has a lower channel slope, a much
wider floodplain, and a  bed containing more silt and sand than either
Thompson Mill Creek or Hoilinger Creek.

McGirts Creek is an intermittent creek which flows in a southwesterly
direction into the Alabama River.  Part of the creek forms the northern
boundary of the property.  The area of the McGirts Creek watershed is
approximately 161 hectares (397 acres); however, only 30 hectares
(73 acres) are within Ideal's property.  This area is primarily in
native woodland.
                                  144

-------
                             WATER RESOURCES/GEOTECHNICAL (QUARRY SITE)
Alabama Tributaries 1, 2, 3, and 4 are located adjacent to the Alabama
River between McGlrts Creek and Hoi linger Creek, and have drainage areas
of 17, 42, 27, and 34 hectares (42, 104, 68, and 84 acres),
respectively.  These basins are characterized by steep land slopes,
poorly-defined watercourses, and intermittent flows.

Water quality conditions in the Alabama River and the three major
streams on the quarry site have been surveyed as part of the present
study.  There is no evidence of serious water quality problems in the
Alabama River other than high levels of suspended solids and turbidity,
which are both influenced by seasonality, rainfall, and the agricultural
cycle.

At base flow, Thompson Mill (MarshalIs) Creek is low in turbidity, sus-
pended solids, nutrients, and organics, but moderately high in hardness,
alkalinity, and nitrate-nitrite.  The latter characteristics are typical
of waters that have extensive contact with limestone formations.  The
low chlorophyll <± values, high dissolved oxygen, and moderate water
temperatures observed in Thompson Mill Creek are indicative of a water
body that is relatively uninfluenced by human activities.  Water quality
in Hoi linger Creek at low flow has been found similar to Thompson Mill
Creek, with the exception that nitrate concentrations are substantially
lower and Kjeldahl nitrogen is higher.  Thus, there appear to be no
significant dry-weather sources of organic pollution.  Water tempera-
tures, which are higher than in Thompson Mill Creek, reflect a lack of
tree canopy over sections of the streambed where pasture has been devel-
oped.  Water quality in Randons Creek differs from the other two major
streams in that alkalinity, hardness, conductivity, total dissolved
solids, and pH are all substantially lower because of less limestone
influence on the stream water.  Turbidity, suspended solids, and color
are relatively high in Randons Creek, but no other water quality
problems have been documented.

Some water quality deterioration in these streams can be expected to
occur in the future.  In the case of Thompson Mill and Hoi linger creeks,
                                 145

-------
                             WATER RESOURCES/GEOTECHNICAL (QUARRY SITE)
the changes would be due primarily to land clearance, pasture develop-
ment, and Increased stock loading.  Turbidity, suspended solids
concentrations, and sedimentation of the stream channel  would be
Increased In the short run, but eventually would decline as land condi-
tions stabilized.  Nutrient enrichment would occur as a result of cattle
grazing and fertilizer application, and there would be increased load-
ings of organic material during storm events.

GEOTECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS

The geologic formations encountered at the proposed quarry site range
from Yazoo Clay at the base through various Eocene and Oligocene lime-
stones, to Pliocene or Pleistocene sands and clays with various soil
layers.  The formations of economic importance, yielding limestones of
commercially acceptable quality, include the upper member of the Ocala
Limestone, the Red Bluff Clay, the Marianna Limestone, and the Byram
Formation.  The complete limestone section was originally about
28 meters (95 feet) thick but has weathered to an irregular surface with
varying thicknesses.

The overburden materials (Citronelle Formation and high terrace
deposits) are composed of sand, clay, topsoil, and other materials
varying in thickness from 0 to 33 meters (110 feet).  The overburden is
thickest in upland areas and thin or non-existent on the steep slopes
near the river.

Several aquifer systems of local importance occur at the quarry site,
including the Citronelle and Marianna formations, as well as various
Eocene and pre-Eocene units underlying the Yazoo Clay.  The Citronelle
Formation has relatively low permeability and is discontinuous in
extent.  The limestone units are high in permeability as a result of
solution channeling.  Thus, it is likely that the water level in the
limestone aquifer system is drawn down near the Yazoo Clay (an imperme-
able layer) for some distance from the river.  This system is actively
discharging into the creeks and river.  The 14 wells identified near the
                                  146

-------
                             WATER RESOURCES/GEOTECHNICAL (QUARRY SITE)
quarry site are either water table wells obtaining water from the sur-
ficial sands, or artesian wells tapping the Lisbon Formation and/or
Gosport Sand below the Yazoo Clay.  None of the wells surveyed obtained
water from the limestone formations.

RELEVANT PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS

The proposed quarry operations will be confined during the first
15 years primarily to the 739-hectare (1,826-acre) northern property
owned by Ideal Basic Industries.  The construction phase of the project,
lasting 18 months, will begin with construction of an all-weather access
road to the loading and storage site at the Alabama River, followed by
construction of clarification basins 1, 2, and 5  (basins 3 and 4 will be
constructed at a later time if they are needed).  Clearing and earthwork
will be conducted on the loading  and storage site, which will involve
grading a plateau at an elevation of 21 meters (70 feet).  The excavated
material will be stockpiled for limestone supply, used as fill in
constructing dams, or moved to the Milkhouse Branch (a tributary of
Thompson Mill Creek) overburden storage area.

A free-standing mooring structure approximately 194 meters (636 feet)
long will be built in the Alabama River so that barges can be secured
for loading.  Dredging in the river is not anticipated due to sufficient
existing depths.

The project will also  include a deep well, septic tank with  soil
absorption system, a 38,000-liter (10,000-gallon) underground fuel oil
tank,  and a 23,000-liter (6,000-gallon) underground gasoline  storage
tank.

The mining operations will work away from the  limestone  storage area.
There  will be several  active quarry areas and  at  least two active  faces
at  any given time.  Where possible, overburden will not  be moved twice,
but instead will be placed in previously quarried areas  as a "haulback"
operation  (see Figure  27).  Overburden which cannot be  utilized
                                  147

-------
                                    YAZOO CLAY
                                        LOWER OCALA LIMESTONE
                                                   ——^^_


                                                   DRAINAGE DITCH
                                                                 CONVEYOR
                                                       TEMPORARY ACCESS ROAD
                                                                                                     PAN SCRAPER
-fa
00
      DRAWINGS NOT TO SCALE
                               PAN SCRAPER
                                                                                    ..*•'.••§.••  § * ?•   • •

                                                                                    '  I '  f'   I  "I ' -"H-^J^-
                                                           LOWER OCALA LIMESTONE
      Figure 27

      CROSS SECTIONS OF A TYPICAL QUARRYING AREA
      SOURCE:  Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc., 1977.
                                                               YAZOO CLAY
                                                                                   TOPSOIL


                                                                                   OVERBURDEN


                                                                                   LIMESTONE


                                                                                   RECLAIMED LAND AND LAND

                                                                                   IN THE PROCESS OF RECLAMATION
                                                                                                      PROPOSED GAILLARD QUARRY

-------
                             WATER RESOURCES/GEOTECHNICAL  (QUARRY SITE)
Immediately in this fashion will be conveyed to the Milkhouse Branch
watershed for long-term or permanent storage.  Topsoil will be  stock-
piled for up to 5 years at locations where it can be  preserved  until the
receiving areas have been brought up to grade.  All topsoil and other
stockpiled materials will be graded and seeded to resist  erosion until
they are used in the reclamation program.

Control of surface runoff from areas affected by mining and reclamation
is required by both EPA and the Alabama Water Improvement Commission
(AWIC).  These requirements will be met by the construction of  the
clarification basins to treat the runoff from all areas disturbed by
storage, mining, and reclamation activities (see Permit and Approval
section).

The capacities will be sufficient to store the runoff from all  disturbed
areas during a 10-year, 24-hour storm event.  A settleability study per-
formed on the natural soils and limestones found at the quarry  site has
indicated that the suspended solids concentration of  basin effluent will
be less than the standard of 30 milligrams per liter,  if  the detention
time is maintained at 24 hours or greater.

In addition to clarification basins, the erosion controls employed at
the site will include revegetation with chipped mulch and with  native
species of grasses, as both a temporary and permanent  stabilization
practice; use of contour terracing to reduce velocities of flow across
unvegetated surfaces; and ditches and berms to divert  runoff away from
disturbed areas.  Also, a 30-meter (100-foot) setback  from streambeds
will be maintained for the major creeks and streams.

Land reclamation will involve placement of overburden  in thin layers on
the previously quarried areas and compaction of each  layer to approxi-
mately natural conditions.  When the final grades are  reached,  topsoil
will be added and compacted, with steps taken if necessary to compensate
for any deterioration of topsoil quality during stockpiling (e.g.,
leaching, loss of micro-organisms).  After replacement of soil  horizons
                                  149

-------
                             WATER RESOURCES/6EOTECHNICAL  (QUARRY SITE)
in a manner to promote revegetation, fertilizer will be added as neces-
sary, and the area will be seeded to the chosen vegetation types.  Land
will be returned to improved pasture.

The slope gradients of reclaimed land will not exceed 3 to 1.  In
general, the land surface will be more gently sloping and less irregular
than before quarrying.  Landforms will be contoured so that there is a
smooth transition from disturbed to undisturbed areas.  In the course of
quarrying operations, it will be necessary to change the direction of
surface drainage for some areas.  These changes will be due to quarrying
requirements and the need to capture all runoff in clarification basins.
Although natural drainage patterns will be reinstated where possible
during reclamation, there will be a net diversion of surface drainage
from Thompson Mill  (MarshalIs) Creek to the Alabama River, amounting to
roughly 10 percent  of the on-site land that presently yields surface
runoff to the creek.  There may also be some changes in groundwater flow
patterns, but these will be relatively minor.

IMPACTS

The  initial clearing,  site preparation, and road construction  activities
at the proposed  quarry will result  in erosion of the land surface during
storm events, but sediment transport to surface water bodies will be
limited by the presence  of clarification  basins.  The magnitude  of water
resource impacts due to  construction site  runoff and stockpile runoff  is
expected to be low, due  to the controls to be  implemented.   Constructing
the  docking facility on  the Alabama River  will  have an  impact  of low
magnitude because dredging will not  be  required.  The amount of the  par-
ti cul ate material cast  into  suspension  by  pile  driving  should  be small.
Both of these construction  impacts  are  considered of low  significance.
These  impacts will  be  short-term  and  reversible.

During  permanent operations  at the  quarry site,  all  stormwater runoff
from disturbed  land will  be  directed  to clarification  basins for
                                  150

-------
                             WATER RESOURCES/GEOTECHNICAL  (QUARRY  SITE)
treatment, and there will be erosion/sedimentation  controls  as  discussed
earlier.  Because of the proper design of  the  basins,  the  total  sediment
inputs to Thompson Mill and Hoi linger creeks should not  exceed  30 mg/1
except during extreme storm events and should  meet  the requirements  in
the Draft NPDES permit (see the Permit and Approval  section).   The
erosion/sedimentation impacts of mining and land  reclamation are rated
low in both significance and magnitude, long-term but  reversible.

Changes in landforms will be irreversible  but  are not  considered signi-
ficant as environmental impacts (low magnitude and  significance).  The
quarried land will be lowered in elevation by  roughly  7.6  meters
(25 feet) on the average, with generally reduced  slopes  and  somewhat
altered drainage patterns.  The reclamation procedures described earlier
should leave the land as productive as before, without significant
effects upon water resources or other off-site conditions.

The surficial aquifer system involving the sand/clay layers  and  perme-
able limestone formations will be disturbed in the  immediate vicinity of
active quarrying operations.  There should not be appreciable effects
upon the quantity or quality of aquifer discharges  to  surface waters.
The function of the surficial aquifer will be  reinstated as  part of  land
reclamation.  Because of the reduced relief, infiltration  may be greater
than before quarrying, leading to more stable  base  flow of local streams
and reductions in soil loss.  The deep aquifer system  will not  be
affected either by quarrying or by land reclamation, because this system
is isolated from surface conditions by the impermeable Yazoo Clay.  The
anticipated impacts will  be a localized drawdown  in groundwater  levels
during active quarrying and possible long-term effects on  groundwater
flows due to a change in soil strata.  This impact  is  assigned  low
significance and magnitude because it should be confined to areas within
60 meters (200 feet)  of each quarry face, and  it  will  not  affect wells
in the area.   This impact is considered long-term and  irreversible.
                                 151

-------
                             WATER RESOURCES/GEOTECHNICAL (QUARRY SITE)
MITIGATING MEASURES

The environmental safeguards employed to lessen water resource Impacts
due to the Ideal Basic Industries quarry project will Include the use of
clarification basins and other sediment controls as described earlier.
Stormwater runoff from,the major sources of sediment (cleared areas,
overburden stockpiles, active quarry areas, and areas being reclaimed)
will comply with effluent standards.  The project will be planned to
reduce erosion by minimizing the extent of cleared, unvegetated areas
during both the construction and quarrying phases.  Berms, diversion
structures, and contour terracing will be utilized to decrease the
velocity of overland flow and encourage infiltration.  The most
important environmental safeguard will be the use of land reclamation
techniques that result in viable soil conditions for rapid
revegetation.

The mitigative measures that could be employed to minimize water
resource impacts would involve even more extensive use of erosion con-
trols such as mulching, seeding, netting, hay bales, sodding, localized
ponding, and vegetated buffer strips.

ALTERNATIVES

The no-action alternative would involve significant  short-term
deterioration in water resources at the quarry site, because of the
ongoing land conversion.  Moderate improvement would then take place  as
land conditions stabilized.

The alternatives to the proposed use of clarification basins are the  use
of vegetation buffers  or of quarry pits to reduce the solids loading  in
the runoff.  (These alternative actions could be used alone or could  be
used as mitigating measures in addition to the clarification basins.)

Vegetation buffers on  the upland and downstream drainage  paths could  be
used to reduce  runoff  velocities, stabilize  soils, and trap  sediment.
                                 152

-------
                             WATER RESOURCES/GEOTECHNICAL (QUARRY SITE)


The vegetation buffers probably would not be as efficient as the clari-
fication basins in controlling the solids levels in the runoff.

The large quarry excavations would be suitable for storing large volumes
of runoff.  However, this alternative could not be implemented until
5 or 7 years of quarrying has created a sufficient size pit (assuming no
reclamation activity).  The use of quarry depressions for expanding the
water storage capacities of the clarification basins is being studied by
the design consultant.

The proposed use of clarification basins is considered an acceptable
ecological action that will meet effluent requirements.
                                  153

-------
                                             ARCHAEOLOGY (QUARRY SITE)
                              ARCHAEOLOGY

BASELINE CONDITIONS

The archaeological-historical inventory of the Ideal Basic Industries
quarry  site  included  a comprehensive review of historic literature and
previous archaeological  surveys in the area.  Although none of the pre-
vious surveys or excavations conducted included the Ideal quarry site,
they provided data for predicting the types of sites which might occur
in the  area, as well  as  the chronological framework for the region.

A walk-over  surface survey of the site was conducted by the University
of South Alabama.  Stream banks, plowed fields, erosional ditches,
recently logged areas, logging roads, and wooded areas were examined for
archaeological/historical sites.  A total of 15 sites, 8 archaeological
and 7 historic, were  recorded during the survey.  Of the 15, two were
determined to merit further investigation—Ideal Site Nos. 6 and 8.

Research and on-site  investigations indicated that these sites are of
special archaeological-historical interest.  In accordance with the
Ideal Quarry Plan, Site  No. 8 will not be disturbed by the quarrying
activities.  Site No. 6, however, will  probably be disturbed as it is
located in the area expected to be quarried within the first 15 years.

The University of South  Alabama Archaeological  Lab was contracted to
perform the  test excavations and/or salvage operations necessary in
order to receive approval for quarrying activities from the Alabama
Historical Commission.   The name of Site No. 6 was changed to Site
No. !Mn57 to conform  to  the standard system of numbering archaeological
sites in Alabama.

Test excavations revealed that Site !Mn57 is a multi-component site
involving an historic house site, a Mississippian component, a Woodland
component, and an archaic component.
                                   154

-------
                                             ARCHAEOLOGY (QUARRY SITE)

The historic component, which was very evident over a large portion of
the site, yielded numerous artifacts (many related to farming activi-
ties) of late 19th to early 20th century origin.

The Mississippian (late prehistoric) component was most obvious in
Feature No. 2.  It is less obvious in the area of cultivation with a
few small shell-tempered sherds mixed with sand- and clay-tempered
sherds and many historic artifacts.  Evidently, much of the Missis-
sippian component has been destroyed by cultivation and erosion.

The Woodland component is demonstrated by the number of large-stemmed
projectile points, blade tools, sand and sand/clay tempered pottery.
Portions of this component have also been disturbed by cultivation;
however, the majority remains intact.

An archaic (pre-ceramic) component is indicated by the presence of stea-
tite fragments,  including a large steatite vessel  sherd.

The archaeologist's final report was submitted to the Alabama Historical
Commission in March, 1978, with a complete account of the required test
excavations.  Site !Mn57 did not reveal significant archaeological evi-
dence to mandate further investigation, and approval  of the Alabama
Historical Commission is pending.
                                  155

-------
                                                 ECOLOGY (QUARRY SITE)
                                ECOLOGY

BASELINE CONDITIONS
TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGY

Five major vegetational communities currently exist on the proposed
quarry site:  improved pasture and cropland, remnant forest, floodplain,
pine-oak forest, and hardwood bottomland (see Figure 28).  The first
vegetational category includes bahia-grass grazing land and fields
planted to row crops and silage, bordered by weedy plant species that
may be important to wildlife.  Remnant forests are defined as disturbed
woodland areas surrounded by improved pasture and used by livestock.
These areas are characterized by elevated nutrient loadings, high
insolation, compacted soils, and reduced understory due to grazing.

The Alabama River floodplain, defined by the presence of alluvial soils,
is a relatively small portion of the quarry site extending along the
river bank and into the creek valleys.  The floodplain vegetation is
dominated by silver maple, gum, hickories, and ash, and also includes
reed, red maple, titi, and cliftonia.  There are cypress along portions
of Hollinger Creek and Randons Creek.  Because of a lack of intermediate
age classes for these trees, the Hollinger Creek cypress area is
considered a modified wetland.

Most of the proposed quarry site is essentially upland pine-oak forests
with bottomlands containing hardwood forests.  The bottomland hardwood
species are typical of "branch-bottoms," which are defined by Gemborys
(1971) as "alluvial and colluvial areas along small intermittent or
perennial streams."  The upland (mesic to xeric) pine-hardwood forest
typically has a loblolly pine overstory which, as described by Quarter-
man and Keever (1962), suppresses the development of a hardwood forest.
Many areas have been opened in the canopy as the result of past and
present agricultural and forestry practices.  These activities have
yielded various stages of succession from old field to predominantly
                                  156

-------
            PINE HARDWOODS

            HARDWOODS

            REMNANT FOREST
                                3 IMPROVED PASTURE

                                3 FLOODPLAIN FOREST

                                -?i FLOODPLAIN FOREST
                                —J DOMINATED BY CYPRESS
            IMPROVED PASTURE  r~1 FLOODPLAIN FOREST
            TRANSITION STATE      WITH MODIFIED CYPRESS
                                  AREAS
THINNED HARDWOODS

ROADS

McWILLIAMS PROPERTY
BOUNDARY
IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
Figure 28
VEGETATION MAP OF THE PROPOSED QUARRY SITE
                             0    O.S    1
                            SCALE IN KILOMETERS


SOURCE: Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc., 1977,
                                                           REGION IV
                                                           U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

                                                           AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
                                                           STATEMENT FOR IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES
                                                                   PROPOSED GAILLARD QUARRY
                                                                     MONROE COUNTY, ALABAMA
                                           157

-------
                                                 ECOLOGY  (QUARRY SITE)
hardwood  areas.  The  upland forests are composed of  cedar, water oak,
and  pine  with  assorted  hardwoods.  Water oak has the highest  Importance
value among  the  upland  stands and is the dominant tree, although it does
not  have  the highest  density.

The  understory species  on the southeast corner of the property are more
sensitive to changes  in soil moisture than the overstory  species.  Areas
of different species  composition can be situated close to one another.
The  mesic areas  generally contain oak saplings, basswood, hackberry,
dogwood,  sweetgum, and  hickories, whereas more hydric areas contain
French mulberry, cane,  and maples.

Ground cover species  include pepper vine, Virginia creeper, poison ivy,
greenbrier,  Japanese  honeysuckle, oak seedlings, mushrooms, and mosses,
with various grasses  also important in open areas.   Lianas, such as
grapes and crossvine, were prevalent in the understory of the higher
hardwood  areas.  The  lower stream-side areas generally lacked any lianas
except in the  higher  strata of the vegetation.  Along the river bluffs
there are microclimates characterized by relatively  cool  air, high
humidity, and  low illumination.  These areas support luxuriant growths
of ferns.

Many of the  animals inhabiting forested areas of the proposed quarry
site are  the same as  those found in the forested areas of the plant
site; however, there  are some exceptions in terms of abundance and
diversity.   The  forests of the quarry site support a greater  abundance
of squirrels and are  characterized by the presence of deer and wild
turkey.   The hardwood bottomlands and floodplain forest of the quarry
site contain barred owls, hooded warblers, southeastern shrews, cotton-
mouths, southern dusky  salamanders  -and pickerel frogs, none  of which
are  present  at the plant site.  Extensive and active beaver dams have
been found in  the lower reaches of Hoi linger Creek.  The characteristic
exclusives of  the forested area are warblers, chickadees, woodpeckers,
squirrels, tree  frogs,  and skinks.  The ubiquitous types are  similar to
                                  158

-------
                                                 ECOLOGY (QUARRY SITE)

those found at the plant site, e.g., raccoons, shrews, rabbits, and box
turtles.

The pasture and cultivated fields of the quarry site are characterized
by cattle, songbirds, cattle egrets, cotton rats, and mice.  Deer,
quail, mourning dove, and turkey also frequent these open areas.  The
number of exclusive species (e.g., the meadowlark) are few.  A large
number of ubiquitous types (e.g., crows, foxes) are commonly found In
both forested and unforested areas.  At the Interface of the forest and
pasture, an edge community provides cover, food, and nesting for a large
variety of species.  Some wildlife species utilize edges to such an
extent that they are not often found In more uniform habitats (Johnston,
1947; Johnston and Odum, 1956).  Quail and dove are quite common In the
forest edges and remnant forest edges.  Seasonal patterns at the pro-
posed quarry site Include spring and fall  Increases of migratory species
of birds and spring and summer Increases In all resident populations.

The relationship between ecosystems at the quarry site Is Illustrated In
Figure 29.  The present forest vegetation  of the quarry site reflects
the history of land use.  In the past, the area has been cultivated,
grazed, lumbered, and some portions have been burned and surrounding
areas have been previously cultivated for  food crops.  During the last
16 years, the property has been managed under an agreement with the U.S.
Department of Agriculture.  From 1968 to 1974, about 40 percent of the
Ideal and MeWilliams properties were managed by cutting 1,300 pine trees
per year and thinning uplands to favor pine, while bottomlands were
managed to favor yellow poplar, ash, gum,  and various hardwoods.
Approximately 36 hectares (90 acres) were  planted in wildlife food
plants (chufu and partridge pea) during this six-year period.

