United States      Region 4       EPA 904/9-78-012
          Environmental Protection  345 Courtland Street, NE  JULY 1978
          Agency        Atlanta, GA 30308
&EPA     Environmental        nD. PT
          Impact Statement     MArl

          Occidental Chemical Company
          Swift Creek Chemical Complex
          Hamilton County, Florida

          Summary Document

-------
      UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

                           REGION IV

                       345 COURTLAND STREET
                       ATLANTA. GEORGIA 30308
                        July 14, 1978
TO:  ALL INTERESTED GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES, PUBLIC GROUPS
     AND CONCERNED INDIVIDUALS

     The Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the
Occidental Chemical Company Swift Creek Chemical Complex is
enclosed for your review and comment.  This document has been
prepared pursuant to Section 102 (2) (c) of the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (Public Law 91-190).  A four
volume Resource Document has also been prepared.  These
documents comprise EPA's detailed evaluation of the proposed
action and contain supporting data related to the DEIS.  While
the DEIS is a stand alone document, the Resource Document has
been referenced in some instances to reduce the volume and
make the DEIS more readable.  The Resource Document may be
reviewed at the following locations:

     Columbia County Public Library, Lake City, FL
     Columbia County Planning Department, Lake City, FL
     Suwannee River Regional Library, Live Oak, FL
     Suwannee River Regional Library, Jasper, FL
     Suwannee River Regional Library, Branford, FL
     Suwannee River Water Management District, White Springs, FL
     Occidental Chemical Company, White Springs, FL
     University of Florida Library, Gainesville, FL
     North Central Florida Regional Planning Council, Gainesville, FL
     Leon County Public Library, 1940 N. Monroe, Tallahassee, FL
     Main Library, 122 N. Ocean, Jacksonville, FL

     A public hearing will be held to discuss this project on
Monday, August 21, 1978 at 7:00 p.m. in the Administration
Building Auditorium, Stephen Foster Center, White Springs,
Florida.

     Persons wishing to make comments should attend and speak
at this hearing.  A verbatum transcript will be made of this
public hearing.  For the accuracy of the record, lengthy or
technically complex statements should also be submitted in
writing to:

-------
                             -2-
                John E.  Hagan III
                Chief,  EIS Branch
                Environmental Protection Agency
                Region  IV
                345 Courtland Street,  N.E.
                Atlanta,  Georgia  30308

     The hearing record  will remain open and additional
written comments may be  submitted until August 31, 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 NPDES 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

     Please bring this  notice to the attention of all persons
who may be interested in  this matter.

                               Sincerely,
                                 HN C.  WHITE
                               Regional Administrator
Enclosure

-------
             NOTICE OF JOINT PUBLIC HEARING

          U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
          Region IV, Water Enforcement Branch
                  345 Courtland Street
                Atlanta, Georgia  30308
                     404/881-2328

                   in conjunction with

     Florida Department of Environmental Regulation
               Twin Towers Office Building
                  2600 Blair Stone Road
               Tallahassee, Florida  32301
                      904/488-4807

Public Notice No. PH78FL0053                   July 21, 1978

NOTICE OF PUBLIC INFORMATION HEARING ON DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT STATEMENT,  NOTICE OF PROPOSED ISSUANCE OF NATIONAL
POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMIT, AND NOTICE
OF CONSIDERATION FOR STATE CERTIFICATION
     The United States Environmental Protection Agency
proposes to issue a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permit to Occidental Chemical Company, Post
Office Box 300, White Springs, Florida 32096 for its new
Swift Creek Chemical Complex and existing Swift Creek Mine,
located in Hamilton County, Florida, NPDES number FL0036226.
During periods of normal operation, the applicant has pro-
posed two discharges from the phosphate fertilizer complex
and the associated phosphate mine  (SIC 2874 $ 2819).
Discharges 001-5 and 001-18 will discharge into Swift Creek.
When the section 10 settling lake  is not usable, the applicant
proposes to have five discharge points:  001-5, 001-5A,
001-ISA, 001-22 and 001-28; all discharging to Swift Creek, a
class III water.  The Florida Department of Environmental
Regulation is currently evaluating the draft permit.

-------
                           -2-
     The proposed NPDES permit contains limitations on the
amounts of pollutants allowed to he discharged and was
drafted in accordance with the provisions of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act, as amended (P0L0 92-500), and
other lawful standards and regulations.  The pollutant
limitations and other permit conditions are tentative and
open to comment from the public.

     The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region IV,
has prepared a draft environmental impact statement (EIS)
on the proposed Swift Creek Chemical Complex.  The draft EIS
will be made available to the EPA Office of Federal Activities
and to the public on July 14, 1978.  The Regional Admini-
strator of EPA has determined that a public hearing will be
held to foster public participation on the proposed issuance
of the NPDES permit.  The public hearing is scheduled for
Monday,  August 21, 1978, and will begin at 7:00 p.m.  in the
Administration Building Auditorium at the Stephen Foster Center
in White Springs,  Florida.  The public hearing will be
co-chaired by the EPA and the Florida DER.

     Both oral and written comments will be accepted and a
transcript of the proceedings 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 statements.

     A fact sheet which outlines the applicant's proposed
discharges and EPA's proposed pollutant limitations and con-
ditions  is available by writing the EPA.  A copy of the draft
permit is appended to the draft EIS summary document and is
also available from the EPA,  Region IV office.   The permit
application,  supporting datas draft environmental impact
statement,  comments received and other information are avail-
able for review and copying at 345 Courtland 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 Florida Department of Environmental Regulation has
been requested to certify the discharge in accordance with the
provisions of Section 401 of the Federal Water Pollution
Control  Act,  as amended (P«L0 92-500).  Persons wishing to
comment  on the state certification of this  discharge 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.

-------
     Persons wishing to comment upon or object  to the project,
the NPDES permit issuance, the proposed permit  limitations  and
conditions and/or the draft EIS axe invited to  respond  in
writing by August 31, 1978 to the Enforcement Division, U.  S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 345 Courtland  Street,  N.E.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30308, Attn:  !>!s .  Mona Ellison.  The NPDES
number  (FL0036266) should be included in the first page of
comments.  All comments received by August 31,  1978 will be
considered in the formulation of final determinations regarding
the final EIS and the NPDES permit issuance and permit  conditions
Response to all substantive comments made at this public infor-
mation hearing will be published in the final EIS.  Requests  for
adjudicatory hearings on the NPDES permit may be filed  after  the
Regional Administrator makes the above described determinations.
Additional information regarding an adjudicatory hearing is
available in the July 24, 1974, Federal Register, 39, page  27081
or by contacting the Legal Support Branch, Enforcement  Division,
at the address above or at 404/881-3506.

     Copies of the draft EIS which include the  draft NPDES
permits and the four volume Resource Document are also  available
for review at the following libraries.

     Columbia County Public Library, Lake City, FL
     Columbia County Planning Department, Lake  City, FL
     Suwannee River Regional Library, Live Oak, FL
     Suwannee River Regional Library, Jasper, FL
     Suwannee River Regional Library, Branford, FL
     Suwannee River Water Management District,
        White Springs,  FL
     Occidental Chemical Company, White Springs, FL
     Univ of FL Library, Document Dept, Gainesville, FL
     North Central Florida Regional Planning Council
        Gainesvilie, FL
     Leon County Public Library, 1940 N. Monroe
        Tallahassee, FL
     Main Library, 122  N. Ocean, Jacksonville,  FL

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

-------
tfA
^o4'
v              He>c^y «           - -11 Libraries
                         "                          EPA  904/9-78-012
                     !£'            -   ,JW          NPDES  Application Number;
                                   "   f,4            FL0036226
                                     DRAFT
                        ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT  STATEMENT
                                      for
                   Proposed Issuance of a  New  Source National
                 Pollutant Discharge Elimination  System Permit

                         Occidental Chemical  Company
                         Swift Creek  Chemical Complex
                           Hamilton County, Florida
                     U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency
                                   Region IV
                            345  Courtland Street,  NE
                            Atlanta,  Georgia  30308
                                   Approved
                  d.
                                                          July 1978
         gional Administrator                         Date

-------
                    Summary Sheet For Environmental




                            Impact Statement




                     Swift Creek Chemical Complex




                     Occidental Chemical Company






(X)  Draft




( )  Final




         U.  S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IV




                    345 Courtland Street N.E.




                     Atlanta, Georgia 30308






1.  Type of Action:  Administrative (X)  Legislative ( )




2.  Description of Action: Accidental Chemical Company is proposing to




increase the superphosphoric acid capacity of its north Florida phos-




phate fertilizer manufacturing complex.\ Increased capacity will be




provided by a two phased expansion:  Phase I involves modification of




the existing Sovannee River Chemical Complex; Phase II proposes the




construction of a new chemical plant, the Swift Creek Chemical Complex.




The EPA Region IV Administrator has declared the Phase II expansion to




be a new source as defined in Section 306 of the Federal Water Pollution




Control Act Amendments of 1972.






In compliance with its responsibility under the National Environmental




Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969,[EPA Region IV has determined that the issuance




of a new source National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)




permit to the proposed Swift Creek Chemical Complex would constitute a

-------
[ major Federal action. / Therefore, this Environmental Impact Statement




 was prepared in accordance with the requirements of NEPA and the EPA




 January 11, 1977, regulations:  Preparation of Environmental Impact




 Statements for New Source NPDES Permits (40 CFR 6.900).






 The proposed chemical complex will be located at a site adjacent to the




 existing Swift Creek Mine, approximately five miles west of the existing




 Suwannee River Chemical Complex.  The facility will require approximately




 50 acres for the plant and 275 acres each for a cooling pond and a




 gypsum storage impoundment, with additional acreage for utilities and




 transportation rights-of-way.