The hardwoods are well-developed because of the opening of the canopy by
the lumbering of pines and the selection of hardwoods in the bottom-
lands.  Many areas within the forest are open and typically have young
pine seedlings, greenbrier, blackberry, saplings of various hardwoods,
and some weedy species.  The understory varies depending on soil
                                 159

-------
                                                  ATMOSPHERE
                                               (WATER. NUTRIENTS)
                                                      AND EDGE ANIMALS
                                         UPLAND FOREST
                                                                     HARDWOOD BOTTOMLANDS
                        PINE-OAK FOREST
                                                              RUNOFF. /NUTRIENTS
           INCREASED NUTRIENT
           LOAD DUE TO CLEARING
           AND LIVESTOCK WASTES
                                                         FLOODPLAIN FOREST
                                                              INCREASED NUTRIENT
                                                             LOAD DUE TO CLEARING
     REMNANT FOREST
                                                                                         ALABAMA RIVER
                                                           INCREASED NUTRIENT LOAD
                                                           DUE TO LIVESTOCK WASTES
 INCREASED NUTRIENT
LOAD DUE TO CLEARING
AND LIVESTOCK WASTES
                                               PASTURE/OLD FIELDS
                                            PASTURE/ OLD FIELD ANIMALS
 	BIOTIC RELATIONSHIPS
 	 ABIOTIC RELATIONSHIPS
Figure 29
ECOLOGICAL RELATIONSHIP OF THE ECOSYSTEMS
OF THE PROPOSED QUARRY SITE
                                           REGION IV
                                           U.S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
                                           AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
                                           STATEMENT FOR IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES
SOURCE:  Environmental Science and Engineering. Inc.. 1977.
                                                                                PROPOSED GAILLARD QUARRY
                                                                                 MONROE I
                                                                      , ALABAMA
                                                   160

-------
                                                  ECOLOGY  (QUARRY SITE)

moisture and the degree of light penetration.   Lianas  are prevalent  in
the understory of the upland areas, especially  Vitis  spp. on the moder-
ately elevated regions.  The most common  understory species  are oaks  and
maples, and they would form the future climax forest  if the  area were
not disturbed.  The managed bottomlands would reach the climax state
relatively soon (80 years) while the uplands would  take longer (160 to
170 years).  The uplands have many clearings which  might  require a
somewhat longer period to reach climax.

Animal succession proceeds with the same  general  pattern  as  plant suc-
cession, involving increases in the diversity and specialization of
organisms over time.  A decline in overall  animal  diversity  at the site
is expected, however, with the implementation of  the  latest  management
plan.  There will be a reduction of forest, edge, and  shrub  communities
and an increase in pastures and old fields, leading to an increase in
grassland species such as mice, meadowlarks, and  grasshopper sparrows.

The overall homeostasis of the proposed quarry  site is low and is
similar to the conditions of very early succession.  The  conversion  of
forest systems to pasture is creating early successional  attributes  such
as poor nutrient conservation (erosion, sedimentation, and increased
need for fertilization); simplified food  chains;  low diversity in both
plants and animals; and relatively great  microclimate  variation (tem-
perature, wind, rain, etc.).  In general,  biotic  regulation  is giving
way to abiotic regulation (and human regulation).  This lower overall
homeostasis of the site is not new.  It has happened  a number of times
in the last two hundred years with cultivation, abandonment, and
recultivation.

The present quarry site ecosystems have a number  of uses.  The primary
commercial uses are timber and livestock  production.   The woodland
ecosystems of the site also provide important services in terms of soil
retention and erosion control.  The site  has a  high productivity for
small game species such as bobwhite quail,  mourning dove, snipe, and
cottontail rabbit.  Wood ducks have also  been observed on the site.
                                  161

-------
                                                 ECOLOGY (QUARRY SITE)

There is a harvestable population of deer (estimated at 115 to 200 ani-
mals), and some trappable populations of upland, bottomland, and
riverine species of fur-bearing mammals can be expected.  Turkey and
squirrel populations are present but declining because of the loss of
hardwood forests.  In terms of recreational and aesthetic value, the
site is not unique but has a number of important natural features,
including the riverfront bluffs and the scenic lower reaches of Thompson
Mill (MarshalIs), Hoi linger, and Randons creeks.

Sixteen species of plants and animals which are endangered, threatened,
or of special concern in Alabama have ranges that include the proposed
quarry site.  The only plant on this list is a pogonia (Isotria
spectabilis) which has been observed growing on the hardwood slopes of
the site.

Three "endangered" species are the golden eagle, bald eagle, and Red
Hills salamander.  Eagle populations have declined in recent years
because of pesticide poisoning, illegal shooting, and other human
disturbance.  The bald eagle is considered likely to occur along the
Alabama River at the quarry site, although no nests have been found. A
recent killing of a bald eagle near the quarry site was reported. Golden
eagles are sighted regularly in Alabama during the winter and may occur
occasionally at the Ideal property.

The quarry site is just outside the known range of the Red Hills sala-
mander, but likely habitat does occur in some of the wooded ravines of
the site.  Field reconnaissance has revealed no Red Hills salamanders
nor their characteristic burrows, so that the likelihood of occurrence
is considered marginal.

Two "threatened" species are the American alligator and the gopher
tortoise.  In sections of the Alabama River adjacent to the proposed
quarry site, the occurrence of the American alligator is very limited
(Boone, 1977).  A few alligators are sighted each year near the con-
fluence of Randons Creek and Lovetts Creek.  The gopher tortoise occurs
                                 162

-------
                                                 ECOLOGY (QUARRY SITE)
commonly on the lower Coastal Plain but is threatened by loss of
suitable habitat.  This burrowing animal apparently was present at the
quarry site in the past, but recent disturbances of the land have
lowered its likelihood of occurrence.

Three species of "special concern" that have been positively identified
at the quarry site are the wood stork, red-shouldered hawk, and little
blue heron.  The wood stork is the only American representative of the
stork family (Ciconiidae).  Although locally common in swamps, marshes,
and ponds, the wood stork population appears to be declining throughout
Alabama (Imhof, 1976; Keeler, 1976).  The wood stork is frequently
reported in Monroe County and has been observed in the hardwood bottom-
lands of the quarry site.  The red-shouldered hawk, which  is a permanent
breeding resident throughout Alabama, favors large tracts  of forested
land, especially bottomland hardwoods.  One red-shouldered hawk was
observed at the quarry site.  The little blue heron nests  in colonies
and feeds primarily upon aquatic animals.  This heron was  observed in
pool areas of the quarry site and is also likely to occur  in the
floodplain forest and hardwood bottomlands.

AQUATIC ECOLOGY
Introduction

Aquatic habitats at the proposed quarry site consist of the Alabama
River, which forms the western boundary of the property, and four per-
manent streams, which empty  into the Alabama River.  Water quality and
the streambeds have been described in the Water Resources  section, and
the vegetation in Terrestrial Ecology.  To summarize this  information,
McGirts Creek, Thompson Mill (MarshalIs) Creek (Figure 30), and
Hoi linger Creek (Figure 31) have good-quality hard water.  Flow gradient
is rather steep (approximately 0.9 percent), and streambeds consist  of
sands or coarser materials.  Randons Creek (Figure 32) is  the largest
and has a gradient of only 0.45 percent, with some silt near the mouth.
Water is soft and generally of good quality, but it shows  some effects
of runoff from agricultural and urban development at Frisco City.  It  is
                                  163

-------
Figure 30
PHOTOGRAPHS OF THOMPSON MILL CREEK
REGION IV
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
STATEMENT FOR IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES
SOURCE:  Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc., 1977.
                                                                      PROPOSED GAILLARD QUARRY
                                                                       MONROE COUNTY, ALABAMA
                                            164

-------
Figure 31
PHOTOGRAPHS OF HOLLINGER CREEK
REGION IV
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
STATEMENT FOR IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES
SOURCE: Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc., 1977.
                                                                       PROPOSED GAILLARD QUARRY
                                                                        MONROE COUNTY, ALABAMA
                                             165

-------
Figure 32
PHOTOGRAPHS OF RANDOMS CREEK
REGION IV
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
STATEMENT FOR IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES
SOURCE: Environmental Science and Engineering. Inc., 1977.
                                                                        PROPOSED GAILLARD QUARRY
                                                                         MONROEi
                        , ALABAMA
                                              166

-------
                                                 ECOLOGY (QUARRY SITE)
expected that the present rapid conversion of most of the site to
improved pasture will  lead to some deterioration of water quality,
especially in the two smaller creeks.

The property is on the convex side of a bend in the Alabama River.  High
bluffs overlook the river, and there is very little floodplain either on
the river or the tributary creeks.  There is no permanent standing water
on the site.

Aquatic Fauna
Fishes

Fishes of the lower Alabama River system are quite similar to those of
the Tombigbee/Mobile/Tensaw Rivers systems with the exception of those
marine or estuarine forms which inhabit the lower reaches.  Like the
Tombigbee River, the Alabama is populated by larger, current-loving
species in the main channel, numerous small fishes along the banks and
in sheltered locations, and a great number of small stream or brook
forms in the tributary streams.  Normally many forms which inhabit tri-
butaries such as those found on the quarry site are similar to headwater
or upper Alabama River forms.  The mouths of all of the streams on site
could have any of the listed species (see Table B.A.E.3 in Appendix B,
Baseline), depending upon the season and the existing water conditions.

Tributary streams to the Alabama at the level of the quarry site were
examined during a low-water period following extensive spring flooding
and general high water conditions.  Hoi linger and Thompson Mill
(MarshalIs) creeks had insufficient water to maintain large riverine
species, and the young of larger river fishes, such as carp, carp-
suckers, catfish, buffalo, sturgeon, or drum, were not observed.

Data for these tributaries are quite limited for this stretch of the
Alabama River.  Hoiley Creek and several by-pass loops, as well as the
mainstream Alabama (south of the quarry site), were examined as part of
a special study of the Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway (Shipp and Hemphill,
                                 167

-------
                                                 ECOLOGY (QUARRY SITE)
1974).  The results of this rather exhaustive sampling effort help to
clarify the relative abundance of fishes which might commonly be
expected from the Alabama River below Claiborne Lock and Dam (see
Table B.A.E.3 in Appendix B, Baseline).

Numerical abundance for the 20 most prevalent species was examined for
both the unaffected portion of the river and the by-passed loops.
Minnows and shad dominate the top ten species, whereas catfishes and
centrarchids were the most significant contributors to the next ten
species.

In Holley Creek there is an array of species typical of moderate-si zed,
mid-south and southern streams.  All trophic levels are represented, and
every available creek habitat is used by such an assemblage of fishes.
With few exceptions, any of these fishes may use the stream throughout
their entire life history.

All of these fishes might be expected to be found in the lower reaches
of Randons Creek, and at high water conditions in Hollinger and Thompson
Mill (MarshalIs) creeks.  Fishes actually observed or seined from these
last two creeks consisted of minnows, sunfish, bass, and darters.  Under
observed streamflow conditions in June, there was not sufficient water
to support larger fishes.

The only species encountered which  is not present in these lists was the
Alabama hogsucker, Hypentilinum etowenum.  Other than numerous minnows,
the centrarchids, both bass and Lepomis sp., were the most prevalent.
Sunfish nests were observed in every suitable soft-bottomed habitat.
Although much of the habitat looked as  if it would be suitable for dart-
ers, these fishes were never very abundant in the collections taken.

Rare and Endangered Fishes

Several species of fishes have been listed by the Alabama Committee  for
the Identification of Rare and Endangered Species.  Although  previously
                                  168

-------
                                                  ECOLOGY  (QUARRY SITE)

listed, the Alabama shad, Alosa alabamae.  and  the blue-spotted sunfish,
Enneacanthus gloriosus, are no longer  regarded as being in these criti-
cal categories.  No special status  fishes  have been  observed at the
site.  Species which could occur  include:   atlantic  sturgeon Acipenser
oxyrhynchus (Rare); shovel nose sturgeon Scaphirhynchus  platorynchus
(Endangered); blue sucker Cycleptu  elongatus  (Status  Undetermined);
crystal darter Ammocrypta asprella  (Threatened);  and  the  freckled darter
Percina lenticula  (Threatened).

Benthic Macroinvertebrates

Data concerning the aquatic invertebrate populations  of the waters in
the vicinity of the quarry site are quite  limited.   Dredging along the
quarry site side of the Alabama River, as  well  as transects across the
river, failed to produce identifiable  benthic  macroinvertebrates.  Even
though there were  isolated pockets  of  finer materials,  species of the
burrowing mayflies (such as Hexagenia  sp.)  were not  detected.

Benthic macroinvertebrates which might be  expected from this level  of
the Alabama River may be inferred from a previous study and compilation
of existing data from various sources  for  the  Tombigbee and Mobile
rivers (see Table B.A.E.4 in Appendix  B, Baseline).   The  apparently
greater numbers and variety of forms is a  reflection  of the finer sub-
strates and pockets of fines and mixed organic matter encountered in
those streams as compared to the Alabama River at the quarry site
vicinity.

The animals tentatively identified  in  the  field are  common to  woodland
gravel, sand, riffle/pool streams found throughout the  midwest and
southeastern United States.  Some expected  forms  were not found; how-
ever, it is possible that some forms were  missed  because  not all sites
were sampled.  It was expected that many more  chironomids and  annelids
and a different assortment of mayflies would be found.   Experiences  at
the same level on the Tombigbee River  suggested that  Sphareriid and
                                  169

-------
                                                 ECOLOGY (QUARRY SITE)
Corbiculid clams would be found, but these were conspicuously absent
from the samples.  Gastropods were locally abundant, however.

Several species of pearly naiads from the Alabama River system are
listed as rare or endangered.  However, no beds or mussel shoals were
found In the Immediate vicinity of the quarry site.

If the quarry were not developed, the land would continue to be con-
verted to pasture with only small areas of forest remaining in 1992.
This conversion could lead to a change in streamflow characteristics
because water tends to run off more quickly from pasture than from well-
developed forest. Water quality and aquatic ecosystems would be affected
by high sediment loadings in the short run due to ongoing land clearance
activity.  Without the proposed quarry project, sediment loadings might
decline after 1980 as the pastureland reaches stable condition. However,
nutrient loadings might continue to increase due to higher stock-loading
rates.  Cattle would have access to the streams and would disturb the
stream bottoms and would create organic and nutrient loadings.

For about 1 kilometer (0.6 mile) from the Alabama River, forest would be
left along the streams, but in the gently rolling terrain farther
upstream all trees probably would be cleared.  The resulting exposure
would lead to greater temperature fluctuations; perhaps of most concern,
water would be warmer in the summer.

As a result of all these perturbations, there would be major changes in
faunal composition in the upper parts of the stream.  How well the fauna
could be maintained in the lower portions, where forest cover is pre-
served, cannot be estimated precisely, but some alteration would be
probable.

RELEVANT PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS

The effects of the proposed quarry project on terrestrial and aquatic
ecosystems have been described in the discussion of water resources.
                                  170

-------
                                                 ECOLOGY (QUARRY SITE)
The initial phase will involve clearance of a 40-hectare (100-acre)
area, including the access roadway.  The construction project will
include preparing an area in the Milkhouse Branch drainage basin for
overburden storage; developing the access road, haul road, and conveyor
alignments; and constructing the docking and loading facilities on the
Alabama River.

Quarrying will proceed in the areas around clarification basins 1 and 2
and will then extend to the east, south, and north of the starting
point.  Land reclamation of each area will begin as soon as there is
enough overburden and land to make reclamation practical.  Erosion
controls will be utilized for all aspects of the project that involve
land disturbance.

Quarrying and reclamation will proceed at an average rate of about
14 hectares (35 acres) per year.  As much as 80 percent of the 1,633-
hectare (4,035-acre) site could be quarried over the 50-year life of the
project.  However, the total area of land which is disturbed at any one
time, excluding stable reclaimed land, should not exceed 120 hectares
(300 acres).

IMPACTS

Land disturbance at the quarry site will alter significantly the present
ecological functions and attributes of the site. The initial disturbance
of existing vegetation in the first 15 years represents a loss of 120
hectares (296 acres) of cultivated croplands or pasture1ands, 139 hec-
tares (343 acres) of hardwoods, and 30 hectares (74 acres) of remnant
forests.

Any forests which are left on the site during the quarrying  activities
may be affected by the quarry.  Some of the lower floodplain forest may
remain; however, the increased surface runoff, insolation, and airflow
will cause changes in composition and production of these remnant areas.
                                  171

-------
                                                 ECOLOGY (QUARRY SITE)
Insolation of the remnant forests will Increase and will cause increased
temperatures within the forests.  The opened areas will develop more
weedy species and primary woody invaders.  Most of the forest areas
remaining after excavation will be hardwood bottomlands, since the
pine-oak upland areas will have been destroyed during the quarrying.

The magnitude of these impacts is considered low because of the abun-
dance of the existing forested areas in the area.  The significance is
low because these actions will probably not affect subsequent land use
(pasture).  The impacts are considered long-term, but reversible.

In addition to the innate value of plant communities destroyed, the
first 15 years of the project will involve losses of at least
56 hectares (138 acres) of most favorable rabbit and quail habitat,
93 hectares (230 acres) of most favorable turkey habitat, and 21 hec-
tares (51 acres) of most favorable squirrel habitat.  The animal
populations inhabiting these areas will be displaced.

In general, the impact of the quarrying activities will be the change in
wildlife populations from forest types to old field/pasture types; how-
ever, the magnitude of these changes is low because of the relatively
small amount of affected area in comparison to the areawide abundance of
available forest habitat.  The significance of this wildlife habitat
loss is low because of the frequent occurrence of the species involved
in the surrounding area.  All the populations in the area are currently
self-sustaining.  This impact is considered long-term, but reversible.

The major impact of these activities on rare and endangered species will
be reduced habitat for those animals which inhabit forest or forest/
field communities.  The magnitude of this disturbance of sensitive fauna
inhabiting aquatic environments will be low, and the significance should
be low because of the small areas to be affected and the availability of
suitable habitat in nearby areas.  This impact will be long-term, but
reversible.
                                  172

-------
                                                 ECOLOGY (QUARRY SITE)

Erosion and stormwater will be controlled by berms, grading, and
clarification basins; however, it is expected that some moderate net
Increases in the loads of participate material carried by tributary
streams will occur.  The presence of this material could be detrimental
to aquatic organisms and could reduce primary productivity.  In addi-
tion, settling of particulate material on the substrate could smother
bottom-dwelling organisms.  These impacts are considered of limited
significance because erosion controls will limit sediment loads and the
ecological adjustment to elevated turbidity levels should have already
occurred during the conversion of the site to improved pasture.

The overall effect of sedimentation, organic loadings, and land
clearance will be to increase the prevalence of facultative aquatic
organisms.  Siltation can be expected to create more soft-bottomed habi-
tats which would favor burrowing forms (worms, chironomids, burrowing
mayflies) over root, rubble, sand, or gravel  inhabitants.  The removal
of trees and their detrital components, such as leaves, twigs, and bark,
may eliminate the larger grazers and carnivores of the present system
(mayflies, elmid beetles, stoneflies, dragon and damsel flies, and
members of the Megaloptera).

The net sedimentation effects of the quarrying project alone would
probably not be sufficient to cause pronounced changes in ecological
conditions.  These impacts are considered of low magnitude based on the
erosion/sedimentation controls planned and of low significance.  The
impacts should be long-term (life of the quarry) and mostly reversible.

As presented in the Air Quality section, limestone dust may enter the
atmosphere from quarry operations.  The results of Brandt and Rhodes
(1972) Indicate the possibility of reduced productivity of the remaining
forest species at the perimeter of the quarry.  The effects are consi-
dered to be of low significance and magnitude because of the commonness
of the species involved and the relatively few trees to be affected.
These impacts  will  be long-term but reversible when the quarry area is
reclaimed.
                                 173

-------
                                                 ECOLOGY (QUARRY SITE)
Noise resulting from construction and quarrying (see Noise section) will
have adverse effects on some species of wildlife, such as the turkey,
which requires a fairly high degree of isolation.  This disturbance
could contribute to the reduction of some wildlife populations remaining
on the site.  It is not considered significant to the area and region
because of the frequent occurrence of the species.  This impact is con-
sidered of low magnitude and long-term, but highly reversible.

The increased barge traffic from the quarry could disturb activity pat-
terns of water-associated birds, such as eagles and waterfowl, and could
affect alligators  in the area.  In all cases, the disturbed species will
relocate or adapt  to the conditions.  These impacts are of low magnitude
and significance,  long-term, and reversible.

The drainage patterns created by the quarrying and reclamation process
could reduce the drainage area of Thompson (MarshalIs) Mill Creek by
about 10 percent.  This change could reduce the base flow of the stream,
the extent of flushing, the size and depth of pools, and the length of
stream reaches containing water during dry-weather conditions.  However,
since major effects on base flow should not occur, the related impacts
to aquatic communities are estimated to be of low magnitude and
significance, but  irreversible and long-term.

After active quarry slopes are no longer drained into the clarification
basins, these basins will have the positive impact of creating addi-
tional habitat for aquatic-related species such as herons and waterfowl.
This positive impact is considered to be of low significance and low
magnitude for the  area because of other existing ponds.

MITIGATING MEASURES

The environmental  safeguards employed to lessen impacts upon terrestrial
and aquatic ecosystems will include all of the measures described ear-
lier in connection with water resources, noise, and air quality.  Among
the most prominent measures will be the stormwater clarification basins,
                                  174

-------
                                                 ECOLOGY (QUARRY SITE)
on-site erosion controls, 30-meter (100-foot) setbacks from major creeks
and streams, and steps during reclamation to recreate productive soil
conditions.

There are no mitigating measures available to reduce the immediate ecol-
ogical impacts of land clearance, given the necessary characteristics of
quarry operation.  However, a number of options exist with regard to the
revegetation of reclaimed land and other areas requiring stabilization.
A program could be established to develop healthy biologic communities
as a wildlife asset, particularly at the edge of mined areas.  These
"blend" zones would become ecotones between biotic communities and would
be managed to produce more varied assemblages of plants and animals than
would be possible for either community alone.  A variety of wildlife
food and cover plants are available from public sources.  Other species
which would naturally volunteer and produce significant browse would
include woody species such as maples, persimmon, sassafras, and oak, and
herbaceous natural plants such as beggar ticks, vetch, lespedeza, and
sumac.

Since the reclaimed land will be utilized as pasture, the area for which
beneficial wildlife plantings will be feasible is rather small, con-
sisting of:  (1) blend zones between quarried and undisturbed land;
(2) potentially difficult areas such as drainageways where erosion may
occur; and (3) other areas requiring stabilization such as faces of
retention dams.

ALTERNATIVES

Ecosystem conditions at the proposed quarry site would be only moder-
ately different under the no-action alternative than under the project
alternative.  The no-action alternative would involve somewhat greater
recovery of aquatic conditions from the effects of land conversion,  and
somewhat more forest cover would remain for the benefit of terrestrial
organisms.  The no-action alternative obviously would not  involve  per-
manent changes in topography and drainage.
                                  175

-------
                                                 ECOLOGY (QUARRY SITE)

Alternatives relating to ecological Impact Involve land reclamation.
Instead of reclaiming to pasture, the project could Include the creation
of a connerclal pine forest or an old field condition leading by natural
succession to a mixed deciduous woodland.  These alternatives would lead
to a different mix of faunal species and possibly greater ecosystem
diversity than the pasture alternative, and generally would benefit
aquatic conditions.