 Process units and related facilities will include a phosphate rock




 transport system, two contact double absorption sulfuric acid plants,




 a dihydrate wet process phosphoric acid plant, phosphoric acid evaporation




 facilities, a phosphoric acid clarification plant, and two superphosphoric




 acid plants.






 The proposed chemical complex will have a capacity of 500,000 metric tons/




 year of superphosphoric acid.  Sulfuric acid will be produced on-site




 to satisfy process requirements.  It is planned to supply wet unground




 phosphate rock from the existing Swift Creek Mine.  By-product steam from




 the sulfuric acid plants will be used to generate 60 percent of the




 electric power requirements, with the balance supplied by Florida Power




 Corporation.  A gypsum stack and cooling pond will be provided to store




 by-product waste gypsum from the phosphoric acid plant and to provide




 atmospheric cooling for recirculated process water.

-------
In connection with a trade agreement between Occidental and the U.S.S.R.,




superphosphoric acid will be traded for ammonia, urea and potash.   The




superphosphoric acid will be shipped from the port of Jacksonville.






3.  Summary of Major Environmental Effects






    (A)  Construction






The proposed Swift Creek Chemical Plant will be constructed adjacent to




the existing Swift Creek Benefication Plant and settling areas.  Building,




embankment, storage and borrow areas will be cleared only as necessary




just prior to construction.  Construction run-off will be controlled




during heavy rains by collection of run-off in ditches and clarification




to remove suspended particulates prior to discharge to Swift Creek.






During construction, heavily trafficked areas will be wetted to control




dusting.  Roads within the chemical complex will later be paved.  Borrow




areas that will not be used for mining purposes will be revegetated to



reduce erosion.  No archeological or historical sites recorded for the




State of Florida are located on the site of the proposed project.






    (B)  Operation






Operation of the proposed Swift Creek Chemical Complex will increase




groundwater withdrawals by approximately 3.7 MGD.  Measures taken to




limit withdrawals from the Floridan Aquifer include production of




98 percent sulfuric acid and recycling of process and nonprocess water.

-------
Monitoring of water levels in observation wells and supply wells will




be undertaken to assess the impact of withdrawals and leakage in ground-




water quantity.






Discharge of nonprocess water to Swift Creek will increase by approximately




1.6 MGD.  Measures taken to reduce nonprocess water discharges include




recycling nonprocess water to the sulfuric acid plant cooling tower and




to the sulfuric acid plant boilers.  Extensive in-plant measures will be




implemented to prevent and control contamination of nonprocess water.  The




proposed action is expected to result in a maximum increase of 206 kg/day




of total phosphorus, 147 kg/day of fluoride, 14 kg/day of total nitrogen,




and 1470 kg/day of sulfate to Swift Creek.  Reduction or elimination of




discharges during drought periods will mitigate potential impacts of




discharges to surface waters during critical low flows.






Process water will be contained in a pond system designed to maintain a




surge capacity equal to 1.5 times the run-off from the 25 year, 24 hour




rainfall event.  Treatment of process water will be limited to periods of




heavy rainfall, i.e., whenever more than 50 percent of the available surge




is used.






The gypsum stack-cooling pond will be designed to minimize seepage to the




surficial aquifer.  Observation wells have been installed to monitor water




quality in the surficial aquifer during operation.  No measurable impacts




are projected on water quality in the Floridan Aquifer.  Deep observation




wells and water supply wells will be monitored during operation.  The




earthen-dikes of the gypsum stack-cooling pond complex will be

-------
routinely during construction and operation to assure proper maintenance.






The air pollutants emitted from the proposed source in significant quanti-




ties are sulfur dioxide,  particulate matter and fluorides.   Sulfur dioxide will




be emitted from the two sulfuric acid plants, the auxiliary boiler associated




with the sulfuric acid plants and from the heaters associated with the four




superphosphoric acid plants.  Particulate matter will result from acid




mist emissions from the sulfuric acid plants and particulate emissions from




fuel fired boilers and the phosphoric acid plant complex.  Fluoride




emissions will result from the phosphoric acid plant, the superphosphoric




acid plants and associated acid clarification facilities.  Fluorides will




also be emitted from the cooling and gypsum pond.  EPA has reviewed the




proposed sources and found that air quality standards will not be violated,




air quality will not be significantly degraded, and sulfur dioxide and




particulate matter emissions will satisfy New Source Performance Standards




or Best Available Control Technology.






Given the present disturbed nature of the site, impacts to biological




components of the environment will be minimal.  Aquatic communities will not




be adversely impacted by water discharges from the proposed plant.  Impacts




to terrestrial biota are associated with air pollutant emissions and water




discharges.






Surface water will remain near the radioactivity levels of natural surface




waters in the area.  Mitigative measures instigated to control seepage from




the gypsum stacks will insure that groundwater contamination by radium 226




is not a problem.  The proposed chemical plant will process wet unground rock,

-------
 thereby reducing drying requirements at the existing rock dryers,

 thereby reducing air-borne radionuclide emissions.


 The construction and operation of the proposed Swift Creek Chemical Complex

 will result  in  additional employment in Columbia, Hamilton and Suwannee

 Counties,  as well as the State of Florida.  Revenue from the collection of

 state sales  and  local property taxes  are projected  to increase based on the

 proposed expansion and  associated growth in population  and business.  Popula-

 tion growth  will result in increased demand for public  services  and shifts

 in  land use.


 4.   Alternatives to  the Proposed  Action:

     A.   No-action alternative

     B.   Site location alternatives


     C.   Process  alternatives

     D.   Product  alternatives

     E.   Wastewater treatment alternatives

     F.   Air emission abatement alternatives


 5.   The  following Federal,  State, and local  agencies and interested groups

have been requested to  comment  on this impact statement:


                             Federal Agencies

Bureau of Outdoor Recreation               Energy Research and
Bureau of Mines                               Development Agency
Coast Guard                                Federal Highway Administration
Corps of Engineers                         Fish & Wildlife Service
Council on Environmental Quality           Food and Drug Administration
Department of Agriculture                  Forest Service
Department of Commerce                     Geological Survey

-------
Department of Health, Education
  and Welfare
Department of the Interior
Department of Transportation
Economic Development Administration
National Park Service
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Soil Conservation Service
                               Members of Congress
Honorable Lawton Chiles
United States Senate

Honorable Don Fuqua
U. S. House of Representatives
Honorable Richard Stone
United States Senate
                                     State
Honorable Reuben O'D. Askew
Governor

Bureau of Intergovernmental
  Relations
Coastal Coordinating Council
Dept. of Environmental Regulation
Dept. of Natural Resources
Dept. of Agriculture and
  Consumer Service
Dept. of Administration
Dept. of State
Environmental Regulation
  Committee
Geological Survey
Game and Freshwater Fish
  Commission
Dept. of Commerce
Dept. of Health and
  Rehabilitative Services
                                Local and Regional

County Commission of Columbia County
County Commission of Hamilton County
County Commission of Suwannee County
North Central Florida Regional Planning Council
Suwannee River Water Mangement District
                                Interested Groups
Florida Audubon Society
Florida Sierra Club
Florida Defenders of the Environment
Florida Federation of Gardens, Inc.
Florida Trail Association
Florida Wildlife Federation
Florida Conservation Foundation
Florida Ltmg Association
Columbia County Environmental Council
Hamilton County Chamber of Commerce
Environmental Action Group

-------
The Council of Clean Air
NE Florida Air Conservation Council
Soil and Water Conservation Council
Izaak Walton League
S.A.V.E., Inc.
Suwannee River Coalition
The Fertilizer Institute
Florida Phosphate Council
7.  This Draft EIS was made available to the EPA Office of Federal

Activities and the public in July, 1978.
                                        8

-------
                                                              Permit No. FL0036226
                                                              Application No.
                     AUTHORIZATION TO DISCHARGE UNDER THE
               NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM   J(/£  Q t


      In compliance with the provisions of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended,
   (33 US.C. 1251 et. seq; the "Act"),
        Occidental Chemical Company
        Post Office Box 300
        White Springs,  Florida 32096
   is authorized to discharge from a facility located at


        White Springs,  Florida


   to receiving waters named

        001-5,  001-5A,  001-18.  001-18A,
        001-22,  and 001-28   - all points  discharging  into Swift Creek.


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

      This permit shall become effective

      This permit and the authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight,
   Signed
                                         Paul J.  Traina
                                            Director
                                      Enforcement Division
EPA Form 3320-4 (10-73)

-------
A.  EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS:   Effective when the Section 10 Lake is in use
                                                       as part of the treatment system.

    During the period beginning on effective date and  lasting through expiration, the permittee is
    authorized to discharge from outfall(s) serial numbers 001-5, and 001-18  -  combined wastewater
    stream.  Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:

    EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTIC                  DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS             MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
    Flow-m3/Day (MGD)

    Total Suspended Solids

    Total Phosphorus

    Fluoride


    Process wastewater that has been treated can be a part of this combined discharge, and then only
    under the conditions described on page 3.

    The pH shall not be less than 5.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units and shall be
    monitored continuously.

    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):
                                                                                                        S2 ttf
            at point of discharge from the Section 10 lake or at 001-5.                                 aw
Dally Average
30 rag/1

Daily Maximum
60 mg/1
10 mg/1
10 mg/1
Measurement
Frequency
2/Week
2/Week
2/Week
Sample
Type
Continuous
Composite
Composite
Composite
                                                                                                        w n   H
                                                                                                        C/l

                                                                                                              "
                                                                                                          OV
                                                                                                        O

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

      During the period beginning on the effective date and lasting through expiration,
      the permittee Is authorized to discharge from any and all point sources of process
      wastewater.

     a.  There shall be no discharge of process wastewater pollutants to navigable waters.