The property could also be used as an Industrial area because of Its
favorable location with good water access and a small flood potential.

The decision for reclamation to pastureland provides flexibility In
long-range land use since timbering, agriculture, or some other land use
could easily be established at a later time.
                                  176

-------
                                          SOCIOECONOMICS (QUARRY SITE)
                            SOCIOECONOMICS

BASELINE
PRESENT CONDITIONS

The socioeconomic Impact area of the proposed quarry operation Includes
Monroe, Clarke, and Conecuh counties, with the most significant Impacts
limited primarily to Monroe County.  Historically, the region around
Monroe County has been characterized by declining populations and stag-
nant economic conditions.  Population losses between 1940 and 1970
amounted to 29.3 percent In Monroe County, 38.6 percent In Conecuh
County, and 3.3 percent In Clarke County.  However, the populations of
these counties have been either stable or rising since 1970.   Monroe
County contained 20,883 residents In 1970, 21,200 persons In  1975, and
an estimated 21,700 persons In 1977.

Past population losses In the three Impact area counties primarily
Involved out-migration of farm workers and their families, In response
to the low profitability of agriculture and the Increased opportunities
elsewhere.  The principal economic support now Is manufacturing
activity, which accounts for more than 40 percent of total employment
In each of the three counties.  Two-thirds or more of the manufacturing
employment In each case Is concentrated In three Industrial  categories:
wood products, textile products, and pulp and paper products.  Growth
In manufacturing employment has provided the major stimulus for recent
population gains In Monroe and Clarke counties.  Monroe County has also
benefltted by substantial employment growth In retail trade and
services, Involving the emergence of Monroevllle as the commercial
center for a sizable area.

Average Income levels are relatively low for Monroe, Clarke,  and
Conecuh counties.  Per capita Income remains between 72 percent and
81 percent of the average for the State of Alabama, although  there has
been a recent narrowing of the gap In Monroe and Conecuh counties.
                                177

-------
                                          SOCIOECONOMICS (QUARRY SITE)

In 1970, between 30 percent and 35 percent of the families In the three
counties had incomes below the poverty level.

Housing in Monroe County is currently in somewhat short supply, partic-
ularly in the Monroeville area.  This circumstance is related to the
general increases in employment and population, and to the construction
of the Parsons and Whittemore, Inc., pulp mill facility at Claiborne.
It is estimated that the housing market in Monroe County currently can
absorb at least 50 percent more dwelling units per year than were con-
structed on the average between 1960 and 1970.  Active steps are being
taken by the city administration of Monroeville to alleviate the
present shortage, particularly with regard to rental units and the
availability of sites for mobile homes.

Community facilities in Monroe County presently are being expanded and
will be generally adequate to accommodate future growth.  Public school
enrollment has declined in recent years (due to an expansion of enroll-
ment at Monroe Academy), but can be expected to increase in the future.
The major health care facility in the county, Monroe County Hospital,
was expanded in 1974 and will increase in capacity by 50 percent over
the next 10 years according to current plans.

A public sewer system serving Monroeville, Frisco City, and adjacent
areas is presently under construction.  Public water supply systems are
currently being expanded by the Monroeville Water Board and the Excel
Water Board.  There has been improvement in the public recreation
facilities provided by Monroeville and other communities, but the
overall level of recreation opportunities in the county has been
described as "lacking" in the Monroe County Preliminary Comprehensive
Development Plan.

Existing highway facilities in Monroe County are more than adequate to
accommodate the low volumes of traffic found in the county.  There are
no public transportation facilities other than intercity bus service.
The Monroeville Fire Department provides fire protection service to
                                178

-------
                                          SOCIOECONOMICS (QUARRY SITE)

most of the county.  No special  problems in providing police or fire
protection to the county's expanding population have been reported.

Planning assistance to Monroe County is provided actively by the
Alabama-Tombigbee River Regional Planning and Development Commission,
which has recently prepared a preliminary comprehensive development
plan for the county.  The City of Monroeville enforces zoning regula-
tions and building codes within its corporate limits and exercises
subdivision review within the police jurisdiction [extending
2.5 kilometers (1.5 miles) beyond the corporate boundary].  There is no
regulation outside police jurisdiction of municipalities.

FUTURE CONDITIONS

The most important single development affecting Monroe County is the
$266 million Parsons and Uhittemore pulp mill project. Permanent opera-
tion at this pulp mill will generate more than $5,000,000 in Income for
350 employees.  More than $2,000,000 annually will be spent for wood
purchases in Monroe County alone, creating roughly 125 new forest-
related jobs.  Several other industrial development projects in Monroe
County have either been announced or are under construction.  A new
Scotch Plywood plant in Beatrice will employ 125 to 130 persons, with a
payroll of approximately 1.6 million dollars.  Another wood products
plant is to be constructed by Georgia Pacific at Peterman.  These and
other expansion plans could add close to 1,000 Industrial and related
jobs in Monroe County over the next 5 years.

Employment projections for Monroe County in  1977, 1985, and 1992 are
presented in Table 7.  The 1985 forecasts assume only that the
developments just mentioned will take place  and that there will be a
multiplier effect on non-manufacturing activity.  The forecasts for
1992 assume a slowdown in industrial growth  but continued expansion  In
the services-producing sector.  Table 8 presents two population
forecasts for Monroe County:  the OBERS Series E Projection and an
alternative forecast series which is consistent with the employment
                                179

-------
                                           SOCIOECONOMICS (QUARRY SITE)
Table 7.  Forecasts of Nonagricultural Wage and Salary Employment in
          Monroe County

Manufacturing
Nonmanufacturing
TOTAL
April
1977
3,250
2.990
6,240
Change
1977-1985
850
850
1,700
1985
4,100
3,840
7,940
Change
1985-1992
300
750
1,050
1992
4,400
4.590
8,990
Source:  Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc, 1977, utilizing
         information from the Alabama Department of Industrial  Rela-
         tions, Research and Statistics Division, 1977.
Table 8.  Comparison of Population Forecast for Monroe County with OBERS
          Series. E Projections

Monroe County
Population
1970
1977
1980
1985
1990
1992
Increase, 1977-1992

Alternative
Forecast
20,900
21,700
22 ,400*
23 ,600
24 ,600*
25,000
15.2%


OBERS
20,900
21,600*
21 ,900
22,300
22,600
22,500*
4.2%
Deviation
from OBERS
Number/Percent
0 0
100 0.5
500 2.3
1,300 5.8
2,000 8.8
2,500 11.1

* Denotes interpolated values.

Sources:  U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service,
          1975.

          Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc., 1977.
                                  180

-------
                                          SOCIOECONOMICS (QUARRY SITE)
estimates just described.  The alternative forecast, which exceeds
OBERS by 11.1 percent in 1992, is believed to be more accurate as an
extrapolation of very recent trends in the county.  The projected
average population growth rate of roughly 1 percent per year is not
considered sufficient to produce serious stress upon housing, community
facilities, or social stability.

RELEVANT PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS

The construction phase of the proposed Ideal Basic Industries quarry
project will involve an average of 133 employees for 18 months and a
peak labor force of 250 workers.  The total wages paid will exceed
$3,000,000.  Permanent operations at the quarry will employ 19 persons
and will generate an annual payroll of approximately $400,000 in 1977
dollars.  The project will involve temporary changes in land use from
improved pasture to mineral extraction and back to pasture in each
successive area of the site that is quarried.  There will be major
increases in waterway traffic on the Alabama River, as discussed in the
Water Resources section, and very slight increases in traffic on high-
ways near the quarry site.

IMPACTS

The multiplier effects of construction employment at the  quarry site
will generate approximately 60 additional jobs in Monroe  County, and
$1,000,000 or more in additional income.  The total employment effect
will thus average nearly 200 workers during the 18-month  duration of
the project.  This economic stimulus to Monroe County and surrounding
areas is rated moderate in significance and magnitude as  an impact.

The labor force buildup at the quarry may coincide with the phasing out
of the nearby Parsons and Whittemore project.  This situation would
allow some direct shifts of personnel and would permit the quarry
construction workers to utilize housing and public facilities that
currently are used by the Parsons and Whittemore labor force.
                                 181

-------
                                          SOCIOECONOMICS (QUARRY SITE)

The construction  labor  force residing in Monroe County is somewhat
limited  because of  the  small scale of the local economy.  Therefore, a
majority of  the workers on the quarry project will necessarily live
elsewhere.   Some  of these workers will commute to Monroe County on a
daily  or weekly basis,  and a few will establish residence in the area
for the  duration  of the project or longer.  The current shortage of
transient accommodations and rental housing units in Monroe County is
expected to  ease  by the time the quarry project is under way, so that
construction workers should not have difficulty in finding suitable
lodgings.  Very few of  the workers will  bring dependents to the area.
Given  the generally favorable experience of the Parsons and Whittemore
project,  the construction phase at the proposed quarry should not have
adverse  impacts upon public services or social conditions.

Permanent operations at the proposed quarry will  involve 19 employees
and will  generate 25 additional jobs in Monroe County due to a multi-
plier  effect.  This favorable economic impact is considered moderate in
magnitude and  high  in significance to the community.  Of the 44 jobs
attributable directly or indirectly to the quarry operation, it is
estimated that the  number held by Monroe County residents will be
approximately  32  in 1985 and 38 in 1992.  The project will increase the
Monroe County  population by about 92 persons in 1985 relative to base-
line conditions and by  102 persons in 1992.  Population increments of
this size clearly can be assimilated by the Monroe County community
without overburdening public facilities or creating social
disruptions.

The isolation  of  the  Ideal Basic Industries quarry site relative to
other developed land uses will  limit greatly the possibility of off-
site impacts upon land  use, land value,  or residential  amenity.  The
project  is not expected  to have significant impacts involving noise or
air quality.
                                182

-------
                                          SOCIOECONOMICS (QUARRY SITE)
MITIGATING MEASURES

The proposed quarry project will not yield adverse socioeconomic
impacts which would require mitigation.

ALTERNATIVES

Alternate quarry locations are discussed in the Site Selection section.
There are no other project alternatives which would have a significant
influence upon socioeconomic impacts.
                                183

-------
   PERMIT AND
APPROVAL SECTION

-------
DRAFT NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
             (NPDES)  PERMIT (PLANT SITE)

-------
                                                            Permit No  AL0028801
                                                            Application No
                     AUTHORIZATION TO DISCHARGE UNDER THE
              NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
      In compliance with the provisions of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended,
   (33 U.S.C. 1251 et. seq; the "Act"),
      Idea]. Basic Industries
      Cement Division
      Theodore Cement Plant
DRAFT
   is authorized to discharge from a facility located at

      Theodore Industrial Park
      Theodore, Alabama


   to receiving waters named

      Theodore Ship Channel - Discharge  001
      North Fork of the Deer River - Discharge 002


   in accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements and other conditions set forth
   in Parts I, II, and III hereof.

      This permit shall become effective on

      This permit and the authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight.
   Signed this      day of
                                               Paul J.  Traina, Director
                                                 Enforcement Division
EPA Form 33:0.4 (10.73)

                                      p-1

-------
    A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS

   1.   During the period beginning on effective date and lasting through  the term of this  permit,
       the permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall(s) serial number(s) 001-material stockpiles run-off,  cooling
       tower blowdown,  vehicle and floor wash wastewaters and fuel  storage area dike drainage.
       Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:
-a
rvs
       Effluent Characteristic
                                         Discharge Limitations
                              kg/day (Ibs/day)            Other Units (Specify)
                         Daily Avg      Daily Max      Daily Avg      Daily Max

Flow-m3/Day (MGD)         -            -             -             -

Total Suspended Solids  shall not exceed  50 mg/1 for  any one (1) day
  Monitoring Requirements
Measurement
 Frequency

 Dally

 I/week
Sample
 Type

Recorder

Composite
                                                                                                                    —n
       The pli shall not be less than  6.0   standard units nor greater than  9.0   standard units and shall be monitored once per
       week by  grab sample.

       There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

       Samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements specified above shall be taken at the following location(s):
       nearest accessible point after  final treatment but prior  to  actual discharge to or mixing with
       the receiving waters.
                                                                                                                  O H-
                                                                                                                  O t->
                                                                                                                  to
                                                                                                                  00
                                                                                                                  00
                                                                                                                  O

-------
        2.  During the period beginning  on effective date and lasting through the term of this permit,
            the permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall(s) serial number(s) OOla,  fuel storage dike area  only.

            Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:

            Effluent Characteristic                      Discharge Limitations                     Monitoring Requirements
                                        kg/day (Ibs/day)            Other Units (Specify)
                                                                                        Measurement     Sample
                                    Daily Avg      Daily Max      Daily Avg     Daily Max     Frequency       Type

            Flow—m3/Day (MGD)         _            _            —            —        I/month        Estimate

-o           Oil and Grease             —           —        30 mg/1      60 mg/1     I/month        Grab
W


            Where dike drains discharge  into an oil-water separator,  effluent limitations and monitoring
            requirements apply to  the effluent from the oil-water  separator.  However, the discharge  from     BS-V"!
            dike drains shall not  be  subject to the monitoring and  effluent requirements of the permit  if     T|
            all of the following are  true:                                                                             *

                 1.   The dike drain discharge does not go to an oil-water  separator and

                 2.   The facility  has a  valid SPCC Plan pursuant to 40 CFR 112
                     and

                 3.   Best management  practices (BMP) are used in draining  the diked area.  BMP  is defined
                     as use of a portable oil skimmer or similiar  device or the use of abosorbent material
                     to remove oil and grease (as indicated by the  presence of a sheen) immediately prior
                     to drainage.

            Samples  taken  in  compliance  with the monitoring requirements specified above shall  be taken at
            the  following  location(s):  nearest accessible  point  after final treatment but prior  to actual
            discharge  to or mixing with  all other waste waters.
Z U)   —

  o
> -
O H-
O I-
                                                                                                                    oo
                                                                                                                    o

-------
3. During the period beginning  on effective date and lasting through the tern of this permit,
   the permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall(s) serial number(s) 002, uncontaminated  storm'water  run-off.
   Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:

   Effluent Characteristic                       Discharge Limitations
                                 kg/day (Ibs/day)            Other Units (Specify)
                            Daily Avg
Daily Max
Daily Avg
Daily Max
   Flow-m3/Day (MGD)
                                           Monitoring Requirements
Measurement
 Frequency

 1/month
Sample
 Type

Estimate
                                           Best  Management  Practices  (BMP)
                                                                                                                 *

-------
                                                                  PARTI


                                                                  Page   5   ,,f  11
                                                                  Perm,. No   AL0028801
B. SCHEDULE OF COMPLIANCE

   1.  The  permittee  shall  achieve  compliance with the  effluent limitations  specified  for
       discharges in accordance with the following schedule:
       Operational Level  Attained	Effective Date  of permit
    2.  No later than 14 calendar days following  a  date identified in the above  schedule of
       compliance, the  permittee shall  submit  either a report of progress or, in  the  cas? of
       specific actions being required by  identified dates,  a written notice of compliance or
       noncompliance. In the latter case, the notice shall include  the cause of noncomplianiv.
       any  remedial  actions  taken,  and  the  probability  of meeting  the  next scheduled
       requirement.
                                      P-5

-------
                                                                  PART I

                                                                  PJFI-  6  -f 11
                                                                  PcrmilN.,    AL0028801
C. MONITORING AND REPORTING

   1.  Representative Sampling

       Samples and measurements taken as required herein shall be representative of the volume
       and nature of the monitored discharge.

   2.  Reporting

       Monitoring results obtained during  the previous   3   months shall be summarized for
       each month and reported on  a Discharge Monitoring  Report Form (EPA No. 3320-1),
       postmarked no later than the 28th day of the month following the completed reporting
       period. The first report is due on                       . Duplicate signed copies of
       these, and all  other reports  required  herein,  shall  be  submitted  to the  Regional
       Administrator and the State at the following addresses:


       Environmental Protection Agency     Alabama Water  Improvement Commission
       Water Enforcement Branch             State  Office Building
       345 Courtland Street,  N.E.           Montgomery, Alabama   36130
       Atlanta, Georgia  30308
    3.  Definitions

       a.  The "daily average" discharge means the total discharge by wsight during a calendar
          month  divided  by the number of days  in the  month  that the production or
          commercial facility was operating. Where less than  daily sampling is required by this
          permit, the daily average discharge shall be determined by the summation of all the
          measured daily  discharges by  weight  divided  by  the number of days  during the
          calendar month when the measurements were made.

       b.  The "daily maximum" discharge means the total discharge by weight  during any
          calendar day.

    4.  Test Procedures

       Test  procedures  for the analysis of pollutants shall conform to regulations published
       pursuant to Section 30-J(g)  of the Act, under which such procedures may be required.

    5.  Recording of Results

       For each measurement or sample taken pursuant to the requirements of this  permit, the
       permittee shall record the following information:

       a.  The exact place, date, and time of sampling;

       b.  The dates the analyses were performed;

       c.  The person(s) who performed the analyses;
                                         P-6

-------
                                                                 PARTI

                                                                 I'jto   7  »i  11
                                                                 ivr.mi NM  AL0028801
   d.  The analytical techniques or methods used: and

   e.  The results of all required analyses.

6. Additional Monitoring by Permittee

   If the  permittee monitors any pollutant at the  location(s)  designated  horein  more
   frequently than required hy this permit, using approved analytical methods as specified
   above, the results of such monitoring shall  be included in the calculation and renortmp of
   the values required in the Discharpe .Monitoring Report Form (EPA No. 3320-1). Such
   increased frequency shall also be indicated.

7. Records Retention

   All records and  information  resulting from  the  monitoring activities required  by this
   permit including aJl records of analyses performed and calibration and maintenance of
   instrumentation  and  recordings  from continuous  momtOi-.-q instrumentation shall he
   retained for a minimum of three (3) years, or  longer  if  requested  by the Resional
   Administrator or the State water pollution control  agency.
                                         P-7

-------
                                                                     PART II


                                                                     Page  8   "I   11
                                                                     Permit No.   AL0028801
A.  MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS

    1.  Change in Discharge

       All discharges authorized heroin shall be consistent with the terms and conditions of this
       permit. The discharge of any pollutant identified in this permit more frequently than or
       at a level in CXCPSS of  that authorized  shall constitute  a violation of the permit. Any
       anticipated  facility  expansions, production increases, or process modifications which will
       result  in  new, different,  or  increased discharges  of pollutants must be reported  by
       submission of a new NPDES application or, if such changes will not violate the effluent
       limitations specified in this permit, by notice to the permit issuing authority of such
       changes.  Following such notice, the permit may be modified to specify and limit any
       pollutants not previously limited.

    2.  Noncompliance Notification

       If, for any reason, the permittee does not comply with or will be unable to comply with
       any  daily  maximum  effluent  limitation  specified in this permit, the  permittee  shall
       provide the Regional Administrator and the State with the following  information, in
       writing, within five  (5) days of becoming aware of such condition:

       a.   A description of the discharge and cause of noncompliance; and

       b.  The period of noncompliance, including exact dates and  times; or. if not corrected,
           the anticipated  time the  noncompliance is expected to  continue, and steps being
           taken to reduce, eliminate and prevent recurrence of the noncomplying discharge.

   3.  Facilities Operation

       The permittee shall  at all times maintain in good working order and operate as efficiently
       as possible all  treatment or control facilities or systems installed or used by the permittee
       to achieve compliance with the terms and conditions of this permit.

   4.  Adverse Impact

       The permittee shall  take all reasonable steps to minimize any  adverse impact to navigable
       waters resulting from  noncompliance  with  any effluent  limitations specified in  this
       permit, including such accelerated or additional monitoring as necessary to determine the
       nature and impact of the noncomplying discharge.

   5.  Bypassing

       Any diversion from or  bypass of  facilities necessary to maintain compliance with the
       terms and conditions of this permit is prohibited, except (i) where unavoidable to prevent
       loss of life or severe property damaae, or (11) \\herc* excessive storm drainage or runoff
       would daniuge any  facilities necessary  for compliance with the effluent  limitations and
       prohibitions  of this   permit.  The  permittee  shall  promptly  notify  the  Regional
       Administrator and the .Slate in  writing of each such diversion or bypass.
                                         P-8

-------
                                                                    PART II


                                                                    Page  9  of  11
                                                                    Permit No.  AL0028801
   6.  Removed Substances

       Solids, sludges, filter backwash, or other pollutants removed in the course of treatment or
       control of wastewaters shall be disposed of in a manner such as to prevent any pollutant
       from such materials from entering navigable waters.

   7.  Power Failures

       In  order  to maintain compliance with  the effluent limitations and prohibitions of this
       permit, the permittee shall either:

       a.  In accordance with  the  Schedule of Compliance contained in Part  I,  provide  an
          alternative power source sufficient to operate the wastewater control facilities;

       or, if such alternative power source is not in existence, and no date for its implementation
       appears in Part I,

       b.  Halt,  reduce  or otherwise  control  production and/or all  discharges upon  the
          reduction, loss, or failure of the primary  source of power to the wastewater control
          facilities.
B. RESPONSIBILITIES

   1.  Right of Entry

       The  permittee shall  allow  the  head of the State water pollution control agency, the
       Regional  Administrator, and/or their authorized representatives, upon the presentation of
       credentials:

       a.  To  enter  upon the permittee's premises where an effluent source is  located or in
          which any records are required  to  be kept under the terms and conditions of this
          permit; and

       b.  At reasonable times to have access to and copy any records required to be kept under
          the terms  and conditions of this permit; to inspect any monitoring equipment or
          monitoring method required in this permit; and to sample any discharge of pollutants.

   2..  Transfer of Ownership or Control

       In the event of any change in control or ownership of facilities from which the authorized
       discharges emanate, the permittee shall notify the succeeding owner or controller of the
       existence of this permit by  letter, a copy of which shall be forwarded to the Regional
       Administrator and the State water pollution control agency.

   3.  Availability of Reports

       Except for data determined to be confidential  under Section  308 of the Act, all reports
       prepared  in  -accordance  with  the terms  of  this permit shall  be available  for public
                                             P-9

-------
                                                                 PART II
                                                                      10 of  11
                                                                 PermnNo.  AL0028801
    inspection at the offices of the State water pollution control agency and the Regional
    Administrator. As required by the Act. effluent data shall not be considered confidential.
    Knowingly making any false statement on any such report may result in the imposition of
    criminal penalties as provided for in Section 309 of the Act.

4.  Permit Modification

    After notice and opportunity for a' hearing, this permit may be modified, suspended, or
    revoked in whole or in part during its term for cause including, but not limited to, the
    following:

    a.   Violation of any terms or conditions of this permit;

    b.  Obtaining this permit by  misrepresentation or failure to disclose fully all relevant
       facts; or

    c.  A change in any condition that requires either a temporary or permanent reduction or
       elimination of the authorized discharge.

5.  Toxic Pollu tan ts

    Notwithstanding Part II, B-4 above, if a toxic effluent standard or prohibition (including
    any  schedule of comoliance specified  in  such effluent standard or  prohibition)  is
    established under Section 307(a)  of the Act for a toxic pollutant which is present in the
    discharge and such standard or prohibition is more stringent than any limitation for such
    pollutant in this permit, this permit shall be revised or modified in accordance with the
    toxic effluent standard  or prohibition and the permittee so notified.