     b.  Process wastewater pollutants from a calcium sulfate storage pile runoff facility
         operated separately or in combination with a water recirculation system designed,
         constructed and operated to maintain a surge capacity equal to the runoff from
         the 25 year, 24 hour rainfall event may be discharged, after treatment, whenever
         chronic or catastrophic precipitation events cause the water level to rise into
         the surge capacity.  Process wastewater must be treated and discharged whenever
         the water level equals or exceeds the midpoint of the surge capacity.

      c. When the Section 10 lake is not  used as part  of the treatment  system,  the limitations
         on pages 4,  5,  6 & 7 are in effect.
                                                                                                     ID P>
                                                                                                       300
                                                                                                       »
                                                                                                           H
                                                                                                     o
                                                                                                     o
                                                                                                     o>
                                                                                                     M

-------
   A.2.
   During the period beginning on the effective date and lasting through expiration,  the permittee Is
   authorized to discharge from outfall(s)  serial number(s) 001-28, process wastewater, under the con-
   ditions described on page 3 of  16.   Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the permittee
   as specified below:
   Effluent Characteristic
   Flow-m3/Day (MGD)
   Total Phosphorus (as P)
   Fluoride
 **Total Suspended Solids
   Radium 226
***pll range (std.  units)
    Discharge Limitations

Dally Average   Dally Maximum
35 mg/1
25 mg/1
50 mg/1
105 mg/1
 75 mg/1
150 mg/1
 9 p Ci/1
       Monitoring Requirements
Measurement     Sample
 Frequency       Type

   	          Cont inuoits
     *          24-hr composite
     *          24-hr composite
     *          24-hr composite
   The effluent limits, and any additional requirements, specified in the attached state certification
   supersede any less stringent effluent limits listed above.  During any time period in which the more
   stringent state certification effluent limits are stayed or inoperable, the effluent limits above
   shall be in effect and fully enforceable.                .

   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 or mixing with the receiving waters.

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

  *The measurement frequency shall be twice per week during periods of discharge, except Radium 226
   which shall be monitored once per month.
 **The total suspended solids limitations and monitoring requirements set forth above shall be waived
   for process wastewater from a calcium sulfate storage pile runoff facility operated separately or in
   combination with a water recirculation system which is chemically treated and then clarified or
   settled to meet the other effluent limitations established above.
                                                                      PI ID
                                                                      t/>
                                                                        JS
                                                                      «ite
                                                                      3 o
                                                                      r* M>
                                                                      o
                                                                      o ••-
                                                                      OJ cr>
                                                              I
*** pli shall be monitored at outfall(s) serial number(s) 001-5 and 001-18.

-------
A. 3. During the period beginning on the effective date and lasting through expiration, the permittee is
     authorized to discharge from outfall(s) serial number(s) 001-22, contaminated non-process waste-
     water.  This discharge shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:

     Effluent Characteristic                Discharge Limitations              Monitoring Requirements
                                              kg/day(Ibs/day)             Measurement       Sample
                                      Dally Average    Daily Maximum       Frequency         Type

     Flow-mVday  (MOD)                    	              	               	            Continuous

     Total Phosphorus  (as P)          35 mg/1          105 mg/1           2/Week            24-hr composite

     Fluoride                         25 mg/1           75 mg/1           2/Week            24-hr compostie

     *pH  range (std. units)
      The  effluent  limits, and any additional requirements, specified in the attached state certification
      supersede any less  stringent limits listed above.  During any time period in which the more stringent
      state  certification effluent limits are stayed or inoperable, the effluent limits listed above shall
      be in  effect  and  fully enforceable.

      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 or mixing with the receiving waters.
                                                                                                           Q.
                                                                                                           S
      *  pH  shall  be monitored at Outfalls 001-5 and 001-18.                                                 £
                                                                                                           N>
                                                                                                           SJ

-------
A.6. During the perioil beginning on the effective date and lasting through expiration,  the permittee
     is authorized to discharge from outfall(s)  serial number(s)  001-5 and 001-18,  combined waste-
     water stream.  This discharge shall be limited and monitored by the permittee  as specified below:
     Effluent Characteristic
     pii range (std.  units)
Discharge Limitations


Miniraum    Max imum

5.0        9.0
Monitoring Requirements
                                                                               Measurement
                                                                                Frequency
               Sample
                Type

               Continuous
     The effluent limits and any additional requirements specified in the attached state certification
     supersede any less stringent effluent limits listed above.   During any time period in which the
     more stringent state certification effluent limits are stayed or inoperable,  the effluent  limits
     listed above shall be in effect.and fully enforceable.