6.  Civil and Criminal Liability

    Except  as provided  in permit conditions on  "Bypassing" (Part II, A-5) and "Power
    Failures" (Part II, A-7). nothing in this permit shall be construed to relieve the permittee
    from civil or criminal penalties for noncompliance.

7.  Oil and Hazardous Substance Liability

    Nothing in this permit shall be construed to preclude the institution of any legal action or
    relieve the  permittee  from any  responsibilities, liabilities,  or penalties to  which the
    permittee is or may be subject under Section 311 of the Act.

8.  State Laws

    Nothing in this permit shall be construed to preclude the institution of any legal action or
    relieve the permittee  from any responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties established pursuant
    to any applicable State law or regulation under authority preserved by Section 510 of the
    Act.
                                      P-10

-------
                                                            PART II


                                                            Paw  11 of 11
                                                            Permit No. ALOO28801
    9. Property Rights

      The issuance of this permit does not convey any property rights in either real or personal
      property, or any exclusive pnvtlpges, nor does it authorize any injury to private property
      or any invasion of personal rights, nor any infringement of Federal, State or local laws or
      regulations.

    10. Severability

      The provisions of this permit are severable,  and if any provision of this permit, or the
      application  of any provision of this permit to any circumstance, is held invalid, the
      application of such provision to other circumstances, and the remainder of this permit,
      shall not be affected thereby.
                                   PART III


OTHER REQUIREMENTS

    1.   For the purpose of this permit,  a calendar day is defined  as  any
        consecutive 24-hour period.

    2.   In  accordance with Section 306(d) of  the  Federal Water Pollution
        Control Act (PL92-500) the standards  of performance for conventional
        pollutants  as contained in this  permit shall not be made any  more
        stringent during a ten year period beginning on the date of completion
        of  such construction or during the period of depreciation  or  amortization
        of  such facility for the purposes of  section 167 or 169 (or both)  of
        the  Internal  Revenue Code of 1954, whichever period ends first.  The
        provisions  of Section 306(d) do  not limit the authority of the Environ-
        mental  Protection Agency to modify the permit to require compliance
        with a  toxic  effluent limitation promulgated under BAT or  toxic
        pollutant standard established under  Section 307(a)  of the FWPCA,  or
        to modify,  as necessary, to assure compliance with any applicable
        State Water Quality Standard.

    3.  Control of  runoff  from site construction  shall  be  consistent with sound .
       engineering practices  such  as thocc  contained  in "Guidelines for Erosion
       and Sediment  Control  Planning and Ir.plctr.cntation," EPA-R2-72-015 (August,
       1972) or "Processes,  Procedures and  Methods  to  Control Pollution Resulting
       from all Construction  Activity," EPA-430/9-73-007  (October, 1973).   Prior
       to start of construction,  the permittee shall submit  to the Regional
       Administrator  for  review and  approval, a detailed  erosion  and  sediment
       control plan.  An  approved  plan shall be  implemented  prior  to  start of
       construction.

    4.  Any overflow  which is  discharged from facilities designed,  constructed
       and operated  to  treat  to the applicable limitations  for pH and total
       suspended solids,  the  precipitation  and run-off resulting  from a 10-year,
       24-hour precipitation  event shalL not be  subject to  the limitations sec
       forth in Part  I, A of  this  permit.
                                       P-ll

-------
DRAFT NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
            (NPDES)  PERMIT (QUARRY SITE)

-------
                                                                 Pcrinil N,,   AL0028819
                      AUTHORIZATION TO DISCHARGE UNDER THE
                NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
       In complianre with the provisions of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended,
   (33 U.S.C. 1251 et. seq; the "Act").
       Ideal Basic Industries
       Cement Division
       Gaillard Quarry
FT
   is authorized to discharge from a facility located at

       Monroe  County, Alabama



   to receiving waters named

       Alabama River



   in  accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements and other conditions set forth
   in  Parts I, II, and III hereof.

       This permit shall become effective on

       This permit and the authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight,
   Signed this      day of
                                                     Paul J. Traina, Director
                                                       Enforcement Division
EPA Farm 1320.4 (10-73}
                                      P-13

-------
A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
   During the period beginning on effective  date  andjasting through the term of this permit,
   the permittee is authorized to discharge from all point sources  associated with active mine dewatering  activities
   indicated  on the area map (Attachment I).

   Such discharges shall be limited and monitored  by the permittee as specified below:
   Effluent Characteristic
                                         Discharge Limitations
                              kg/day (lbs/da"y)            OtKeir Units (Specify)
                            Daily Avg      Daily Max
                                                     Daily Avg
Daily Max
   Flow-m3/Day (MGD)
              Monitoring Requirements
Measurement
 Frequency


 I/month
Sample

 Type


Instantaneous
   Total Suspended Solids  shall not exceed 30 mg/1 for  any one (l)  day
                                                                                 I/month
                             Composite
The pH shall not be less than   6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0   standard units and shall be monitored once per
month  by grab sample.


There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.


Samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements specified above shall be taken at the following location(s):

nearest  accessible point after final  treatment but  prior to actual  discharge  to  or mixing with
the  receiving waters.
                                                                                                               »
                                                                                                               a
                                                                                                               3
                                                                                                                 -   -
                                                                                                              o
                                                                                                              o so
                                                                                                              IS)
                                                                                                              00
                                                                                                              00

-------
                                                                   PARTI


                                                                   Page 3   of 9
                                                                   Permii No.  AL0028819
B.  SCHEDULE OF COMPLIANCE

    1.  The  permittee  shall achieve  compliance with  the effluent limitations specified for
       discharges in accordance with the following schedule:
       Operational  Level Attained	Effective Date of Permit
    2.  No later than 14 calendar days following  a  date identified in the above  schedule of
       compliance,  the  permittee shall submit  either a report of progress or, in  the case of
       specific  actions being required by identified dates, a written notice of compliance or
       noncompliance. In the latter case, the notice shall include the cause of noncompliance,
       any  remedial  actions taken, and  the  probability  of  meeting the  next scheduled
       requirement
                                    P-15

-------
                                                                  PART I

                                                                  pjpc  4 of 9
                                                                  PermilNo AL0028819
C. MONITORING AND REPORTING

   1.  Represen ta five Samp ling

       Samples and. measurements taken as required herein shall be representative of the volume
       and nature of the monitored discharge.

   2.  Reporting

       Monitoring results obtained during  the previous  3    months shall be summarized for
       each month and reported on a Discharge  Monitoring  Report Form (EPA No. 3320-1),
       postmarked no later than the 28th day of  the month following the completed reporting
       period. The first report is due on                       . Duplicate signed copies of
       these, and all  other  reports required herein,  shall  be  submitted  to the  Regional
       Administrator and the State at the following addresses:


       Environmental Protection Agency        Alabama Water Improvement Commission
       Water Enforcement Branch                g      Qff±    Building
       345  Courtland Street, N.E.              M^«i--« «-,,   Aia*.ama   -umn
       ....          .    tn^no                 Montgomery, Alabama   36130
       Atlanta, Georgia  30308                      °      *
    3.  Definitions

       a.  The "daily average" discharge means the total discharge by weight during a calendar
          month  divided  by the number of days  in the  month that the production or
          commercial facility was operating. Where less than  daily sampling is required by this
          permit, the daily average discharge shall be determined by the  summation of all the
          measured daily  discharges by  weight  divided by  the  number of days  during the
          calendar month when the measurements were made.

       b.  The "daily maximum" discharge means the total discharge by  weight  during any
          calendar day.

    4.  Test Procedures

       Test procedures  for the analysis of pollutants shall conform to  regulations published
       pursuant to Section 304(g)  of the Act, under which such procedures may be required.

    5.  Recording of Resu Its

       For each measurement or sample taken pursuant to the requirer.ients of this permit, the
       permittee shall record the following information:

       a.  The exact place, date, and time of sampling;

       b.  The dates the analyses were performed;

       c.  The person(s) who performed the analyses;
                                        P-16

-------
                                                                 PARTI

                                                                 ?w  5   oi  9
                                                                 PcrmuNo.  AL0028819
   d.  The analytical techniques or methods used; and

   e.  The results of all required analyses.

6.  Additional Monitoring by Permittee

   If the permittee monitors any  pollutant  at  the location(s) designated herein more
   frequently than  required by this  permit, using approved analytical methods as specified
   above, the results of such monitoring shall be included in the calculation and reporting of
   the values required in the  Discharge Monitoring Report Form (EPA No. 3320-1). Such
   increased frequency shall also be indicated.

7.  Records Retention

   All records and  information resulting  from the monitoring activities required by this
   permit including all records of analyses performed and calibration and  maintenance of
   instrumentation  and  recordings from  continuous monitoii"^  instrumentation shall  be
   retained  for a minimum of  three  (3)  years, or longer if requested by  the Regional
   Administrator or the State water pollution control agency.
                                         P-17

-------
                                                                    PART 11


                                                                    Page   6  of  9
                                                                    Permit No.   AL0028819
A. MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS

   1.  Change in Discharge

       All discharges authorized herein shall be consistent with the terms and conditions of this
       permit. The discharge of any pollutant identified in this permit more frequently than or
       at a level in excess of that authorized  shall constitute a violation of the permit.  Any
       anticipated facility expansions, production increases, or process modifications which will
       result  in  new, different,  or  increased  discharges of  pollutants must be reported by
       submission of a new NPDES application or, if such changes will not violate the effluent
       limitations specified in this permit, by notice to the  permit issuing authority of  such
       changes.  Following such notice, the permit may be modified to specify and limit any
       pollutants not previously limited.

   2.  Noncompliance Notification

       If, for any reason, the permittee does not comply with or will be unable to comply  with
       any  daily  maximum effluent  limitation  specified in  this permit, the  permittee  shall
       provide the  Regional  Administrator and  the State with  the following  information, in
       writing, within five (5) days of becoming aware of such condition:

       a.  A description of the discharge and cause of noncompliance; and

       b.  The pehod of noncompliance, including exact dates and times; or, if not corrected,
           the anticipated time the  noncompliance  is expected to  continue, and steps being
           taken to reduce, eliminate and prevent recurrence of the noncomplying discharge.

   3.  Facilities Operation

       The permittee shall at all times maintain in good working order and operate as efficiently
       as possible all treatment or control facilities or systems installed or used by the permittee
       to achieve compliance with the terms and conditions of this permit.

   4.  Adverse Impact

       The permittee shall take all reasonable steps to minimize any adverse impact to navigable
       waters resulting  from  noncompliance  with any  effluent limitations specified  in this
       permit, including such accelerated or additional monitoring as necessary to determine the
       nature and impact of the noncomplying discharge.

   5.  Bypassing

       Any diversion  from  or bypass of  facilities necessary to maintain compliance  with the
       terms and conditions of this permit is prohibited, except (i) where unavoidable to prevent
       loss of life or  severe  property damage,  or (ii) where excessive storm  drainage or runoff
       would damage any facilities necessary for compliance with the effluent limitations and
       prohibitions  of  this  permit.   The  permittee  shall  promptly   notify  the  Regional
       Administrator and the State in writing of each such diversion or bypass.
                                         P-18

-------
                                                                    PART II

                                                                    Page  7   of  9
                                                                    Permit No.   AL0028819
   6.  Removed Substances

       Solids, sludges, filter backwash, or other pollutants removed in the course of treatment or
       control of wastewaters shall be disposed of in a manner such as to prevent any pollutant
       from such materials from entering navigable waters.

   7.  Power Failures

       In  order to maintain compliance with  the effluent limitations and prohibitions of this
       permit, the permittee shall either:

       a.  In accordance with  the  Schedule of Compliance contained in  Part  I,  provide an
          alternative power source sufficient to operate the wastewater control facilities;

       or, if such alternative power source is not in existence, and no date for its implementation
       appears in Part I,

       b.  Halt,  reduce  or  otherwise  control  production and/or   all discharges  upon  the
          reduction, loss, or failure of the primary source of power to the  wastewater control
          facilities.
B. RESPONSIBILITIES

   1.  Right of Entry

       The  permittee shall allow  the  head of the State water pollution  control agency, the
       Regional  Administrator, and/or their authorized representatives, upon the presentation of
       credentials:

       a.  To enter upon  the permittee's premises where an effluent source is located or in
          which any records are required  to  be kept under the terms and conditions of this
          permit; and

       b.  At reasonable times to have access to and copy any records required to be kept under
          the terms  and conditions of this permit; to inspect any monitoring  equipment or
          monitoring method required in this permit; and to sample any discharge of pollutants.

   2.  Transfer of Ownership or Control

       In the event of any change in control or ownership of facilities from which the authorized
       discharges emanate, the permittee shall notify the succeeding owner or controller of the
       existence of this permit by letter, a copy of which shall be forwarded to the Regional
       Administrator and the State water pollution control agency.

   3.  Availability of Reports

       Except for data determined to be confidential under Section 308 of the  Act, all reports
       prepared in  accordance  with the terms  of this permit shall be  available for  public
                                             P-19

-------
                                                                 PART II

                                                                 Page  8   of  9
                                                                 Permit No.   AL0028819
    inspection at the offices of the State water pollution control agency and the Regional
    Administrator. As required by the Act, effluent data shall not be considered confidential.
    Knowingly making any false statement on any such report may result in the imposition of
    criminal penalties as provided for in Section 309 of the Act.

4.  Permit Modification

    After notice and opportunity for a hearing, this permit may be modified, suspended, or
    revoked in whole or in part during its term for cause including, but not limited to, the
    following:

    a.   Violation of any terms or conditions of this permit;

    b.  Obtaining this permit by  misrepresentation or failure to disclose fully  all relevant
       facts; or

    c.  A change in any condition that requires either a temporary or permanent reduction or
       elimination of the authorized discharge.

5.  Toxic Pollutants

    Notwithstanding Part II, B-4 above, if a toxic effluent standard or prohibition (including
    any  schedule of compliance specified  in  such effluent standard or  prohibition)  is
    established under Section 307(a)  of the Act for a toxic pollutant which  is present in the
    discharge and such standard or prohibition is more stringent than any limitation for such
    pollutant in  this permit, this permit shall be revised or modified in accordance with the
    toxic effluent standard  or prohibition and the permittee so notified.

6.  Civil and Criminal Liability

    Except  as provided  in permit conditions on "Bypassing" (Part II, A-5) and "Power
    Failures" (Part II, A-7), nothing in this permit shall be construed to relieve the permittee
    from civil or criminal penalties for noncompliance.

7.  Oil and Hazardous Substance Liability

    Nothing in this permit shall be construed to preclude the institution of any legal action or
    relieve  the  permittee  from any  responsibilities, liabilities, or  penalties to  which the
    permittee is or may be subject under Section 311 of the Act.

S.  State Laws

    Nothing in this permit shall be construed to preclude the institution of any legal action or
    relieve the permittee from any responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties established pursuant
    to any  applicable State law or regulation under authority preserved by Section 510 of the
    Act.
                                       P-20

-------
                                                           PART M

                                                           Page  9  of  9
                                                           Permit No.  AL0028819
   9.  Property Rights

      The issuance of this permit does not convey any property rights in either real or personal
      property, or any exclusive privileges, nor does it authorize any injury to private property
      or any invasion of personal rights, nor any infringement of Federal, State or local laws or
      regulations.

   10. Severability

      The provisions of this permit are severable, and if any provision of this permit, or the
      application of any provision of  this permit to any circumstance, is held invalid, the
      application of such provision to other circumstances, and the remainder of this permit,
      shall not be affected thereby.
                                   PART III


OTHER REQUIREMENTS
       1.  For  the  purpose of this permit, a calendar day is defined as any
           consecutive 24-hour period.

       2.  Any  untreated overflow which is discharged from facilities designed,
           constructed and operated to contain or  treat as applicable all process
           generated  waste water and the surface runoff to the treatment facility,
           resulting  from a 10-year, 24-hour precipitation event shall not be
           suject to  the limitations set forth in  Part I, A of this permit.

       3.  In accordance with Section 306(d) of the Federal Water Pollution Control
           Act  (PL92-500) the standards of performance for conventional pollutants
           as contained in this permit shall not be made any more stringent during
           a ten year period beginning on the date of completion of such construction
           or during  the period of depreciation or amortization of such facility  for
           the  purposes of section 167 or 169 (or  both) of the Internal Revenue Code
           of 1954, whichever period ends first.   The provisions of Section 306(d)
           do not limit the authority of the Environmental Protection Agency to
           modify the permit to require compliance with a toxic effluent limitation
           promulgated under BAT or toxic pollutant standard established under
           Section  307(a) of the FWPCA, or to modify, as neccessary, to assure
           compliance with any applicable State Water Quality Standard.

        4. Control  of runoff from site construction shall be consistent with sound
           engineering practices such as those contained in "Guidelines for Erosion
           and  Sediment Control Planning and Implementation," EPA-R2-72-015 (August,
           1972} or "Processes, Procedures and Methods to Control Pollution Result-
           ing  from all Construction Activity," EPA-430/9-73-007 (October, 1973).
           Prior to start of construction, the permittee shall submit to the Regional
           Administrator for review and approval,  a detailed erosion and sediment
           control  plan.  An approved plan shall be implemented prior to start of
           construction.
                                       P-21

-------
                           ATTACHMENT I
                           AL002R819
                             /  HIUlMOVSe  CLARIFICATION
                           ~   tKAMCM 	yX BASIN 5
    CLARIFICATION  \
      BASIN 4
    CLARIFICATION
      •ASIN 3
    OUARRY PLANT
    AND DOCK AREA
    CLARIFICATION
      BASIN 2
  CLARIFICATION
     BASIN 1
                                                               1111111II AREAS TO BE MINED
CLARIFICATION BASINS
                      0      0.3       1
                     SCALE IN KILOMETERS
                                                                   PROPOSED GAILLAflO OUAftNY
                                                                    MOMWOC COUNTY. ALABAMA
SOURCE  W«lB,wiBdu,tri.,.1977.
                                   P-22

-------
JOINT PUBLIC NOTICE--U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS AND
  ALABAMA WATER IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (PLANT SITE)

-------
             TO

        ATTENTION O Pi
                     DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

                       MOBILE DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS
                                f. 0. BOX 2288
                             MOBILE. ALABAMA 38628
          JOINT PUBLIC NOTICE


    U. S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
 SAMOP-S
 PUBLIC NOTICE  NO.
                                    AND
                             STATE OF ALABAMA
                       WATER IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION
AL78-00057-E
                                         27 April 1978
       PROPOSED DREDGING,  FILL,  BARGE DOCK, AND OUTLET STRUCTURE,
            THEODORE SHIP  CHANNEL AND NORTH FORK DEER RIVER,
             ADJACENT TO MOBILE  BAY,  MOBILE COUNTY, ALABAMA

TO IJHOM IT HAY CONCERN:

This District  has received  an application  for a Department of the Army
permit  pursuant to  Section  10 of  the  River and Harbor Act of 1899
(33 U.S.C. 403), and  Section 404  of  the  Federal Water Pollution Control
Act (PL 92-500, 33  U.S.C. 1344),  as  described below:


APPLICANT;   Ideal  Basic  Industries
             G. M.  Lochhead, P.  E.,  Chief  Engineer
             P. 0.  Box  8789
             Denver,  CO 80201

WATERWAY;    Theodore Ship  Channel,  North  Fork Deer River
             Mobile County, Alabama

WORK;   Perform dredging to  a depth of -40.0 MSL,  by hydraulic dredge,  of an
area approx. 300 ft.  x 2300 ft. along the  shoreline of applicant's property as
shown.  Approximately 650,000 CY  native  soil,  including sands,  silts and clays
will be removed.  It  is presently anticipated that dredging operations will be
conducted concurrently with the dredging of the Theodore Industrial Canal and
that the removed material will be disposed  of in a site approved for use in
connection with the Theodore Industrial  Canal.
Approximately  2300  ft. of concrete trestle  type dock  structures will be con-
structed adjacent to  the dredged  area.   The dock facilities will extend approx.
80 ft.  from the shoreline into the dredged  area.   The dock facilities  will be
operated to receive raw materials utilized  in the manufacture of cement and to
support equipment utilized  in loading cement  transport vessels.

Fill will be placed in the  wetland area  as  shown  adjacent to an existing road-
way in order to construct an access road to the plant site.   Approx. 4450 CY
fill will be required to bring the grade of the plant access road to elevation
10.0 MSL,  the  top of  the.proposed bridge across North Fork Deer River.  The
earth fill will cover a lineal distance  of  approximately 500 feet with an
average height of fill about 5 feet.
                                 P-23

-------
 SAMOP-S                                                  27 April 1978
 PUBLIC NOTICE NO.  AL78-0057-E

 Fill will  also be  placed  in  two wetland areas within the plant site itself in
 order to bring the plane  grade to elevation lo.O MSL.  Concrete sheet pilings
 will be driven along the  northeast corner of the plant site along the edge of
 the fill to minimize construction in the wetland area.

 A concrete outlet  structure, with riprap, will be constructed at the southwest
 corner of  the plant site  adjacent to the Theodore Ship Channel.  The outlet
 structure  will serve as a discharge point for the settling basin as shown on
 the attached  plan.

 The trestle for  the railroad and the bridge within the plant access road
 have not been included in this Public Notice since they are currently being
 processed  by  the Eighth Coast Guard District, New Orleans.  If the Coast Guard
 declines jurisdiction at  a later date, an additional public notice will be
 advertised.

 AIL work to be performed  on or adjacent to the applicant's property within the
 Theodore Industrial Park, off Theodore Ship Channel, Mobile Bay, Mobile County
 Alabama.   Plans  submitted by the applicant are attached to this notice.

 PLANS SUBMITTED  BY THE APPLICANT ARE PRELIMINARY AND BASED ON CONCEPTUAL
 ENGINEERING STUDIES,  NOT  DETAILED DESIGN.  ANY SUBSTANTIAL DEVIATIONS WILL BE
 RE-ADVERTISED.

 The applicant has  applied for certification from the State of Alabama in
 accordance with  Section 401(a)(l) of the Federal Water Pollution Control
 Act Amendments of  1972; and upon completion of the required advertising,
 a determination  relative  to certification will be made.

 The Environmental  Protection Agency has determined that an Environmental
 Impact Statement (EIS) is necessary.   An EIS is currently being prepared
 for Ideal  Basic  Industries' entire operation, both at the Theodora Site and
 the Quarry Site, Monroe County.

 This public notice is baing distributed to all known interested persons
 in order to assist  in developing facts on which a decision by the Corps
 of Engineers  can be based.  For accuracy and completeness of the record,
 all data in support of or in opposition to the proposed work should be
 submitted  in  writing setting forth sufficient detail to furnish a clear
 understanding of the  reasons for support or opposition.  The decision
 whether to issue a permit will be based on an evaluation of the probable
 impact of  the proposed activity on the public interest.  That decision
 will reflect  the national concern for both protection and utilization of
 important  resources.  The benefit which reasonably may be expected to
 accrue from the  proposal  must be balanced against its reasonably foresee-
 able detriments.  All factors which may be relevant to the proposal will
be considered; aniong  those are conservation, economics, aesthetics, general
 environmental  concerns, historic values, fish and wildlife values, flood
damage prevention,  land use classification, navigation, recreation, water
 supply,  water quality and, in general, the needs and welfare of the people.
No permit  will be  granted unless its  issuance is found to be in the public
 interest.
                                 P-24

-------
 SAMOP-S                                                   27  April  1978
 PUBLIC NOTICE NO.  AL78-00057-E
Any person who has an interest which nay be adversely affected by the issuance
of a permit may request a public hearing.  The request must be submitted in
writing to the District Engineer within 30 days of the date of this notice and
oust clearly set forth the interest which may be adversely affected and the
manner in which the interest may be adversely affected by the activity.