     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 or mixing with the receiving waters.
                                                                                                      aw
                                                                   I
                                                                                                      3°
                                                                                                      10

-------
A.5.  During the period beginning on effective date and lasting through expiration,  the permittee is
      authorized to discharge from outfall(s)  serial numbers 001-5A and 001-18A  -  Mining  Effluent.
      Such dischargee shall be limited and monitored by thepermittee as specified below:

      EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTIC                   DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS          MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
                                                                              Measurement     Sample
                                            Dally Average   Daily Maximum      Frequency       Type

      Flow-m3/Day (MGD)                     	         	           	         Continuous

      Total Suspended Solids                30 rag/1         60 mg/1           2/Week          Composite
      The effluent limits and any additional requirements specified in  the attached  atate certification
      supersede any less stringent effluent limits listed above.  During any  time period in which the
      more stringent; state certification effluent limits, are stayed or  inoperable, the effluent limits
      listed above shall be in effect. and fully enforceable.

      The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than  9.0 standard  units and  shall
      be monitored 2 /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):
                                                                                                       a
                                                                                                       •3
               at the nearest accessible point after  final treatment but prior to                       M
               actual discharge or mixing with the receiving waters.
                                                                                                       0*0
                                                                                                       o
                                                                                                       CO
                                                                                                       ro
                                                                                                       Cf

-------
                                                              PART  I

                                                             Page 8 of 16
                                                             NPDES #FL0036226
9.  For the  purpose of this permit:
    a.   The  term "process wastewater" means any water which, during manufacturing
        or processing, comes into direct contact with or.results frcxn  the
        production or use of any raw material, intermediate product, finished
        product, by-product, or waste product.  The  term "process wastewater"
        does not include contaminated non-process wastewater, as defined belcw.

    b.   The  term "contaminated non-process wastewater" shall mean any water
        including precipitation runoff which, during manufacturing or processing,
        comes into incidental contact with any raw material, intermediate proauct,
        finished product, by-product or waste product be means of: (1) pre-
        cipitation runoff; (2) accidental spills; (3) accidental leaks caused by
        the failure of process equipment and which are repaired or the discharge
        of pollutants therefrom contained or terminated within the shortest
        reasonable time which shall not exceed 24 hours after discovery or when
        discovery should reasonably have been made, whichever is earliest; and (4)
        discharges from safety showers and related personal safety equipment and
        from equipment washings for the purpose of safe entry, inspection and
       maintenance; provided that all reasonable measures have been, taken to
        prevent, reduce, eliminate and control to the maximum extent feasible
        such contact and provided  furtherthat all  reasonable measuras have bean
        taken that will  mitigate the effects of such contact once it has occurred.

   C.  The term "twenty-five year, 24 hour rainf.ill event" shall mean the maximum
       24 hour  precipitation event with a probable recurrence interval of once in
       twenty-five years as defined by the National Weather Service in technical
       paper No. 40, "Rainfall Frequency Atlas of the United States," May, 1961,
       and subsequent amendments in effect as of the effective date of this
       regulation.

   d.  The  term "calcium  sulfate storage pile runoff"  shall  mean the calcium
       sulfate  transport water runoff from or through  the calcium sulfate pile,
       and  the  precipitation which falls  directly  on the storage pile and which
       may be collected  in  a  seepage  ditch at the  base  of the outer slopes of
       the storage pile,  provided  such  seepage ditch is protected  from the
       incursion of surface  runoff from  areas outside  of the cuter perirr.eter cf
       the seepage ditch.

   e.  The term  "daily average  concentration" means the arithmetic  average
       (weighted by  flow value)  of all  the daily deterninations  of concentre.fic-r:
       made  during  a calendar month.  Daily detemnnuvions of  co:icc:itraticn  nv.ce
       using a  composite sample  shall be  the  concentration of  the  composite
       sample.

-------
                                                  PART I

                                                 Page 9 of 16
                                                 NPDES #FL0036226

f.  The term "dally maximum concentration" means the daily determination
    of concentration for  any calendar day.         •

g.  The term "weighted  by flow  value" means the summation of each sample
    concentration multiplied by its  respective flow divided by the sum
    of the respective flows.

h.  For the purpose of  this permit,  a calendar day is defined as any
    consecutive  24-hour period.       .                 .                      •

1.  The term "mining effluent"  shall  mean any water that is impounded or that
    collects in  the mine  and is  pumped,  drained, or otherwise removed from
    the mine through the  efforts of  the  mine operator.   However, if a mine
    1s also used for the  treatment of process generated  wastewater,
    discharges of commingled water from  the mine shall  be deemed discharges
    of process generated  wastewater.

j.  The term "mine" shall  mean an area of land, surface  or underground,
    actively used for or  resulting from  the extraction of a mineral from
    natural  deposits.

k.  The term "process generated wastewater" shall mean any wastewater used
    1n the slurry transport of mined  material, air  emissions control, or
    processing exclusive  of mining.   The term shall  also include any other
    water which  becomes commingled with  such wastewater  in a pit, pond,
    lagoon,  mine, or other facility used for settling or treatment of such
    wastewater.

-------
                                                                 PARTI

                                                                 Page 10  of 16
                                                                 Permit No. FL0036226
B. SCHEDULE OF COMPLIANCE
    1.  The  permittee shall achieve compliance  with  the effluent limitations specified for
       discharges in accordance with the following schedule:
          Compliance shall be achieved  on the first day of discharge.
    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.