You are requested to communicate the information contained in this letter to
any other parties whom you deem likely to have interest in the matter.

Evaluation of the probable impacts involving deposits of dredged or fill
material into navigable waterways will include the application of guidelines
established by the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.

No properties listed in the National Register of Historic Places are known to
be near the proposed work.  The possibility exists that the proposed work may
damage or destroy presently unknown archeological, scientific, prehistorical
or historical sites or data.  Copies of this notice are being sent to the State
Archeologist, State Historical Preservation Officer and the National Park
Service.


Correspondence concerning this Public Notice should refer to Public Notice No.
AL78-00057-E     and should be directed to the District Engineer, U. S. Army
Engineer District, Mobile, Corps of Engineers, P. 0. Box 2288, Mobile,
Alabama  36628, ATTN   Regulatory Functions Branch, in time to be received
prior to 26 May 1978.

If you have any questions concerning this application, you may contact  this
office, P. A. Flanagan           , telephone number (205) 690- 2650
Please refer to the above Public Notice number.
                                         MOBILE DISTRICT
                                         U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
                                 P-25

-------
                                  HOLLINGERS

                                     /ISLAND
                    THEODORE  INDUSTRIAL
                          PARK
                                      /^
 ADJACENT  PROPERTY:
 (T) AIM REDUCTION COMPANY

                                     ^/s
                                     f          X"S>
                                    ££• IDEAL  BASIC  "N
                                    gtf INDUSTRIES
                                   If
                                     .PROPOSED DOCK
                                       DREDGING
                           TURNING
                           BASIN
                                                 1
                                                 1
(|) HIGHWAY R.O.W.

FROM: uses OUAO SHEET (THEODORE, ALA.)
                              LOCATION  MAP
                            O 500 IOOO   200O   3OOO
                                 SCALE  IN FEET
                                                                          Sfe-
                                                                                 UkT.
                                                                                      •-:-?/
FROM:  US. C.S. MAP (MOBILE, ALABAMA; MISS.; LA.)
                                                 PROPOSED SHIP a BARGE  DOCK
                                                              IN THE

                                                   THEODORE  SHIP  CHANNEL
                                                         MOBILE COUNTY

                                                       STATE OF ALABAMA
                                                           APPLICATION  BY
                                                    IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES
                                                                  • 977
                                       P-26

-------
                                       250'
                                                                    1400
                                                        CONCRETE DECK  	
                                                        SUPPORTED BY PILES*/ P
                               V
                                  NEW PIERHEAD LINE ft BREASTING LINE
                                                X"~
                                                        AREA TO BE DREOOEO
                                                        TO M.S.L.  EL.(-)40
                                        TOE  OF CHANNEL
                            THEODORE   SHIP   CHANNEL
                                        TOE  OF CHANNEL
                                                            PLAN
                                                   0   50  100
                                                                  200
                                                                          300
s
r
CD
        H
(/>      B
H      O
>  2  O
H  O  O
^  9?  $
-o
3
o
TJ
o
CO
m
o
CO
                                                         SCALE  IN FEET
5
F553S  ¥5i
\ *  ^         ^j^  ^J|
=  i  > o  -D  g »
g  a  r O  o    m

w  *  5 5  >    2
-j     1* ~j  Z    O
^     5C -<  2    m
***     ^.     r-r^
m                  o
CO                  O
                    o
                                                                            200*
                                                                                                                   i UOOHINU
                                                                                                            BREASTING DOLPHIN
                                                                                                  NOTE;
                                                                                                   INFORMATION  PRESENTED ON THIS DRAWING
                                                                                                   IS PRELIMINARY AND BASED ON CONCEPTUAL
                                                                                                   ENGINEERING  STUDIES NOT DETAILED DESICN
                                                                                    DATUM:  UEAN SEA LEVEL  M.S.L.
                                                                                    NOTE;
                                                                                       NEW PIERHEAD LINE
                                                                                       ft BREASTIN6 LINE
                                                        . TOE OF
                                                       ^ CHANNEL
                                                         M.S.L.  EL.0.01
                                                                                         EXISTING
                                                                                         GRADE

                                                                              DREDGE TO
                                                                                H 40' M S L
                                                                                Z_
                                                                              SECTION  A-A
                                                                        ,0
                                                                              20
                                                                                   40
                                                                                        60
                                                                                         L.
                                                                                             80
                                                                                                  100

-------
                                 HOLLINGERS
                                /
                                       ISLAND
                   XHEOOORE  INDUSTRIAL
                         PARK
                                           •>•».
                                                vi//.
                           SETTLING
                            BASIN

                           TUSHIHG
                           BASIN
                                  IDEAL -BASIC
                                  INDUSTRIES
                                   .OUTLET
                                   STRUCTURE
                                               '•WE
ADJACENT PROPERTY.
0 A»* REDUCTION COMPANY

(I) HIGHWAY HO W.

(D ALABAMA STATE DOCKS


FKOM> U30S OUAO 3HEET (THEODORE, ALA.)
  :  USG5  MA>(MO§ILt. ALABAMA; Ml S3 i LA.)
                         LOCATION  MAP
                       O  300
                                       3OOO   \o
                            SCALE IN FEFT
                                                                           LAT
                                                                      ••v
VICWITY  MAP
a ;  *  "i   «~"">
 iCALI IN MIUES"
                                                             LOCATION  MAP
                                                            THEODORE PLANT
                                                            MOBILE COUNTY
                                                          STATE OF ALABAMA
                                                               APPLICATION BY
                                                        IDEAL  BASIC  INDUSTRIES
                                                                JANUARY 13, 1978
                                         P-28

-------
      EXISTING
        ROAD
      EXISTING
      CULVERTS
AIR  REDUCTION
COMPANY PROPERTY
       PROPERTY-
         UNE
  NOTE:  Information
         preliminary
         engineering
                                         APPROXIMATE LIMIT
                                         OF MARSH  EL. 4
                                          PROPOSED RAILROAD BRIDGE
                                                         H
                   PROPOSED  ROAD BRIDGE
                                                             NOTE:
                                                             Mean High Water and
                                                             Mean Low Water levels
                                                             are not  known
                                                             for  Marsh area.
                                                                       200
                                                               	
                                                         SCALE IN FEET
presented on  this drawing is
and based on  conceptual
studies not detailed design.
                  P-29
                              PROPOSED   BRIDGES
                                        OVER
                           NORTH  FORK  DEER  RIVER
                                 MOBILE  COUNTY
                               STATE  OF  ALABAMA
                                     APPLICATION  BY
                             IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES
                                     JANUARY 13, 1978

-------
                                 2 SPANS  X 25'= 50*
                                    TOP OF SLAB
                                  \EL. lo.o
                                        NATURAL
                                        GROUND
                                        ?.  PROFILE
FILL
NOTE'-
 Mean High Water and
 Mean Low Water levels
 ore  not known
 for Marsh area.
   ELEVATION
O  5  LO    20    30
   SCALE IN FEET
                                      30'
                                                                   PILES  DRIVEN
                                                          TO REFUSAL
i 1
ui H r
L^

.«:
EL. IO.O
1 H
{••L,
:|


^i
>^~
                                                             PRECAST CONCRETE
                                                             STRINGERS
                                                        CONCRETE PILES
                                SECTION  A-A
                                       10
                                   SCALE IN FEET
                   20
 NOTES:
  I. Elevations shown refer to Mean Sea Level.
 2. Approximately 4450 cubic yards of select
    granular material  will be  used for  fill.
NOTE:   Information presented on this drawing
       Is  preliminary and based on conceptual
       engineering studies not detailed design.
                    PROPOSED ROAD BRIDGE
                             OVER
                  NORTH FORK DEER  RIVER
                        MOBILE COUNTY
                     STATE OF ALABAMA
                          APPLICATION BY
                   IDEALBAS£ INDUSTRIES
                          JANUARY 13, 1973
                                    P-30

-------
                                                  Ween High V/atar and
                                                  Mson Lo* Wo fur lev
                                                  for  ?jtarso Arao.
                 RAILROAD
                 SPUR
ACCESS
 ROAD
                                AREA OF FU
                                                                      NORTH FORK
                                                                      DEEH RIVER
                          A    R          A

                         (PLANT GRADE = EL. IS.Oi)
               THEODORE   SHIP  CHANNEL
HO I
                           500
                                       1,000
                        SCALE IN FEET
       Information presented on this drawing is
       preliminary and based on conceptual
       engineering studies not detailed design,

                                      P-31
        V/ETLAND FILL
   THEODORE  PLANT
    MOBILE COUNTY
  STATE OF ALABAMA
      APPLICATION BY
IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES
        FEBRUARY 14, 1973

-------
    L-9A"
24 DIA. PIPE
                             PLAN
                               INV EL. 0.0
                                     EL 0.0
                                                      MEAN HIGH WATER EL. 0.7

                                                         IEAN  LOW WATER EL-B07
                                         •MHW EL. 0.7
                                                          EL.H0.7
               CONCRETE
               OUTLET
               STRUCTURE
                          PROFILE
                         SCALE IN FEET
  NOTES:

  I. Elevations shown refer to Mean Sea Level.
NOTE:  Information presented on this drawing is
      preliminary and based on conceptual
      engineering studies not detailed design.
                                     PROPOSED OUTLET STRUCTURE
                                                   IN THE
                                        THEODORE SHIP CHANNEL
                                              MOBILE  COUNTY
                                            STATE OF ALABAMA
                                                APPLICATION BY
                                          IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES
                                                 JANUARY 13,1978
                                    P-32

-------
JOINT PUBLIC NOTICE—U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS AND.
 ALABAMA WATER IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (QUARRY SITE)

-------
                     DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
                       MOBILE DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS
                                f. 0. BO! 2288
                             •OBIIE. ALABAMA 38B28


                             JOINT PUBLIC NOTICE

                       U.  S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

                                    AND

                             STATE OF ALABAMA

                       WATER IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION

 SAMOP-S                                                   ,, .   ..  1Q7R
 PTTWT Tr MrtTTrr M«                                          ^ APril 1978
 PUBLIC NOTICE NO.  AL78-00056-E

PROPOSED BARGE DOCK .AND FILL ASSOCIATED WITH CLARIFICATION BASINS.  ALABAMA
RIVER, APPROXIMATELY MI. 54, MONROE COUNTY,  ALABAMA

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:

This District has received  an application for  a Department of the Army
permit pursuant to Section  10 of  the  River and Harbor Act of 1899
 (33 U.S.C. 403), and Section 404  of the Federal Water Pollution Control
Act  (PL 92-500, .33 U.S.C. 1344),  as described  below:


APPLICANT; Ideal Basic Industries
           c/o Mr.  G.  M.  Lochhead,  P.E.,  Chief Engineer
           P.O. Box  8789
           Denver,  CO   80201

WATERWAY:   Alabama River, Approximately Mile 54
           Monroe County, Alabama


WORK;  Construct a barge dock, adjacent to the shoreline, on the Alabama River,
 approximately Mile  54. The dock ,  636 ft.  long, will extend approximately 100
 ft.  beyond the MHW  line.  A conveyor sys tern ,loca ted at the center of the dock,
 will connect to on  shore  facilities and will extend an additional 80'  into the
 Alabama River.  The  barge dock  will provide water access to Ideal Basic Industries
 quarry, site.  Additionally, clarification basins and outlet facilities will be
 constructed  to provide effective storage capacities for stormwater runoff.  These
 basins will  provide  a  sediment  trap for all runoff from the disturbed quarry and
 limestone storage area.   Only those basins  adjacent to the Alabama River which
 are  below the OHW will be required to have  Department of Army Permits.  All work
 to be performed adjacent  to the applicant's property on the Alabama River,
 approximately mile  54, Monroe County, Alabama.  Plans submitted by the applicant
 are  attached to this notice.

 PLANS SUBMITTED BY  THE APPLICANT ARE PRELIMINARY AND BASED ON CONCEPTUAL
 ENGINEERING  STUDIES  NOT DETAILED DESIGN.  ANY SUBSTANTIAL DEVIATIONS
 WILL BE RE-ADVERTISED.


                                 P-33

-------
 SAMOP-S                                                    10 April 1978
 PUBLIC NOTICE NO. AL78-00056-E


 The  applicant has applied  for certification from the State of Alabama in
 accordance with Section 401(a)(l) of the Federal Water Pollution Control
 Act  Amendments of 1972; and upon completion of the required advertising,
 a determination relative to certification will be made.

 A preliminary assessment of environmental, social and other factors indicates
 that an  environmental  impact statement is not required.  Permit assessment
 is a continuing process.   This preliminary determination of EIS requirement
 will be  changed if data or information brought forth in the coordination
 process  is of a significant nature.

 This public notice is  being distributed to all known interested persons
 in order to assist in  developing facts on which a decision by the Corps
 of Engineers can be based.  For accuracy and completeness of the record,
 all  data in support of or  in opposition to the proposed work should be
 submitted in writing setting forth sufficient detail to furnish a clear
 understanding of the reasons for support or opposition.  The decision
 whether  to issue a permit  will be based on an evaluation of the probable
 impact of the proposed activity on the public interest.  That decision
 will reflect the national  concern for both protection and utilization of
 important resources.   The  benefit which reasonably may be expected to
 accrue from the proposal must be balanced against its reasonably foresee-
 able detriments.  All  factors which may be relevant to the proposal will
 be considered; among those are conservation, economics, aesthetics, general
 environmental concerns, historic values, fish and wildlife values, flood
 damage prevention, land use classification, navigation, recreation, water
 supply,  water quality  and, in general, the needs and welfare of the people.
 No permit will be granted  unless its issuance is found to be in the public
 interest.

 Any  person who has an  interest which may be adversely affected by the issuance
 of a permit may request a  public hearing.  The request must be submitted in
 writing  to the District Engineer within 30 days of the date of this notice and
must clearly set forth the Interest which may be adversely affected and the
manner in which the interest may be adversely affected by the activity.

You  are  requested to communicate the information contained in this letter to
 any  other parties whom you deem likely to have Interest in the matter.

Evaluation of the probable impacts Involving deposits of dredged or fill   •
material into navigable waterways will include the application of guidelines
established by the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.

No properties listed in the National Register of Historic Places are known to
be near  the proposed work.  The possibility exists that the proposed work may
damage or destroy presently unknown archeological, scientific, prehlstorical
 or historical sites or data.  Copies of this notice are being sent to the State
Archeologist, State Historical Preservation Officer and the National Park
 Service.
                                 P-34

-------
SAMOP-S                                              1° AP*11 1978
PUBLIC NOTICE NO. AL78-00056-E
Correspondence concerning this Public Notice should refer  to Public Notice No.
AL78-00056-E     and should be directed to the District Engineer, U. S. Amy
Engineer District, Mobile, Corps of Engineers, P. 0.  Box 2288, Mobile,
Alabama  36628, ATTN   Regulatory Functions Branch, in time to be received
prior to  3 May 1978.

If you have any questions concerning this application, you may contact this
office,  p. A. Flanagan          • telephone number (205)  690-2658
Please refer  to the above Public Notice number.
                                         MOBILE DISTRICT
                                         U.  S. Army Corps  of Engineers
                                 P-35

-------
                               GAILLARD QUARRY



                  CLARIFICATION BASINS ALONG ALABAMA RIVER








     As the limestone quari*y area is being developed, the open faces



of limestone and other subsurface soil subject to stormwater surface




runoff will erode and could create a turbidity and sediment problem in



nearby streams and wetland areas.  Storm runoff from all of the process



operations will contain suspended solids of varying concentrations.



     During the operating life of the quarry at least five clarification



basins will be required for controlling sediment and water quality of the



storm runoff from the disturbed areas.  However, during the first five



years of quarry operation it is anticipated that only Clarification Basins



Nos.l,2&5 will be needed and therefore are the only ones which are to be



included as part of the initial construction of the quarry facilities.



Since detailed design engineering for these clarification basins has not



been completed, the information presented herein represents only the best



available based on conceptual engineering studies.



     The embankment for Clarification Basin No. 5 may not require the



issuance of a fill permit from the Department of Army since the streambed




elevation at this location is considerably higher than the established



ordinary high water elevation of 3*».0 feet MSL for the Alabama River at



the Gail lard Quarry site.



     The clarification basin embankment will be an earthfill dam with an



impervious clay core.  The preliminary  information for each clarifica-



tion basin embankment is as shown in the following table:
                              P-36

-------
Page 2
Gai1 lard Quarry
Clarification Basins Along Alabama River
fi cat ion
is in

1
2
5
Streambed
Elevat ion
MSL
23
23
55
Top
Elevation
MSL
60
75
105
Length of
Embankment
FEET
270
1*75
J.85
Earthwork
Volume
CY
18,790
80,650
69,100
     All clarification basins would have a flood storage volume to

storm the storm runoff from a 10-year 2^-hour rainfall on top of the

storage volume allocated for sedimentation.  Two discharge structures

will be provided for each basin.  One discharge structure will be

utilized as a decanting facility while the other will serve as an

emergency spillway sized to accommodate flood flows resulting from a

100 year storm.  The suspended solids concentration discharging from

the basins into the Alabama River, under the normal conditions, will

be  limited to 25 mg/1 or less.
                                  V-37

-------
 ttCAL BASIC
 MDUSTMIES
        PROPOSED BARGE DOCK
                IN THE
           ALABAMA  RIVER
           MONROE COUNTY
         STATE OF ALABAMA
             APPLICATION BY
       IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES
                   1977
             SHEET I OF 2
P-38

-------
                            CONyfVOft  SYSTEM
                            TO ONSHORE FACILITIES
                                                                             HI8M
                                                                             WATCH €L-(+»»*'
                                                                                  LOW
                                                                                  WATCH EL.(+) •'
    •ftCASTING LINE
                    ALAB A MA
                                  FLOW
                       NOTE:
                        INFORMATION PRESENTED ON THIS DRAWING IS
                        PRELIMINARY AND BASED ON CONCEPTUAL
                        CNOINEEMN8  STUDIES NOT DETAILED DESISN
                    .. «. _                                                X" WATCH CL.U) •'
                                       PLAN
                                 0  90  100
                                             200
                                                   300
                                     SCALE IN FEET
  OATUMl MEAN SCA LEVEL
                              100*
TO DOCK IL (*) «0'
NI«N
LOW
                SECTION  A -A
              0   fS  9O     100    ISO
                  • CALI IN FCCT
P-39
                    PROPOSED  BARGE  DOCK
                              IN THE
                        ALABAMA   RIVER
                        MONROE  COUNTY
                      STATE OF  ALABAMA
                           APPLICATION BY
                   IDEAL BASIC  INDUSTRIES
                                   ItTT
                           •MEET t OF 2

-------
   CLARinCATiai
      BASIN
   QUARRY
   PLANT AREA
XARIFICATON
  BASIN
     NOTE =

       Mop bdtt it 71/2* USGS  Ouodronqlt Sheet*.
       Elevation* shown art in feet Datum is
       Mean Sea ktvtl.
   6AILLARD QUARRY
       SITE  MAP
   MONROE  COUNTY
  STATE OF ALABAMA
      APPLICATION BY
IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES
       JANUARY 13,1978
       SHEET 2 OF 5
                                     P-40

-------
                                 IDEAL BASIC
                                  INDUSTRIES
                             'McWILLIAMS
                               PROPERTY
                               (LEASED)
                         LOCATION  MAP
                          0 LDOO      &OOO
     f*0* UMS OUAD **CET (ri.TI.Ni LMtf
                            SCALE IN FEET
ITOTf HIGHWAY MAP
                                 P-41
   LOCATION  MAP
 6AILLARD QUARRY
   MONROE COUNTY
  STATE OF ALABAMA
      APPLICATION §Y

IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES
      JANUARY 13, 1378
      SHEET I OF 8

-------
 NATURAL
'GROUND
                      14' (20f-
                                   EL_ (see table sheet 4)
           DISCHARGE
           CHANNEL
                                I-48TDIA. PIPE-
                  SECTION  AT  EMERGENCY OUTLET
10'

NATURAL
Y~ GROUND

               6 SOIL-CEMENT-

                      DISCHARGE  CHANNEL SECTION
                                SCALE IN FEET
NOTE:  Information presented on this drawing 1s
      preliminary and based on conceptual
      engineering studies not detailed design.
PROPOSED  EMBANKMENTS
  8 OUTLET FACILITIES
          NEAR THE
     ALABAMA  RIVER
     MONROE COUNTY

   STATE OF ALABAMA
        APPLICATION BY

IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES
       JANUARY 13,1978
         SHEET 5 OF 6
                                  P-42

-------
       INLET
EL.  \  STRUCTURE
VARIES
14* (20'-BASN I)
          (see table)
                 	—
            SLIDE
            GATE
                            EARTH  FILL
                            EMBANKMENT
                               DISCHARGE
                                CHANNEL
                                        NATURAL •GROUND-^
                              1-36 DlA. PIPE
                                                      OUTLET
                                                      STRUCTURE
                    SECTION  AT  MAIN  OUTLET  FACILITY
                                     SCALE IN FEET
                6  SOIL-CEMENT
                                      10'
                        DISCHARGE CHANNEL  SECTION
                                        5
                                   SCALE IN FEET
                                                           NATURAL
                                                         AGROUND
                                                         *^*f/wfti^
BASIN
NUMBER
1
2
S
4
TOP OF EMB.
EL.
75
60
70
105
   NOTE:  Information presented on this drawing 1s
         preliminary and based on conceptual
         engineering studies not detailed design.
                                                PROPOSED EMBANKMENTS
                                                   a OUTLET  FACILITIES
                                                          NEAR THE
                                                     ALABAMA  RIVER
                                                     MONROE COUNTY
                                                   STATE OF ALABAMA
                                                        APPLICATION BY
                                                IDEAL BASIC INDUSTRIES
                                                        JANUARY 13, 1978
                                                         SHEET 4 OF 5
                                        P-43

-------
         ERA'S AUTHORITY TO CONSTRUCT (EPA  REGULATIONS FOR  THE
  PREVENTION OF SIGNIFICANT DETERIORATION OF AIR  QUALITY, 40  CFR  52.21
                             CEMENT PLANT
[The limestone quarry is not included in this  authority.   Prior  to the
public hearing for this project, a final determination  will  be made
concerning the applicability of 40 CFR 52.21 to  the  quarry operation.]

-------
     UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

v>                            REGION IV
                         343 COURTLAND STREET
                        ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30308


                          MAR 3 0 1978
 Mr.  Robert J. Castelli
 Director of Environmental Quality
 Ideal Basic Industries
 Post Office Box 8789
 Denver, Colorado  80201

 Dear Mr. Castelli:

      'This letter refers to the Ideal Basic Industries applying on
 November 20, 1977, to the Mobile County Board of Health for a
 permit to construct a cement plant in Theodore Industrial Park,
 Theodore, Alabama.