-------
                                                                PARTI

                                                                Pace 11  of 16
                                                                Permit No.FL0036226
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 quarter  shall be  summarized for
      each month and reported on  a Discharge Monitoring Report Form (EPA No. 3320-1),
      postmarked no later than the 23th 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    Florida Dept.  of Environmental  Regulation
      Water  Enforcement Branch            Twin Towers Office Building
      345 Courtland  Street, N.E.           2600 Blair Stone Road
      Atlanta,  Georgia  30308               Tallahassee,  Florida 32301
   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 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;

      e.  The person(s) who performed the analyses:

-------
                                                                PART I

                                                                Page 12 of  16
                                                                Permit No. FL0036226
   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 monito«i"<; 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.

-------
                                                                    PART 11

                                                                    Page 13 of 16
                                                                    Permit No. FL0036226
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  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  noneompliance with any  effluent  limitations specified in  this
       permit, includint; such accelerated or additional monitoring as necessary to determine the
       nature and impact of the noncomplying discharge.

   5   Bypassing

       Any diversion  from or hypass of facilities necessary to  maintain compliance with the
       terms and conditions of ihis 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
       Axiministrj1.• >r and ih<' Sute in wntintj of each such diversion or bypass.

-------
                                                                   PART II

                                                                   Page 14 of  16
                                                                            FL0036226
   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

       Kxoept for data determined to be confidential under Section oOS of the Act.  ail reports
       prepared in accordance  with  the  terms  of this  permit shall be available for  public

-------
                                                               PART II

                                                               Page  15 of  16
                                                               Permit No.  FL0036226
   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 IT, 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.

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 jtiy applicable State law or regulation under authority preserved i-y Section 510 of the
   Act,

-------
                                                           PART !l


                                                           Paee 16 of 16
                                                           Permit No. FL0036226
   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.   If corrective action is required under the provisions of Part III,  l.A.
        & 1.3.  of NPDES Permit #FL0000655,  Occidental will modify the gypsua
        storage and cooling pond facilities serving this  plant to conform  to  the
        program resulting from Part  III, I.B., Permit #FL0000655.

    2.   Additional Conditions for  "Removed Substances",  (Part II, Sect. A,  Para.  6)

        Within 180 days of anticipated gypsum pile abandonment, the permittee
        shall submit a plan for the  elimination of the discharge of pollutants
        from the gypsum pile upon  abandonment.  Such plan for the elimination
        of the discharge of pollutants to the extent practicable shall specify
        the action the permittee will take with respect to the regrading of
        the gypsum pile.

    3.   State Certification - The  State of Florida Department of Environmental
        Regulation has certified the discharge(s) covered by this permit with
        conditions (Attachment I).   Section 401 of the Act requires that conditions
        of certification shall become a condition of the  permit.  The monitoring
        and sampling shall be as indicated for those parameters included in the
        certification.  In the event of any conflict between the conditions of this
        permit and in the certification attached, the more restrictive shall  rule.

-------
         UnitedStates      Region 4        EPA904/9-78-012
         Environmental Protection   345Courtland Street, NE   JULY 1978
         Agency        Atlanta, GA 30308
vEPA     Environmental
         Impact Statement
         Occidental Chemical Company
         Swift Creek Chemical Complex
         Hamilton County, Florida

         Summary Document

-------
                            CONTENTS
      1.0    DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED NEW SOURCE                  1

      1.1    OVERVIEW                                                2
      1.2    SUMMARY OF EXISTING FACILITIES                          3
      1.3    SUMMARY OF NEW SOURCE  (PHASE  II)                        4
      1.4    DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED FACILITIES         6

    1.4.1    EXISTING  FACILITIES                                     6
    1.4.2    SWIFT CREEK CHEMICAL COMPLEX  PROPOSED FACILITIES
               —PHASE II  EXPANSION ALTERNATE  I:  DIHYDRATE
               WET PROCESS PHOSPHORIC ACID PLANT                     6

  1.4.2.1    Chemical  Plant Description                              6

1.4.2.1.1    Products                                                6
1.4.2.1.2    Capacity                                                8
1.4.2.1.3    Raw Materials                                          8
1.4.2.1.4    Process Units                                          8
1.4.2.1.5    Support Facilities                                      8
1.4.2.1.6    Water Use and Discharge                                11
1.4.2.1.7    Process Water Treatment Facilities                     15
1.4.2.1.8    Nonprocess Water  Contamination Control  and
               Treatment Facilities                                 19
1.4.2.1.9    Description of Environmental  Aspects of
               Support Facilities—SCCC                             22

      2.0    ENVIRONMENT WITHOUT THE PROPOSED  ACTION               27

      2.1    METEOROLOGY AND CLIMATOLOGY                            28
    2.1.1    CLIMATOLOGY                                            28
    2.1.2    PRECIPITATION AND EVAPORATION                         28
    2.1.3    ATMOSPHERIC VENTILATION                                28
    2.1.4    SEVERE WEATHER                                         29