      The Mobile County Board of Health performed the Prevention of
 Significant Deterioration (PSD) Mew Source Review (40 CFR 52.21)
 which Includes an engineering and air quality analysis.

      The preliminary review of the'application for permit to
 construct was subject to a 30-day public comment period beginning
 January 12, 1978.  EPA made comments during that period concerning
 Best Available Control Technology (3ACT) for the cement plant.  On
 February 22, 1978, the Mobile County Board of Health submitted to
 EPA their final determination for the cement plant including copies
 of Draft County Permits to Construct.

      Because the authority for enforcement of PSD regulations 1n
 Alabama presently rests with the EPA, we have reviewed the final
 determination.  On the basis of our review, we have  determined,
 subject to the enclosed conditions of approval, that the operation
 of the cement plant will not cause a violation of National Amoient
 Air Quality Standards and the Class II PSD increments for sulfur
 dioxide and particulates and will meet the Federal requirements
 concerning BACT for particulate and sulfur dioxide emissions as
 amended in the Clean Air Act on August 7, 1977*
                             P-45  ,

-------
     This Authority to Construct is hereby issued to Ideal Basic
Industries for the cement plant described in your county application
as numbers 503-8026-0001 thru 0028, with permit conditions (enclosed)
which are hereby made a part of this approval.

     Also please note that the Mobile County Board of Health
must review and approve specifications for the selected air pollution
control devices prior to your issuance of a purchase order.
Therefore, we require a  monthly progress report to be submitted by
your company beginning with this Authority to Construct and ending
when the purchase of all control equipment is approved by the Alabama
Air Pollution Control Commission.

     Please be advised that violation of any condition issued as a
part of this approval as well as construction at variance with the
permit will be subject to enforcement action.  Also, this Authority
to Construct applies only to PSO requirements and not to other
Federal, State, or local agency permitting requirements.

     Authority to Construct shall take effect on the date of this
notice.  Any questions concerning this approval may be directed to
Eliot Cooper of the Air Programs Branch, 404/881-3286.
                            inoerely yours,
                            John A. White   '
                          jional Administrator


Attachment

cc:  Mr. James Cooper
     Alabama Air Pollution Control Commission

     Mr. Johnny Sanders
     Mobile County Board of Health


This Approval to Construct would be issued this date  Ffb- Z7,  • -•ru,
but for the order entered in Environmental Defense Fund v. Environmental
Protection Agency, No. 78-281 (D.D.C.) (entered on February   , 1978).
                             P-46

-------
                                  Penalt  Conditions


    1.  This permit is Issued on the bnsls of rules rnd  relations existing en  Ihc
        date oC issuance.  In the event addliia:wl  rules and  reflations are r.JoPctd.
        it shall be the pcrait holders responsibility  to r.onply vith such rules,.

    2.  This.permit is not transferable.   Upon sale er.lcc.nl  transfer,  the ncv owner
        or operator must apply for a pcrnic vichin  30  days.

    3.  This permit is tc be kept on file or on display  at  all tlv.cs at the facility
        where the permitted article, machine, pr equipricr.t  is used.  It is to be wade
        readily available for inspection by any and all  persons who ray request  to
        see it.

    4.  Nothing in this ponr.it or conditions thereto  shall  negate any authority granted
        to the Mobile County Board of Health; Division of Air Pollution Control  or Health
        Officer pursuant :o the Alabama Air Pollution  Control Act or regulations issued
        thereunder.
 5.  Additions end revisions to the conditions of this  rrrnit  vill be made ii  necessary to
     insure tltnl (he Mobile County Air Pollution Control  Rules and Regulations arc not
     violaled.

 6.  Additional cenitorJng, records and reporting My be  rocuired as Authorised by Fart 1.5
     of the Mobile County Alt i'ollutlon Control Rules nr.d Regulations.

 7.  The approved episode plan for particular natter,  sulfur  dioxide, nitrogen oxide and
     hydrocarbons is hereby eace * p.-.rt of and a condition to  this permit.

 8.  A ncu pcnalt cppllc.-.tion uyst bs e.-.de for new sources,  .as defined in Fart 1.3.2"  of
     the Mobile County Afr Pollution Control Rules and  Foliations, or for any roaJffcation
     of *» existing source, as modification Is defined  In Pare 1.3.?6 of said Rales and
     Reflation*.

 9.  The Health Officer or his authorized reprcscntniive  any enter &r.rt Inspect any f-opcrty.
     premises or place on or at which tn cir conC>JBlnant  source Is located cr is being  con-
     structed, installed or established at any ree&oi:.-.hlc lime for '.ho purpose cf .i-.sortan;-
     •ing the state of cc-.rli.-ntce with these rci-ular'.ons.   N'o person shall refuse entry  or
     access to the Health Cfiiccr or his authorized rcpicstnt.itivc who reqxtests entry lor
     purposes of inspection, and who presents apprcnrlr.ro crciloncinls; nor fhall any 7«ir=-jr.
     ebstnict, hamper or Interfere with any such inspection.  If requested, cho owner or
     Operator of the preai&etf shall receive a report setting Jorth .-,11 facts found v'.iiclt
     relate to coxpliance.sttf.tua.

10.  This source may not be oporitcd until a Teaporary  Pt-ratt  to Operate hits b-?on obtaJncd
     froa this office as spc.-ifled in Part 3.10 of the  Mobile  County Air Pollution CYatrol
     Kales and P.cr.ulctions.  T.ils request should be made,  in vritins at lo.ist 10 days F'.MoT
     to planned ctart-up.
                                          P-47

-------
 11.  Any change* or deviation fron the plans and specif icatlo is  r.uhnlttrd in the i'f»"l *«MSl"n
      frr llils remit ruse  be .improved by this Division LI'  sail changes or dsviaci.cn say cj'tr.u
      an increase in die  anounc of air concanin.incs cr.icr.cd.

 12.  The methods for report in* nainten.tnce or oalfunetloninc sf  equip-scnt rhall be in jcr.v-
      dancc vitli Part 1.12  of the Mobile County Air Politician CimtroL Rules and Ri*;juJ.-;tlcr..5.

 13.  In case of rhutdovn of. lir pollution control cqttfcnonc far  scheduled ealntrn.-incfl f;-r
      a period greater  th.in 4 hour?,  ihr intone Co shucOovrs sh-ill l»o reported to ihc 'Jivivin.i
      of Air Pollution  Control at least 24 hours prior to the planned shucJcvn.

 14.  In the event  there  is 'a breakdown of e^ulpnent *" "'ch a Winner .is Co cause c!io l:ier«.txr
      of omission of Mr  coremln.incr. for a period f.rpatcr  Chan 4 hours, the pcrsi-t r/^ronsli'U-
      for such oqnipaent  sfcill notify the Division of Air Pollution Concrol viihi". 2* 'inirs .IMC
      provide 9. sJntO'wnt jjK-lns ulJ  p«?rtli«o:i'. f-ictJ:, ancludirt^ tt'.a -luraeton -Jl t!i- hi p^I.da-.ii.
      The Division  of Air 1'ollution Concrol shall also bu contacted when riio br«-nk-jv<«'n has I 0.1-1
      corrected.

 IS.  During construction rha r^olicant rast take all prcrnuclcr.3 to Halt the snrunt of ?.u-
      Clculac-2 anctcr In  elf  nlr.  Tiicsr vill include, but  an: not Halted co. the •..-.'tci-i-.'. of
      all dirt rondii on a srh-»JuicJ b.ir.ls durlr.R any dry partods  and the «««c of the hrsr
                 In the burning of vr^ot.ition at thr plnnt  sice.   A burning pcmli r.u.Jt  he
               jir'or to any ooen burninr..
16.  The three total suspended patticulatc nonilorlng  sites vill rcxaln in oporatlon at
     their present locacio:i or at other locations approved by die Mantle County Hca'.rh
     Hepartrcnc.   The site dnta cust be collected on .in  every 6 days b.isis ,ini/:he roJ lec-
     tion anil analysis rust follov all approved cviidcllr.es.  A seal -annual rcjjor: o.f tlj-j"
     data will be required.

17.  After construction the relieving measures sust be tancn to assure the adequate con-
     trol of  fugitive dust caisslons:

     a.   The  application of wafer, or suitable chcr.lcals on e-atcrlal stockpiles or
          other surfaces which may create fugitive dust.

     b.   All  paved surf&cca shall be cleaned as necessary.

     e.   Paving of all utilized auto or truck traffic rands ?r areas.

     d.   Any  spillage clean up Is to be done vith a vacuum  type system or other
          appropriate cquipncnc as necessary.

     e.   The  removal frrn the plant  sice of all waste materials  in  a aanner Co
          prevent  fugitive euiir-sivns.

     f.   Adequate controls during any unloading cr loading  operations  to air.imlrc
          cplllagc and fugicivc emissions.

18.  I'articulate  ealsalons from the  conl dryer shall be subject  to  whichever ct the
                condition!: Is norc stringent:
     a.  'The participate caisnicn  rate shall not exceed 21.1 Ibs/hr; or

     b.  The pnrtlculntc caissicna shall  be United to 0.031 pr/dscf a.t
         In the U. S. Environmental Protection Armey's Standnrds c; Fcc'onuncc
         for Coal Preparation I'lants.

     In addition the .ipplicnnt  shill not  cnusc to be discharged Inro tl'C  atcosphrrc  fron
     the t her ixi 1 dryer', f.sses which exhibit 20 percent opacity or greater.
                                            P-48

-------
19.  The applicant shell 'not  cau.-.e  to  be dtscli_rr.c>I into  the nlr.:or.phere frcn ar.y  coal
     processing or convey lit*;  equip?.. >it,  coal stnraf.o syr.tcu, or co.il transfer  a:vJ *sr.d
     Ing systiie, &ascs which  exhibit 10.1 op.iciLy or p.rc.itcv and paniculate rxission
     limit r.rcater than  0.01  Rr/dscf.

     a.  The sulfur dioxide rate  froa  the- coal dryer shall  not exceed the were
         etritif.cnt of 60  Ibs/ton of co.il burned or ISO  Ibs/hr.  Vho applicant
         shall conduct tostliir.  In order  to tirasuic the  sulfur dioxicii: erMr::ic-u
         rate froa the coal dryer.   The  rone methods aiirt  procedure:; must In:
         approved by the  Mubllc County Health De?.ii txeut.
20.  With roj-.ard to  the  coal drver,  the applicant shall  continuously operate
     devices for Btc.isurocenc of the  i caper.-, it: ro nf cha ».as  ft roan at thn exit of  t'.-.f  coal
     dryer on a con: inuou.--  ha:: is;  alr.o. the menl tcrir.r. Hevi.-.es are Co bis rocal U'ralcd
     annually In accordance vlth procedures uiuiur 40 C"K 60.13(j)(J).


  21.  With regard LO thu raw allis  arid- kilns (anJ the cllnl.cr cooler if ulccrnacivi*  r.u-ner  1
       is utilized), they vill  ncet  a  partlcul.-itc emission  Halt of tSe norc st.'Jnpc.iC  oC  ^.1
       Ibs/hr or of 0.30 Ib/ton of food (dry b^sl.s) to kiln  *••. specified by ldu.il Ci >.c:ic !:•..
       its pci-r.lt application to the "obilc County Health Dr.p-i:tav.-.t.  Tlia 0..50 J«/i ,r.  of
       feed 1& equal to  the  U.  S. Er4vironr^ntcl Protection  Aj-.ensy'n Sr.ar.dard of Perf srrj.vic.-..
       In addition, the applicant shall not cause to b«  dlschiirced inco '.he .acuria^hrrc  thrr«|>
       the raw will stack, any  gases which exhibit sru.itcr  than 20 percent cpr.city.
       a.  The sulfur dloxiJe omission  rate frora the rav mill::,  kilns and clay
           (and clinker cooler if slcernatlvc- number 1 is utilized) ci>rour.h the ruv
           Mill stack shall i.ot exceed  iric norc s^rir.^cnt of  -SO  ]bs/tc;i of coal burvcc
           or 2,160 Ibs/hr.  Within  150 cays aiicr initial  oporatlon of the fas; ;-.?». . or
           90 days after tho facility is operating .1: full  ca.v-rj cy, rcstinr. vili br
           conducted on several occasions to determine che  sulfur  dior.idc enii-sicii r.-ro
           through the raw aill stack.   (Tiic test ucthods and prnccduron nsur.t be approved
           by the Mobile Cour.cy Health  Departr.cr.t.)  Tlie Dcpjrtr.cnc »?.y then make vra-
           sonablc reductions in tne above cnissio:i rate basc-i upon ch.? results oT tl:ij
           testing and the variations in such results aud the possibility of
           in the future; tha feasibility, cost and engineer Ing  aspects of
           with such rerluctiotu, if  any are proponc-d; and the process, fuel or rav
           aaterial changes necessary to cecply with such reductions, .if any arc pro-
           posed .

  22.  With regard to tha clinker cooler (if alternative number  2  is utilized), it "ill
       Beet a partlculat? c-nission limit of the n.->re stringent of  31 Ibs/hr or of 0.10
       Ib/ton of feed (dry basis) to kiln as specified by Ideal  Cco-rat in its pcrair.
       application 'co tha Mobile County Health D.:;-:irtne-it .  Th«  0.30 Ib/tcn of 5:-rJ i*
       equal to the U. S. Cnvircnscnta]  ?rotcctio:i Agency's St^ncsrJ of Pcrforn-T.ee  ' In
       addition, the applicant shall not cause to l>c discharged  into the atrxtsphsro i
       the clinker cooler any &zscs  which exhibit 10 percent  opacity, or greater.
  23.  With retard to the clay dryer,  it will coot a parrictilr.te emission licit of '.ha
       stringent of A. 30 ics/hr or  0.01 Rr/dscf as specified  by  Ideal Ccir.y EJ<^ =?provod  true ccthoiis and ::!i.ill not cause to t« aljrhirr.t.J
       to the atr.ocphcrc, f.nsv3 which euhlMt 102 opacity or  greater.
                                                P-49

-------
  25.  Due to  the  large nur.l-cr of point sources,  source test:: wilj  In* required er  sonrccr.
       Chat bslh KPA and Mai-i2e County iU-nlth  Pepartncnt L:\ cunrul.tc.icion wi.tii the a^i-i Jca.it
       fed arc representative of the fabric filters used at the plant.

  26.  The applicant cur.t sail 10 cite Mobile County Health Di'partccnc and EfA, juiililu  fli-r.
       vorkinp. d.iys  after sploctlon, and before  purchase, co;«i.'c of technical Jain i»ert::in»n.;
       Co the  selected control Ji-vicou IncluJ!.-;'.  fornal bid fvo-.i the vendor, cti.it .:n:crsl  i:l f:
       elcnry  or ccinsion r.it*». and all design pcr.inetcrs.  A Hat  oi any ac!ultfor:il  r.'ijtiv/e.4
       information vill lie sent to the .ippllc.tr.t  upon ivcolp- of tH:> sul'nltt.il.   Altnoui'.l- '
       Che type of control ili«-'lccfl which .ire desrrihocl in .'*.ci\(  rcv'r*.1 c'..t*
     final nalectcd device in order to verify the  col.isJon Hulls r-tatod in ti-.-i fs»vc '.li  rl:<»
     Msbilc. County Heal ih Pcparts.cnt applicant .-.hull rulait to tl'.f Mobile Ccnr.ty !:e.i.'.:l.
     Department a runrtcrly  status report bricily our.iJuius prepress  nr.de on c»;.ir.vcrlii.'j
     design and purchase  of  tujor pieces of equipment,  incluJing control equiin».:tii.

28.  The applicant i/ill bft requited to operate and o.->intnJr. continu'ju::  In-stJck op.ir.iry
     Bonitcrs on the rev  r:ill  stack (Emission Points "o.  -'«5 and /.G) and on t'w ciirki'r
     cooler stacha (Emission Points' Ko. 47 and 48) if"  altLiTsstivv Number 2 is i-tiitzL'd.
     TIic instrument and reporting fonnit aust be approved by die Mobile Couucy lu-.-it!i
     Dnpertaent..

29.  The total sulfur content  in the coal will be asccsured and a r.cnthly report ftf t!:e
     content will be requitd.   The method of analysis  for sulfur anci rcporr.'.v.g foi-ruc
     must be approved by  the Mobile County Health Department.

30.  Testing for partlculnte natter must ba conducted  on  Emission Points 45, ^5, 4/ &n-J
     48.   The test methods aisd procedures must be approved by the Mobile County rlcjltli
     Department .

31.  Test Ins for sulfur dioxide muse be conducted on Enissie-n Points  45 and 4'-.  T,ic  test
     ncthods and procedures  nusc be approved by the Mobile County Hoalth DooarCMn. .

32.  The applicant vill bo required to operate and naintaln continuous  tn-sspci: s-J»fvir.
     dioxide wonitors en  cho raw mill stack (raisslon  ."oints J.'o. 45 and 46).  This IIISLTU-
     nent and reporting fornat must be approved by the  Mobile County  Health Dcp;ir:iie:it.
                                              P-50

-------
ALABAMA HISTORICAL COMMISSION (PLANT SITE)

-------
W WARNER FLOYD
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
        STATE OF  ALABAMA

ALABAMA HISTORICAL COMMISSION

           726 MONROE STREET

      MONTGOMERY. ALABAMA 361O4

          August 29, 1977
TELEPHONE NUMBER
   832-6621
        Ms.  Marcia L. Ward
        Environmental Planner
        Environmental Science  and  Engineering,  Inc.
        P.  O.  Box 1354   University Station
        Gainesville, Florida   32604
                                      Re:   Proposed Cement Plant
                                           Theodore Industrial Park
                                           Monroe County
        Dear  Ms.  Ward:
             Based on  the  assessment conducted by Archaeologists Noel
        R.  Stowe  and Dan L.  Jenkins, the Alabama Historical Commission,
        state historic preservation office,  concludes that the cement
        plant site, Theodore Industrial Park,  Monroe County, will have
        no  adverse affect  on any cultural resources included in or
        eligible  for the National Register of  Historic Places.

                                      Sincerely,
                                      W.  Warner Floyd

        WWF/gcb

        xc:   Archaeologist Noel  R.  Stowe
        Milo B.  Howard,  Jr.      6/ "^
        State Historic Preservation Officer

-------
ALABAMA HISTORICAL COMMISSION (QUARRY SITE)

-------
w WARNER FLOYD
IXCCUTIVC Dime-Ton
        STATE OF ALABAMA

ALABAMA HISTORICAL COMMISSION

           729 MONROE STREET

      MONTGOMERY. ALABAMA 361O4

         April 19, 1978
TELEPHONE NUMBER
   832-6621
        Ms. Marcia L. Ward
        Environmental Planner
        Environmental Science and Engineering,  Inc.
        P. O. Box 13454
        Gainesville, Florida  32604
                                       Re:   Archaeological Investigations
                                            at the Ideal Basic Industries,
                                            Inc.,  Perdue Hill Quarry Site
                                            Monroe County
        Dear Ms. Ward:
             Based on the archaeological  investigations conducted by
        Archaeologist Noel R. Stowe, the  Alabama Historical Commission,
        state historic preservation office,  concurs in the development
        of Ideal Basic Industries, Inc. plant site at Perdue Hill.
        However, if during construction or mining activities artifacts
        are discovered please notify the  Commission immediately.

                                      Sincerely,
                                      W. Warner Floyd
        GCB
                                     P-53

-------
ALABAMA STATE DOCKS DEPARTMENT APPROVALS (PLANT SITE)

-------
                  "fit*
ALABAMA  STATE  DQCXS DEPARTMENT *"
                          March 15, 1978
                                                      or THE .TAT. or AUA.AMA
                                                            TWX810 741.7748
                                                               P.O.BOX 1988

                                                        MOBILOLABAMA 36601
      Ideal Basic Industries
      Cement Division
      P. O. Box 8789
      Denver, Colorado  80201

      Attention:  Mr. G. M. Lochhead, P. E.
                  Chief Engineer

      Gentlemen:

      You are hereby licensed to perform dredging, removing
      approximately 650,000 cubic yards of material, on the
      Theodore Industrial Canal, near Mobile, Mobile County,
      Alabama, in a manner and at the location as described
      in your application dated March 3, 1978, and the draw-
      ings attached thereto.

      This license merely concerns the public's rights of
      navigation and has no connection with property rights.

      This license is issued subject to the approval of the
      U. S. Corps of Engineers, and no work in connection
      with this project is to be performed prior to the
      issuance of a permit by the Corps of Engineers.

      Also, this license is issued subject to the approval
      of the Alabama Water Improvement Commission, Alabama
      Department of Conservation & Natural Resources, and
      Environmental Protection Agency.

      For the Director:
                                 W. H. Black, Jr.
                                 Chief Administrative
                                 Officer
  .  .% . cc;  Corps of Engineers
CEMMT
                               P-55

-------
ALABAMA  STATE S3&GKS
                                               *»
                                                      OF THC STATS OF ALABAMA
                                                            TWX 81O 741-7748

                                                               P.O.BOX isaa

                                                        MOBILE.ALABAMA 366O1
                          March 15, 1978
      Ideal Basic Industries
      Cement Division
      P. O. Box 8789
      Denver, Colorado  80201

      Attention:  Mr. G. M. Lochhead, P. E.
                  Chief Engineer

      Gentlemen:

      You are hereby licensed to construct access road bridge
      and railroad spur bridge, discharge outlet, discharge
      catchment area, and fill in wet land, in North Fork
      Deer River, near Mobile, Mobile County, Alabama, in a
      manner and at the location as described in your appli-
      cation dated March 3, 1978, and the drawings attached
      thereto.

      This license merely concerns the public's rights of
      navigation and has no connection with property rights.

      This license is issued subject to the approval of the
      U. S. Corps of Engineers, and no work in connection
      with this project is to be performed prior to the  •
      issuance of a permit by the Corps of Engineers.

      For the Director:
                                 W. H. Black, Jr.
                                 Chief Administrative
                                 Officer
  MAR §Si97§°rpS '°f

M CEMENT COMPANY
                                 P-56

-------
ALABAMA STATE DOCKS DEPARTMENT APPROVALS (QUARRY SITE)

-------
ALABAMA STATE  D'QGXS  E3EPARTZWENT AN AGENCY or TN« .TAT« or ALABAMA
                                                            TWX81O 741-7748

                                                               P.O.BOX 1588

                                                        MOBILE.ALABAMA 366O1


                         March 15,  1978
     Ideal Basic  Industries
     Cement: Division
     P. O. Box 8789
     Denver, Colorado   80201
     Attention;
     Gentlemen:
Mr. G. M. Lochhead,  P.  E.
Chief Engineer
     You are hereby  licensed to construct a dock facility
     on the Alabama  River,  near Perdue Hill, Monroe County,
     Alabama, in a manner  and at the location as described
     in your application dated March 3, 1978, and the draw-
     ings attached thereto.

     This license merely concerns the public's rights of
     navigation and  has no connection with property rights.

     This license is issued subject to the approval of the
     U. S. Corps of  Engineers,  and no work in connection
     with this project is  to be performed prior to the
     issuance of a permit  by the Corps of Engineers.

     For the Director:
                                 W.  H.  Black, Jr.
                                 Chief Administrative
                                 Officer
     WHB/mh
6NGINEER1NG DEPT.
     cc:  Corps of Engineers
  MAR 21 1978

    EMtNT COMPANY
                               P-57

-------
ALABAMA  STATE B&GXS
                                          AN *<*ENCY or THE STATE or ALABAMA
                                                       TWX 81O 741-7748

                                                          P.O.BOX 1588

                                                   MOBILE.Al.AaAM A 36SO1
                     March 15,  1973
 Ideal  Basic  Industries
 Cement Division
 P. O.  Box 8789
 Denver,  Colorado  80201
Attention:
Gentlemen;
                 Mr. G. M. Lochhead, P. E,
                 Chief Engineer
You  are hereby licensed to form clarification basins on
the  Alabama  River,  near Perdue Hill,  Monroe County,
Alabama,  in  a manner and at the location as described
in your application dated March 3,  1978,  and the draw-
ings attached thereto.

This license merely concerns the public's rights of
navigation and has  no connection with property rights.

This license is issued subject to the approval of the
U. S. Corps  of Engineers,  and no work in connection
with this project is to be performed prior to the
issuance  of  a permit by the Corps of Engineers.

For  the Director:
                            W.  H.  Black,  Jr.
                            Chief  Administrative
                            Officer
WHB/mh

cc:  Corps of Engineers
                           P-58

-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY

-------
                              BIBLIOGRAPHY
Alabama Air Pollution Control  Commission.   1976.   Emissions Data.
     Montgomery, Alabama.

Alabama Department of Conservation.   1976.  Personal  Communication.
     Montgomery, Alabama.

Alabama Department of Education.   1971.   Annual  Report.  Montgomery,
     Alabama.

Alabama Department of Education.   1974.   Annual  Report.  Montgomery,
     Alabama.

Alabama Department of Highways.  1970.   Average Dally Traffic  Counts.
     Montgomery, Alabama.

Alabama Department of Highways.  1976.   Average Dally Traffic  Counts.
     Montgomery, Alabama.

Alabama Department of Highways.  1977.   Average Dally Traffic  Counts.
     Montgomery, Alabama.

Alabama Department of Industrial  Relations.  Research and Statistics
     Division.  1976.  Unemployment  Trends.  Montgomery,  Alabama.

Alabama Department of Industrial  Relations. Division  of Employment
     Security.  1977.  Manpower Information for Affirmative Action
     Programs.  Montgomery, Alabama.

Alabama Department of Industrial  Relations.  Research and Statistics
     Division.  1977.  Basic Labor Market Information by  County.
     Montgomery, Alabama.

Alabama Department of Public Health.  1976.  Comprehensive Health
     Planning.  Montgomery, Alabama.

Alabama Department of Public Health.  Bureau of Environmental  Health.
     1977.  Files on Chemical  Analysis  of Water Samples for Municipal
     Wells.  Montgomery,  Alabama.

Alabama Development Office.  1976.  Alabama County Data Book.
     Montgomery, Alabama.

Alabama Division of Employment Security.  1976.   Components of Change  in
     Resident Employment, 1970-1976. Montgomery, Alabama.

Alabama Employment Service.  1970.  Wage and Salary Employment in  the
     Mobile Area.  Montgomery, Alabama.
                                B-l

-------
Alabama Employment Service.  1975.  Wage and Salary Employment 1n the
     Mobile Area.  Montgomery, Alabama.

Alabama Employment Service.  1977.  Wage and Salary Employment In the
     Mobile Area.  Montgomery, Alabama.

Alabama State Docks Department.  1977.  Personal  Communication.  Mobile,
     Alabama.

Alabama.  University of South Alabama, Mobile.  Archaeological Research
     Laboratory.  1977.  Archaeological-Historical  Survey of Ideal  Basic
     Industries Quarry Site.

Alabama Water Improvement Commission.  1976.  Water Quality Management
     Plan:  Mobile River Basin.  Montgomery, Alabama.

American  Industrial Hygiene Association.  1968.  Air Pollution Manual
     Part II:  Control Equipment.  Akron, Ohio.

Applied Science and Resource Planning, Inc.  1973.   Environmental Impact
     Study for Proposed New Cement Plant.  San Juan Bautista,
     California.

Associated Water and Air Resources Engineers, Inc.   1975.  Environmental
     Assessment Study for a New Pulp Mill in Alabama.  Prepared for
     Parsons and Whittemore, Inc., New York.  Nashville, Tennessee.

Associated Water and Air Resources Engineers, Inc.   1975.  Environmental
     Assessment Study for a New Pulp Mill in Alabama, Appendices:
     Volume I.  Prepared for Parsons and Whittemore, Inc., New York.
     Nashville, Tennessee.

Athens, W.  1977.  Personal Communication.  Area Resident, Mobile,
     Alabama.

Bateman (Robert S.) and Associates, Inc.  1976.  Housing Study:
     Monroeville, Alabama.  Mobile, Alabama.

Bauer, F.  1977.  Personal Communication.  Ideal  Basic Industries,  Inc.,
     Denver, Colorado.

Bellrose, F.C.  1976.  Ducks, Geese, and Swans of North America.  The
     Stackpole Company, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, and Wildlife
     Management Institute, Washington, D.C.

Bertelson, D.F.  1972.  Alabama Forest Industries.   Southern Forest
     Experiment Station, New Orleans, Louisiana.   Forest Resources
     Bulletin, SO-36

Beshears, W.W.  1974.  Wood Ducks in Alabama.  Alabama Department of
     Conservation and Natural Resources, Division of Game and Fish,
     Montgomery, Alabama.  Special Report No. 4.
                                 B-2

-------
Beshears, W.U., Jr.  and Haugen,  A.O.   1953.   Muskrats In  Relation  to
     Farm Ponds.  Journal  of Wildlife Management,  17:450-456.

Boone, W.E.  1977.  Personal  Communication.   Conservation Officer,  South
     Monroe County,  Alabama.

Boschung, H. (Editor).  1976.  Endangered and Threatened  Plants  and
     Animals of Alabama.  The Results of a Symposium Sponsored by  Game
     and Fish Division, Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural
     Resources and by Alabama Museum  of Natural  History.   The  University
     of Alabama, University,  Alabama.  Alabama Museum of  Natural History
     Bulletin No. 2.

Brandt, C.J. and Rhodes, R.W.  1972.   Effects of Limestone Dust
     Accumulation on Composition of a Forest Community.  Environmental
     Pollution, 3:217-225.

Brown & Root, Inc.  1977.   Personal  Communication  Concerning Construc-
     tion Schedule,  Manpower Requirements, Equipment Requirements,
     Quarry Facility Plan, Layout of Waterfront Development, and Noise
     Characteristics of Equipment.  Houston, Texas.

Brown & Root, Inc.  1977.   Personal  Communication.  Houston, Texas.
     (Maps).

Bullington, R.A.  1971.  The Stabilization of a Gully by  Natural Forest
     Stabilization.   Transactions of Illinois Academy of  Sciences,
     64:388-397.

Byford, J.L.  1970.   Movements and Ecology of White-Tailed Deer in  a
     Logged Floodplain Habitat.  M.S. Thesis, Auburn University, Auburn,
     Alabama.

Carlisle, A., Brown, A.H.F., and White, E.J.  1967.  The  Nutrient
     Content of Rainfall and Its Role in Forest Nutrient  Cycles.  Iji:
     International Union of Forestry Research Organizations, XIV,
     Congress II, 21:145-158.

Castelli, R.  1977.   Personal Communication Concerning Raw Material and
     Fuel Requirements, Raw Materials Storage Supply, Storage  Pile
     Characteristics, Quarry Site Development, and Expansion Possibili-
     ties.  Ideal Basic Industries, Inc., Denver,  Colorado.

Chapman, H.H.  1946.  The Effect of Overhead Shade on the Survival  of
     Loblolly Pine Seedlings.  Ecology, 26:274-282.

Cher-mock, R.L., Boone, P.A., and Lipp, R.L.  1974.  The Environment of
     Offshore and Estuarine Alabama.   Alabama Geological  Survey,
     University, Alabama.   Information Series No.  51.

Christmas, J. and Langley, W.  1973.   Estuarine Invertebrates,
     Mississippi.  .In:  Cooperative Gulf of Mexico Estuarine Inventory
     and Study, Mississippi, Phase IV:  Biology, pp. 255-320.
                                 B-3

-------
Clewell, A.F., Gainey, L.F., Jr.,  Harlos,  D.P.,  and  Tobi,  E.R.   1976.
     Biological Effects of Fill-Roads Across  Salt Marshes.  Florida
     Department of Transportation, Tallahassee,  Florida.

Community Development Consultants, Inc.   1976.   Development Management
     Plan for South Mobile County.  Prepared  for the South Alabama
     Regional Planning Commission, Mobile, Alabama.

Conant, R.  1975.  A Field Guide to Reptiles  of  Eastern  and Central
     North America.  Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, Massachusetts.

Co pel and, C.W.  1968.  Geology of the Alabama Coastal  Plain.   Alabama
     Geological Survey, University, Alabama.   Circular 47.

Cornaby, B.W., Gist, C.S., and Crossley,  D.A., Jr.  1975.  Resource
     Partitioning in Leaf-Litter Faunas  from  Hardwood and  Hardwood-
     Converted- to-Pi ne Forests.  In:  Mineral  Cycling in Southeastern
     Ecosystems.  F.G. Howell, J.B. Gentry, and  M.H. Smith, Editors.
     Technical Information Center, U.S.  Energy Research  and Development
     Administration.  ERDA Symposium Series,  CONF-740513.

Crance, J.H.  1971.  Description of Alabama Estuarine Areas—Cooperative
     Gulf of Mexico Estuarine Inventory.   Alabama Marine Resources
     Laboratory, Dauphin Island, Alabama.   Alabama Marine  Resources
     Bulletin, 6:1-85.

Darley, E.F.  1966.  Studies on the Effects of Cement Kiln Dust on
     Vegetation.  Journal of Air Pollution Control Association,
     16(3):145-150.

Davis, J.  1976.  Personal Communication Concerning Mail Survey for  Game
     Animals, 1975-76.  Alabama Department of Conservation, Jackson,
     Alabama.

Davis, J.  1977.  Personal Communication.   District Seven  Biologist,
     Alabama Department of Conservation,  Jackson, Alabama.

Day, J.  1973.  Community Structure and Carbon Budget of a Salt Marsh
     and Shallow Bay Estuarine System in Louisiana.  Center  for Wetland
     Resources, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

de la Cruz, A.A.  1973.  The Role of Tidal Marshes in the  Productivity
     of Coastal Waters.  Association of Southeastern Biologists
     Bulletin, 20:147-156.

Dunphy, L.M. and Chiang, S.  1974.  Economic  Analysis of the  Port of
     Mobile with Special Reference to Its Economic Impact Upon the
     Alabama Economy in 1973.  Department of  Economics,  University of
     South Alabama, Mobile, Alabama.
                                 B-4

-------
Dusi, J.L.  1976.  Mammals.  In:   Endangered and Threatened Plants and
     Animals of Alabama.  Thelesuits of a Symposium Sponsored by Game
     and Fish Division of the Alabama Department of Conservation and
     Natural Resources and Alabama Museum of Natural  History.
     H. Boschung, Editor.  Univerlsty of Alabama, University, Alabama.
     Alabama Museum of Natural History Bulletin No. 2:88-92.

Ehrhart, L.M.  1976.  A Study of a Diverse Coastal  Ecosystem on the
     Atlantic Coast of Florida.  Office of Graduate Studies and
     Research, Florida Technological  University, Orlando, Florida.

Environmental Consultants International.  1976.  Baseline Environmental
     Assessment of the Kerr-McGee Chemical Corporation's Facility at
     Theodore, Alabama.  Gulf Shores, Alabama.

Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc.  1975.   Final Environmental
     Report for the Proposed Dow Badische Company Facility at Calvert,
     Alabama.  Gainesville, Florida.

Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc.  1977.   Industrial Noise
     Study.  Gainesville, Florida.

Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc.  1977.   Output from Star
     Program, Mobile, Alabama, 1971-1975.  Gainesville, Florida.

Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc.  1977.   Present Land Use
     Study.  Gainesville, Florida.

Environmental'Science and Engineering, Inc.  1977.   Prevention of
     Significant Deterioration Application, Volumes I, II and III.
     Gainesville, Florida.

Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc.  1977.   Traffic Volume
     Study.  Gainesville, Florida.

Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc.  1977.   Water Quality Study.
     Gainesville, Florida.

Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc.  1978.  An Analysis of
     Environmental Considerations, Quarry Plan for the Gaillard Tract,
     Monroe County, Alabama.  Prepared for Ideal Basic Industries, Inc.,
     Denver, Colorado.  Gainesville, Florida.

Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc.  1978.   Raw Materials Stock-
     pile Leachate and Toxicity Studies:  Ideal Basic Industries Cement
     Plant.   Prepared for Ideal Basic Industries, Denver, Colorado.

Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc.  1978.   Settleability Study,
     Gainesville, Florida.
                                 B-5

-------
Environmental Science and Engineering,  Inc.   1978.   Water/Wastewater
     Engineering Report (Plant Site)  [for]  Ideal  Basic Industries  Cement
     Plant, Mobile, Alabama.   Gainesville,  Florida.

Environmental Science and Engineering,  Inc.   1978.   Water/Wastewater
     Engineering Report (Quarry Site)  [for]  Ideal  Basic Industries
     Cement Plant, Mobile, Alabama.   Gainesville,  Florida.

Ferguson (H.K.) Associates.  1975.   Engineering Report for  Theodore
     Plant and Gaillard Quarry, Phase II.   San Francisco, California.

Folk, R.  1974.  Petrology of Sedimentary  Rocks.   Hemphill  Publishing
     Company, Austin, Texas.

Gemborys, S.R. and Hodgkins,  E.J.  1971.   Forests of Small  Stream
     Bottoms in the Coastal Plain of Southwestern Alabama.   Ecology,
     52(l):70-84.

Golley, F.B.  1962.  Mammals  of Georgia.   University of Georgia Press,
     Athens, Georgia.

Gordon, C.G., Jt _al_.  1971.  Highway Noise—A Design Guide  for Highway
     Engineers.  Highway Research Board,  National  Cooperative Highway
     Research Program, Washington,  D.C.  Report 117.

Gosselink, J.G., Odum, E.P.,  and Pope,  R.M.   1974.  The Value of the
     Tidal Marsh.  Center for Wetland Resources, Louisiana  State
     University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana.   LSU-SG-74-03.

Gulf South Research Institute.  1974.  Social, Economic, and Environ-
     mental Effect Assessment Study for a Planned Federal  Navigation
     Project Theodore Ship Channel, Mobile Bay, Alabama.  Prepared for
     U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,  Mobile District, Mobile, Alabama.
     New Orleans, Louisiana.

Harper, J.  1977.  Personal Communication.  U.S. Soil Conservation
     Service, Monroeville, Alabama.

Hatchell, G.E. and Ralston, C.W.  1969.  Natural Recovery of Soils
     Disturbed by Logging.  Soil Science Society of America Proceedings,
     In:  Forest Soil Improvement Through Cultivation.  1970.  Journal
     oT Forestry, 68:328-331.

Heaney, J.P., Huber, W.C., Nix, S.J.  1976.  Storm Water Management
     Model, Level I:  Preliminary Screening Procedures.  U.S.
     Environmental Protection Agency, Municipal Environmental Research
     Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, Cincinnati, Ohio.
     EPA-600/2-2-76-275.

Hedound, A. and Earles, J.M.   1973.  Forest Statistics for Alabama
     Counties.  U.S. Forest Service Resources Bulletin, SO-39.
                                 B-6

-------
Henderson, G.S., Harris, W.F.,  Todd,  D.E., Jr., and Grizzard, T.   1977.
  •   Quantity and Chemistry of  Throughfall as Influenced by Forest-Type
     and Season.  Journal of Ecology, 65:365-374.

Herrin, D.  1977.  Personal Communication.  Mobile County Board of
     Health, Division of Air Pollution Control, Mobile, Alabama.

Hirth, H.F.  1959.  Small Mammals in  Old Field Succession.  Ecology,
     40:417-425.

Hodgkins, E.J.  1958.  Effects  of Fire on Undergrowth Vegetation  in
     Upland Southern Pine Forests.  Ecology, 39:36-46.

Holzworth, G.C.  1972.  Mixing  Heights, Wind Speeds, and Potential for
     Urban Air Pollution Throughout the Contiguous United States.  U.S.
     Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Programs, Research
     Triangle Park, North Carolina.  Publication AP-101.

Hosier, C.R.  1961.  Low-Level  Inversion Frequency in the Contiguous
     United States.  Monthly Weather  Review, 89.

Hyde, L.W.  1970.  Effects of Water and Soil on Drainage Structures  in
     Alabama, Phase I.  Alabama Geological Survey, University, Alabama.
     Bulletin 92-A.

Ideal Basic Industries, Inc. 1973.  Personal Communication.  Mobile,
     Alabama.

Ideal Basic Industries, Inc. 1975.  Personal Communication.  Denver,
     Colorado; Mobile, Alabama.

Ideal Basic Industries, Inc. 1977.  Personal Communication.  Denver,
     Colorado; Mobile, Alabama.

Imhof, T.A.  1976.  Alabama Birds.  The University of Alabama Press,
     University, Alabama.

Ivey, J.B.  1957.  Geology and  Ground Water in the Monroeville Area,
     Alabama.  Alabama Geological Survey, University, Alabama.
     Bulletin  66.

Johnson, D.A.  1972.  A Study in Ball Mill Noise Control.  For Presen-
     tation at the IEEE Cement  Industry Technical Conference, Detroit,
     Michigan.

Johnston, D.W. and Odum, E.P.  1956.   Breeding Bird Populations in
     Relation to Plant Succession on  the Piedmont of Georgia.  Ecology,
     37:50-62.

Johnston, U.R.  1947.  Breeding Birds of the Forest Edge in Illinois.
     Condor, 49:45-53.
                                 B-7

-------
Kathurla, D.V., Nawrockl, M.A., and Becker,  B.C.   1976.   Effectiveness
     of Surface Mine Sedimentation Ponds.  Hittman Associates,  Columbia,
     Maryland.  Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
     Office of Research and Development,  Cincinnati,  Ohio.
     EPA/600/2-76/117.

Keeler, J.E.  1976.  Birds.  In;  Endangered and  Threatened Plants  and
     Animals of Alabama.  The Results of  a Symposium  Sponsored  by the
     Game and Fish Division of the Alabama Department of Conservation
     and Natural Resourses and Alabama Museum of  Natural  History.
     H. Boschung, Editor.  University of  Alabama, University, Alabama.
     Alabama Museum of Natural History Bulletin No. 2:80-87.

Kerr,.A.W.  1977.  Personal Communication.  Chief, Hydrology and
     Hydraulics Branch, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Mobile District,
     Mobile, Alabama.

King.  1977.  Personal Communication.  Alabama Department of Industrial
     Relations, Division of Employment Security,  Montgomery, Alabama.

Kosky, K.F. and Wanielista, M.P.  1975.  Fugitive Particulate from
     Highway Construction.  Paper Presented  at the 1975 Air Pollution
     Control Association Annual Meeting.   Paper #75-36.3

Lowery, G.H.  1974.  Mammals of Louisiana and Its Adjacent Waters.
     Louisiana State University Press, Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

Lucas, J.D.  1977.  Personal Communication.   U.S. Army Corps of
    .Engineers, Mobile District, Mobile,  Alabama.
       F.X.  1957.  Nutria of the Mobile Delta.   Alabama Department of
     Conservation, Montgomery, Alabama.  Fur Resource Survey and
     investigation.

March, W.J. and Skeen, J.H.  1976.  Global  Radiation Beneath the Canopy
     and 1n a Clearing of a Suburban Forest.  Agricultural  Meteorology,
     16:321-327.

Marchington, R.L.  1968.  Telemetric Study  of White-Tailed Deer Movement
     Ecology and Ethology in the Southeast.  Ph.D.  Thesis, Auburn
     University, Auburn, Alabama.

Martin, A.C., Zim, H.S., and Nelson, A.L.  1951.   American Wildlife and
     Plants.  Dover Publications, Inc., New York.

McCormick, R.A. and Holzworth, G.C.  1976.   Air Pollution Climatology.
     JJK  Air Pollution, Volume 1:692-695.   Third Edition.  Academic
     Press, New York.
                                 B-8

-------
Mitchell, J.E.,  Waide,  J.B.,  and Todd,  R.L.   1975.   A Preliminary
     Compartment Model  of the Nitrogen  Cycle in a Deciduous Forest
     Ecosystem.   In:   Mineral Cycling in Southeastern Ecosystems.
     F.G. Howell, J.B.  Gentry, and M.H. Smith,  Editors.   Technical
     Information Center,  U.S. Energy Research and Development
     Administration.   ERDA Symposium Series, CONF-740513.

Mobile Area Chamber of Commerce.  Economic Development Department.
     1976.  Theodore Industrial  Area, Mobile, Alabama.  Mobile,
     Alabama.

Mobile Area Chamber of Commerce.  1977.  Mobile's Monthly Economic
     Indicators.  Mobile, Alabama.

Mobile (City) Board of Water and Sewer Commissioners.  1977.  Personal
     Communication.  Montgomery, Alabama.

Mobile (County)  Board of Health.  Division of Air Pollution Control.
     1977.  Personal  Communication.  Mobile, Alabama.

Mobile (County)  Board of School  Commissioners.   Division of Business
     Affairs.  1975.   A Plan for Reorganization of the Forestry
     Department, Mobile, Alabama.  Mobile, Alabama.

Mobile (County)  Highway Department.  1977.  Traffic Count at
     Intersection of Island and Rangeline Roads.  Mobile, Alabama.

Mobile (County)  School Board.  1977.  Statistics for School Year
     1976-77.  Mobile, Alabama.

Moehring, D.H.  1970.  Forest Soil Improvement Through Cultivation.
     Journal of Forestry, 68:343-347.

Monk, C.D., Child, G.I., and Nicholson, S.A.  1970.  Biomass, Litter,
     and Leaf Surface Area Estimates of an Oak Hickory Forest.  01kos,
     21:138-141.

Mount, R.H.  1975.  The Reptiles and Amphibians of Alabama.  Alabama
     Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn, Alabama.

Mount, R.H.  1976.  Endangered and Threatened Plants and Animals of
     Alabama.  The University of Alabama Press, University, Alabama.

Odum, E.P.  1971.  Fundamentals of Ecology.  Saunders, Philadelphia,
     Pennsylvania.
Odum, E.P.  and Fanning, M.E.  1973.  Comparison of the Productivity of
     Spartina alterniflora and Spartina cynosuroides in Georgia Coastal
     Marshes.  Bulletin Georgia Academy of Science, 31:1-12.
                                 B-9

-------
 Olson, J.S.   1971.   Primary Productivity:   Temperate  Forests,  Especially
      American Deciduous Types.   In:   Symposium  on  the Productivity  of
      Forest  Ecosystems.  Productivite1  des  Ecosystemes Forestiers,  pp.
      235-258.  Proceedings of the  Brussels  Symposium  Organized by UNESCO
      and the International Biological Programme (27-31 October 1969).
      P. Duvigneaud,  Editor.

 Omernick, J.M.   1976.   The Influence  of Land Use in Stream  Nutrient
      Levels.   U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency, Eutrophication
      Survey  Branch,  Corvallis Environmental Research  Laboratory,
      Corvallis,  Oregon.

 Oney, J.   1954.   Clapper Rail Survey  and Investigation Study,  Final
      Report.   Georgia  Game and  Fish Commission,  Atlanta,  Georgia.

 Palmer and Baker Engineers, Inc.   1975.  Site Investigation of Ideal
      Basic Industries, Inc.,  Gulf  Coast  Cement  Plant,  Gaillard Quarry
      Site, Mobile, Alabama.  Prepared for H.K.  Ferguson Company, San
      Francisco,  California.  Mobile,  Alabama.

 Pasquill,  F.   1961.  The Estimation of  Dispersion  from Windborne
      Material.   Meteorology Magazine, 90.

 Pautz,  M.E.   1969.   Severe Local Storm  Occurrences, 1955-1967.
      U.S.  Department of Commerce Technical  Memorandum  WBTM  FCST 12.

 Perry,  T.O.   1964.   Soil  Compaction and  Loblolly Pine  Growth.   U.S.
      Forest Service.   Tree Planter Notes, 69:9.

 Peterson,  A.P. and Gross,  E.E.  1974.   Handbook  of Noise  Measurement.
      General  Radio Company, Concord, Massachusetts.

 Pierce, L.B.  1966.  Surface  Water on Southwestern Alabama.  Alabama
      Geological  Survey,  University, Alabama.  Bulletin  84.

 Powledge,  H.  1975.  Personal Communication.  Ideal Basic Industries,
      Inc., Denver, Colorado.

 Powledge,  H.  1977.  Personal Communication Concerning  Proposed Plant
      Plot  Plan.   Ideal  Basic  Industries, Inc., Denver,  Colorado.

Quarterman, E. and Keever,  C.   1962.  Southern Mixed Hardwood  Forest:
      Climax in the Southeastern Coastal  Plain, U.S.A.    Ecological
     Monographs, 32:167-185.

Ramsey, J.S.  1976.  Freshwater Fishes.   In:  Endangered and Threatened
     Plants and Animals  of  Alabama.  The "Results of a Symposium
     Sponsored by Game  and  Fish Division of the Alabama Department of
     Conservation and Alabama Museum of Natural  History.  H. Boschung,
     Editor.   The University of Alabama, University, Alabama.   Alabama
     Museum of Natural History Bulletin No. 2:53-65.
                                B-10

-------
Reding, J.T., Muehlberg,  P.E.,  and Shepherd,  B.P.   1975.   Environmental
     Catalog of Industrial  Process:   The Cement Industry.   Prepared  for
     U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency,  Office  of Research  and
     Development, Washington,  D.C.  Dow Chemical,  Freeport, Texas.

Reed, P.C.  1972.  Geology  of  Mobile County,  Alabama.  Alabama
     Geological Survey,  University,  Alabama.   Map  93.

Reed, P.C. and McCain, J.F.  1972.  Water Availability in  Mobile County,
     Alabama.  Alabama Geological  Survey, University, Alabama.  Map  121.

Reichle, D.E.  1975.  Advances in  Ecosystem Analysis.  Bioscience,
     25:257-264.

Robinson, W.H., Powell,  W.J.,  and  Brown, E.  1956.  Water  Resources  of
     the Mobile Area, Alabama.  U.S. Geological Survey. Circular  373.

Robinson and Robbins.  1968.  Sources, Abundance,  and Fate of Gaseous
     Atmospheric Pollutants.  Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park,
     California.

Rosene, W.  1969.  The Bobwhite Quail:  Its Life and Management.
     Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, New Jersey.

Rue, L.L.,  III.  1973.  Game Birds of North America, pp. 446,  453.
     Harper and Row Publishers, Inc., New York.

Sanderson, G.C.  1977.  Management of Migratory Shore and Upland Game
     Birds in  North America.  International Association of Fish and
     Wildlife  Agencies, Washington, D.C.

Schomer, P.O.  and Homans, B.  1975.  Construction Noise:  Specification,
     Control,  Measurement, and Mitigation.  Construction Engineering
     Research  Laboratory, Champaign,  Illinois.  Technical  Report E-53.

Schwaner, T.D. and Mount, R.H.  1970.  Notes on the  Distribution,
     Habits, and Ecology of the Salamander, Phaeognathus hubrichiti
     Highton.  Copeia, (3):571-573.

Scott, J.C.  1972.  Geology of Monroe County, Alabama.  Alabama
     Geological  Survey, Univeristy, Alabama.  Map 101.

Shipp, R.L. and  Hemphill, A.F.  1974.  Effects of Bypass Canals on Fish
     Populations of the Lower Alabama River, Volume  VIII, Appendix E.
     ^n:  First  Supplemental Environmental Report, Continuing Environ-
     mental Studies,  Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway, Alabama and
     Mississippi.  U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Mobile District,
     Mobile, Alabama.

Simpson, R.H.  and Lawrence, M.B.  1971.  Hurricane Frequencies  Along  the
     U.S. Coastline.  Fort Worth, Texas.   NOAA Technical Memorandum
     NWS SR-58.
                                 B-ll

-------
Sittig, M.  1975.  Pollution Control  in the Asbestos, Cement, Glass, an-
     Allied Mineral Industries.  Noyes Data Corporation,  Park Ridge, Ne\
     Jersey.

Smith-Vaniz, W.F.  1968.  Freshwater Fishes of Alabama.   Auburn
     University, Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn, Alabama.

Snowden, W.  1977.  Personal Communication.  Alabama-Tombigbee Regional
     Commission, Camden, Alabama.

South Alabama Regional Planning Commission (SARPC).  1968.  Environ-
     mental, Geologic, and Hydrologic Study of South Mobile.  Mobile,
     Alabama.

South Alabama Regional Planning Commission (SARPC).  1974.  Regional
     Surface Drainage Study, Mobile County, Phase I.  Mobile, Alabama.

South Alabama Regional Planning Commission (SARPC).  1975.  The Economy
     and Population of the South Alabama Region.  Mobile, Alabama.

South Alabama Regional Planning Commission (SARPC).  1975.  Regional
     Facilities Plan.  Mobile, Alabama.

South Alabama Regional Planning Commission (SARPC).  1976.  Theodore
     Ship Channel Assessment.  Mobile, Alabama.

South Alabama Regional Planning Commission (SARPC).  1977.  Draft
     Summary Number One, Goals and Objectives, Soci©economic Analysis.
     Mobile, Alabama.

South Alabama Regional Planning Commission (SARPC).  1977.  Mobile
     County Population Projections.  Mobile, Alabama.

South Alabama Regional Planning Commission (SARPC).  1977.  Mobile 208
     Preliminary Sampling Program Results.  Mobile, Alabama.

South Alabama Regional Planning Commission (SARPC).  1977.  Personal
     Communication Concerning Traffic Forecasts.  Mobile, Alabama.

Speak, D.W., Lynch, T.E., Fleming, W.J.,'Wright, G.A., and Hamrick, W.I.
     1975.  Habitat Use and Seasonal  Movements ,of Wild Turkey.  In:
     Proceedings of the Third National Wild Turkey Symposium, pp.
     122-129.  Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, Austin, Texas.

Sprunt, A.S., Jr.  1954.  Florida Bird Life, with Addendum.  1963.
     Coward-McCann, New York.

Stienmier, R.L.  1974.  Development Drilling Gaillard Tract, Alabama.
     Ideal Basic Industries, Inc., Exploration Section,  Fort Collins,
     Colorado.
                                B-12

-------
Swingle,  H.   1971.   Biology  of Alabama  Estuarine  Areas—Cooperative Gulf
     of Mexico Estuarine  Inventory.   Alabama  Marine  Resources  Labora-
     tory, Dauphin  Island, Alabama.   Alabama  Marine  Resources  Bulletin,
     5:1-123.

Swingle,  H.A. and Bland,  D.G.   1974.  A Study of  the Fishes of the
     Coastal  Watercourses of Alabama.  Alabama Marine Resources Labora-
     tory, Dauphin  Island, Alabama.   Alabama  Marine  Resources  Bulletin
     10:17-102.

Swingle,  H.A., Keller, J.A., and Allen, R.H.   1975.   Fishes, Birds, and
     Mammals of the Coastal  Area of  Alabama.   Alabama Department of
     Conservation and Natural  Resources, Montgomery, Alabama.

Sykes, J.M. and Bunce, R.G.H.   1970.  Fluctuations in Litterfall  in a
     Mixed Deciduous Woodland Over a Three-Year Period, 1966-68.  Oikos,
     21:326-329.

Tanner, W.F., Brett, C.E., Ryan, J.,  and Stopor,  F.   (n.d.)  Mobile Bay
     Estuarine System—Case  Study,  In:  Case Studies of Estuarine
     Sedimentation and Its Relation  to  Pollution of the Estuarine
     Environment, pp. C-l to C-46.  Gulf Universities Research
     Consortium, Houston, Texas.

Thomason, J.  1973.  Personal  Communication Concerning Limestone Supply.
     Ideal Basic Industries, Inc., Mobile, Alabama.

Thomason, J.- 1974.  Personal  Communication Concerning Site Evaluation.
     Ideal Basic Industries, Inc., Mobile, Alabama.

Thomason, J.  1976.  Personal Communication Concerning Environmental
     Evaluation of Theodore vs. Gaillard Sites.  Ideal Basic Industries,
     Inc., Mobile, Alabama.

Todd,  R.L.,  Waide, J.B., and Cornaby, B.W.  1975. "Significance of
     Biological Nitrogen Fixation and Denitrification in a Deciduous
     Forest  Ecosystem.  _In:   Mineral Cycling  in Southeastern Ecosystems.
     F.G. Howell, J.B. Gentry, and M.H. Smith, Editors.  Technical
     Information Center, U.S. Energy Research and Development  Adminis-
     tration. ERDA Symposium Series, CONF-740513.

Uhlig, H.G.   1956.  The Gray Squirrel:  Its Life History,  Ecology, and
     Population Characteristics in West Virginia.   Final Report of West
     Virginia Conservation  Commission, Pittman-Robertson Project.

U.S.C. Incorporated, Consulting Engineers.   1974.   Predicted Noise Level
     Study.   Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.  _In:   Final  Environmental
     Statement:  Theodore Ship Channel and Barge Channel Extension
     Mobile  Bay, Alabama.   1977.  U.S. Army  Corps of Engineers, Mobile
     District, Mobile, Alabama.
                                 B-13

-------
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.  Mobile District.   1974.   An  Ecological
     Study of the Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway.   _In:  First Supplemental
     Environmental Report Continuing Environmental  Studies  Tennessee-
     Tombigbee Waterway, Alabama and Mississippi, Volume Y, Appendix B.
     Mobile, Alabama.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.  Lower Mississippi  Valley Division.   1975.
     Waterborne Commerce of the United States,  Part 2:   Waterways  and
     Harbors Gulf Coast Mississippi  River System  and Antilles.
     Vicksburg, Mississippi.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.  Mobile District.   1975.   Project Maps.
     Mobile, Alabama.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.  South Atlantic  Division.  1975.   Water
     Resources Development by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers  in
     Alabama.  Atlanta, Georgia.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.  Mobile .District.   1977.  Final  Environ-
     mental Impact Statement:  Theodore Ship Channel  and Barge  Channel
     Extension Mobile Bay, Alabama.   Mobile, Alabama.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.  Mobile District.   1977.   Waterway Traffic
     Reports.  Mobile, Alabama.

U.S. Bureau of the Census.  1961.  1960 Census of Population:   General
     Social and Economic Characteristics, Alabama.  U.S. Department of
     Commerce, Washington, D.C.  PC(1)-2C Alabama.

U.S. Bureau of the Census.  1971.  Current Population Reports:
     Components of Population Change by County:   1960 to 1970.   U.S.
     Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C.   Series P-25, Mo. 461.

U.S. Bureau of the Census.  1971.  1970 Census of Housing:   General
     Housing Characteristics, Alabama.  U.S. Department of Commerce,
     Washington,  D.C.  HC(1)-A2 Alabama.

U.S. Bureau of the Census.  1971.  1970 Census of Population:   Number  of
     Inhabitants, Alabama.  U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington,
     D.C.  PC(1)-A2 Alabama.

U.S. Bureau of the Census.  1972.  1970 Census of Population:   General
     Social and Economic Characteristics, Alabama.  U.S. Department of
     Commerce, Washington, D.C.  PC(1)-C2 Alabama.

U.S. Bureau of the Census.  1972.  1970 Census of Population and
     Housing:  Census Tracts, Mobile, Alabama.  U.S. Department of
     Commerce, Washington, D.C.  PHC(1)-133.

U.S. Bureau of the Census.  1973.  1969 Census of Agriculture:
     Characteristics of Agriculture in Mobile County [Alabama].  U.S.
     Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C.
                                 B-14

-------
U.S. Bureau of the Census.   1975.   Current Population  Reports:
     Components of Population Change by  County:   1960  to 1970.   U.S.
     Department of Commerce,  Washington, D.C.  Series  P-25.

U.S. Bureau of the Census.   1976.   Current Population  Reports:
     Estimates of the Population  of Alabama Counties and Metropolitan
     Areas:  July 1, 1974 and 1975.  U.S.  Department of Commerce,
     Washington, D.C.  Series P-26, No.  75-1.

U.S. Bureau of the Census.   1977.   Current Population  Reports:
     Estimates of the Population  of Alabama Counties and Metropolitan
     Areas:  July 1, 1975 (Revised) and  1976 (Provisional).   U.S.
     Department of Commerce,  Washington, D.C.  Series  P-26,  No.  76-1.

U.S. Bureau of the Census.   1977.   1974  Census of Agriculture:
     Characteristics of Agriculture In Mobile  County [Alabama].   U.S.
     Department of Commerce,  Washington, D.C.

U.S. Department of Agriculture.  Economic Research Services.  1975.
     1972 OBERS Projections:   Economic Activity  in the United States,
     Series E, Population Supplement—Agricultural Projections,
     Volumes 1, 3, and 4.  Prepared for the U.S. Water Resources
     Council.  Washington, D.C.

U.S. Environmental Data Service.   1973.   Earthquake History of the
     United States.  Boulder, Colorado.   Publication No. 41-1.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  Air Pollution Control Office.
     1971.  Air Quality Criteria  for Nitrogen  Oxides.   Washington, D.C.
     Publication No. AP-84.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  Office  of Noise Abatement and
     Control.  1971.  Effects of Noise on Wildlife and Other Animals.
     Prepared by Tennessee State  University, Memphis,  Tennessee.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  Office  of Noise Abatement and
     Control.  1974.  Information on Levels of Environmental Noise
     Requisite to Protect Public  Health and Welfare with an Adequate
     Margin of Safety.  EPA-550/9-74-004.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  Office of Air Quality Planning
     and Standards.  1975.  Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission
     Factors.  Second Edition.  Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
     Publication No. AP-42.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   1976.  Quality Criteria  for
     Water.  Washington, D.C.  EPA-440/9-76-023.

U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency.   1977.  Preparation of Environ-
     mental  Impact  Statements:  New Source NPDES  Permits.   U.S. Code of
     Federal Regulations, Title 40, Chapter 1, Part 6,  Subpart  1,
     pp. 117-136.
                                 B-15

-------
U.S. Federal Highway Administration.   1973.   Noise Standards and
     Procedures.  U.S. Department of  Transportation,  Washington,  D.C.
     Federal Highway Administration Policy  and Procedure
     Memorandum 90-2.

U.S. Federal Water Pollution Control  Administration.   Southeast Water
     Laboratory.  1970.  Effects of Pollution on  Water Quality.  Athens,
     Georgia.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.   1975.   Final  Environmental  Statement
     for the Issuance of Annual  Regulations Permitting the Sport  Hunting
     of Migratory Birds.  U.S. Department of the  Interior, Washington,
     D.C.  FES 75-54.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.   1977.   Endangered and Threatened
     Wildlife and Plants:  Reelassification of American Alligator to
     Threatened Status in Certain Parts of  Its Range.  Federal  Register,
     42(6):2071-2077.

U.S. Forest Service.  1971.  Wildlife Habitat Management Handbook.
     Atlanta, Georgia.  Forest Service  Handbook 2609.23R.

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS).  1943.  Area Hood Prone Map for Choc taw
     Bluff, Alabama.  (15-Minute Series Topographic Quadrangle).

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS).  1970  (Revised).  Andelusla, Alabama.
     First Published in 1953.  (National Topographic  Map 1:250,000 Scale
     Series).

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS).  1967  (Photorevlsed).   Area Flood  Prone
     Map for Chickasaw, Alabama.  First Published in  1953.  (7.5  Minute
     Series Topographic Quadrangle).

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS).  1967  (Photorevised).   Area Hood  Prone
     Maps for Mobile, Alabama.  First Published in 1953.  (7.5 Minute
     Series Topographic Quadrangle).

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS).  1974; 1976  (Photorevised).  Chickasaw,
     Alabama.  (7.5 Minute Series Topographic Quadrangle).

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS).  1974; 1967  (Photorevised)., KuihTa,
     Alabama. First published in 1953.   (7.5 Minute Series Topographic
     Quadrangle).

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS).  1974; 1967  (Photorevised).  Mobile,
     Alabama.  First Published 1n 1953.  (7.5 Minute  Series Topograplc
     Quadrangle).

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS).  1974; 1967  (Photorevised).  Spring Hill,
     Alabama.  First Published 1n 1953.  (7.5 Minute  Series Topographic
     Quadrangle).
                                B-16

-------
U.S. Geological  Survey (USGS).  1974;  1967 (Photorevised).   Theodore,
     Alabama. First Published 1n 1953.   (7.5 Minute Series  Topographic
     Quadrangle).

U.S. Geological  Survey (USGS).  1974 (Photorevised).  Bellefontaine,
     Alabama.  First Published In 1956.   (7.5 Minute Series Topographic
     Quadrangle).

U.S. Geological  Survey (USGS).  1974 (Photorevised).  Coden, Alabama.
     First Published in 1956.  (7.5 Minute Series Topographic
     Quadrangle).

U.S. Geological  Survey (USGS).  1969.   Analysis of the City of Mobile
     Water Supply.

U.S. Geological  Survey (USGS).  1970.   Area Flood Prone Map for Bay
     Ninette, Alabama.  (15-Minute Series Topographic Quagrangle).

U.S. Geological  Survey (USGS).  1970.   Area Flood Prone Map for Tensaw,
     Alabama (15-Minute Series Topographic Quadrangle).

U.S. Geological  Survey (USGS).  1972.   Area Flood Prone Map for Flynn's
     Lake, Alabama.  (7.5 Minute Series Topographic Quadrangle).

U.S. Geological  Survey (USGS).  1972.   Area Rood Prone Map for
     Gainestown, Alabama.  (7.5 Minute  Series Topographic  Quadrangle).

U.S. Geological' Survey (USGS).  1972.   Area Flood Prone Map for Uriah,
     Alabama. (7.5 Minute Series Topographic Quadrangle).

U.S. Geological  Survey (USGS).  1974.   Water Resources Data for Alabama
     Water Year 1974, Part I:  Surface  Water Records.  University,
     Alabama.

U.S. Geological  Survey (USGS).  1975.   Area Flood Prone Map for Fresco
     City, Alabama.  (7.5 Minute Series Topographic Quadrangle).

U.S. Geological  Survey (USGS).  1975.   Water Resources Data for Alabama
     Water Year 1975.  University, Alabama.  U.S. Geological Survey
     Water Data Report AL-75-1.

U.S. Geological  Survey (USGS).  1977.   Water Resources Data for Alabama
     Water Year 1976.  University, Alabama.  U.S. Geological Survey
     Water Data Report AL-76-1.

U.S. Laws, Statutes, etc.  National Environmental Policy Act.
     42 U.S.C. 4341; Amended by PL-94-52, July 3, 1975; PL-98-83,
     August 9, 1975.  In:  Environmental  Reporter, Federal  Laws,
     pp. 71:0101-71:0103.

U.S. Laws, Statutes, etc.  Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of
     1976.  PL-94-580.  In:  Environment Reporter, Federal  Laws,
     pp. 71:3101-71:31167"
                                B-17

-------
U.S. National Climatic Center.  1970.  Monthly Normals of Temperature,
     Precipitation, and Heating and Cooling Degree Days, 1941-1970, for
     Alabama.  U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
     Environmental Data Service, Asheville, North Carolina. Climatog-
     raphy of the United States No. 81.

U.S. National Climatic Center.  1971-1975.  Daily Mixing Heights for
     Burrwood, Louisiana.  Asheville, North Carolina.

U.S. National Climatic Center.  1976.  Annual Local Climatological  Data
     for Mobile, Alabama, 1941-1970.  U.S. National Oceanic and Atmo-
     spheric Administration, Environmental Data Service, Asheville,
     North Carolina.

U.S. National Climatic Center.  1976.  Annual Summary of Climatological
     Data for Alabama.  U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminis-
     tration, Environmental Data Service, Asheville, North Carolina.

U.S. National Emissions Data System.  1976.  NEDS Data for Mobile
     County, Alabama.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
     Air and Hazardous Materials Division, Atlanta, Georgia.

U.S. Public Health Service.  National Air Pollution Control Adminis-
     tration.  1969.  Air Quality Criteria for Sulfur Oxides.
     Washington, D.C..  NAPCA Publication No. AP-50.

U.S. Soil Conservation Service.  1973.  Rainfall  Frequency Atlas:
     Alabama, Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina, for Durations from
     30 Minutes to 24 Hours and Return Periods from 1 to 100 Years.
     Gainesville, Florida.

U.S. Soil Conservation Service.  1974.  Conservation Plan—Howard
     MeWilliams.  Monroe County, Alabama.

Valentine, B.D.  1963.  The Plethodontid Salamander Phaeognathus:
     Collecting Techniques and Habits.  Journal of Ohio Herpitological
     Society, 4(l-2):49-54.

Vitousek, P.M. and Reiners, W.A.  1975.  Ecosystem Succession and
     Nutrient Retention:  A Hypothesis.  Bioscience, 25:376-381.

Ward, G.H. and Espey, W.H.  1971.  Estuarine Modeling:  An Assessment,
     pp. 55-56.  Tracor, Inc., Austin, Texas.

Wells, C., Whigham, D., and Lieth, H.  1972.  Investigation of Mineral
     Nutrient Cycling in Upland Piedmont Forest.   Journal Elisha
     Mitchell Science Society, 88:66-78.

Wharton, C.H., Odum, H.T., Ewel, K., Duever, M.,  Lugo, A., Boyt, R.,
     Bartholomew, J., DeBellevue, E., Brown, S.,  Brown, M., Duever, L.
     1976.  Forested Wetlands of Florida—Their Management and Use.
     Unpublished Manuscript, Center for Wetlands, University of Florida,
     Gainesville, Florida.
                                B-18

-------
Willis, R.  1975.  A Technique for Estimating Potential  Wildlife
     Populations Through Habitat Evaluations.  Kentucky  Department of
     Fish and Wildlife Resources.  Plttman-Robertson Game Management
     Technical Series No. 23.

Yount, D.J.  1975.  Forest Floor Nutrient Dynamics in Southern
     Appalachian Hardwood and White-Pine Plantation Ecosystems,  ^n:
     Mineral Cycling in Southeastern Ecosystems.  F.G. Howell,
     J.B. Gentry, and M.H. Smith,  Editors.  Technical Information
     Center, U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration.  ERDA
     Symposium Series, CONF-740513.
                                B-19

-------