      2.2    AIR QUALITY                                            32

    2.2.1    METHODOLOGY                                            32
    2.2.2    EXISTING  AIR  QUALITY                                   33

  2.2.2.1    Existing  Sulfur  Dioxide Levels                         33

2.2.2.1.1    Calculated  Sulfur Dioxide  Levels                       33
2.2.2.1.2    Measured  Sulfur  Dioxide Levels                         36

  2.2.2.2    Existing  Total Suspended  Particulate Matter
               Levels                                               36

2.2.2.2.1    Calculated  Total  Suspended Particulate  Matter
               Levels                                               36
2.2.2.2.2    Measured  Ambient Total  Suspended  Particulate
               Matter  Levels                                        40

-------
                      CONTENTS (CONTINUED)



2.2.2.3    Existing Fluoride Data                                40
2
2













2
2


.2.2.3.1
.2.2.3.2
2.2.2.4
2.2.3
2.3
2.3.1
2.3.2
2.4
2.4.1
2.4.2
2.4.2.1
2.4.2.2
2.4.3
2.4.4
2.5
2.5.1
2.5.2
2.6
2.6.1
2.6.2
2.6.2.1
2.6.2.2
.6.2.2.1
.6.2.2.2
2.6.3
2.6.3.1
2.6.3.2
Sources of Fluorides
Fluoride in the Environment
Existing Carbon Monoxide, Nitrogen Oxides
and Hydrocarbon Burden
NOISE STUDY
TOPOGRAPHY
GENERAL TOPOGRAPHIC SETTING
SWIFT CREEK DRAINAGE BASIN
GEOLOGY
PHYSIOGRAPHY
STRATIGRAPHY
Regional Stratigraphy
Site Specific Stratigraphy
SITE SUSCEPTIBILITY TO SINKHOLES
EARTHQUAKE SUSCEPTIBILITY
SOILS
GENERAL DESCRIPTION
AGRICULTURAL USES
HYDROLOGY
HYDROLOGIC CYCLE
SURFACE WATER QUANTITY
Suwannee River Flows
Swift Creek Flows
Natural Flows of Swift Creek
Effect of Mining Operations on the Average and
Low Flows of Swift Creek Flows
GROUNDWATER QUANTITY
Hydrogeologic Setting
Surficial Aquifer
40
42
47
47
49
49
49
51
51
51
51
51
54
54
54
54
54
55
55
55
55
57
57
57
58
58
58
                               ii

-------
                        CONTENTS  (CONTINUED)
  2.6.3.3    Hawthorn Confining  Unit and Secondary Artesian
               Aquifer                                                60
  2.6.3.4    FT on" dan Aquifer                                         60
  2.6.3.5    Effect of Mining Operations on  Groundwater
               Flows                                                  61

    2.6.4    SURFACE WATER QUALITY                                     62

  2.6.4.1    General  Setting                                           62
  2.6.4.2    Data                                                      62
  2.6.4.3    Swift  Creek                                               68
  2.6.4.4    Influence of Swift  Creek and Other Major
               Tributaries on the Suwannee River                      74
  2.6.4.5    Summary                                                  76

2.6.4.5.1    Swift  Creek                                               76
2.6.4.5.2    Suwannee River                                           76

    2.6.5    GROUNDWATER  QUALITY                                      77

  2.6.5.1    Sampling Program                                         77
  2.6.5.2    Water  Quality in Surficial  Aquifer and
               Hawthorn Formation                                      77
  2.6.5.3    Water  Quality in Floridan Aquifer                        78

    2.6.6    WATER  USES AND ISSUES                                     78

  2.6.6.1    Water  Supply                                             78
  2.6.6.2    Water  Uses                                               79

      2.7    BIOLOGY AND  ECOLOGY                                      82

    2.7.1    AREA ECOSYSTEM MODIFIERS                                 82
    2.7.2    AQUATIC COMMUNITY                                        82

  2.7.2.1    Swift  Creek                                               82

    2.7.3    TERRESTRIAL  COMMUNITIES OF  SWIFT CREEK                   87
    2.7.4    OTHER  IMPORTANT  BIOLOGICAL  CONSIDERATIONS                96

  2.7.4.1    Unique Natural Communities                                96
  2.7.4.2    Endangered,  Threatened, or  Rare Animals and
               Plants                                                 96
  2.7.4.3    Migratory Wildlife  and Habitat                            96
  2.7.4.4    Wildlife Benefits of the Area to Man                      97
  2.7.4.5    Agricultural and Forestry Resources                      97
  2.7.4.6    Trends in the Area                                        97

    2.7.5    PROPOSED SWIFT CREEK CHEMICAL COMPLEX SITE               97
    2.7.6    SUMMARY:  ECOSYSTEM OVERVIEW                             98
                                i i i

-------
                 CONTENTS (CONTINUED)





2.8    SOCIOECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT OF THE  AREA OF

2.9
2.9.1
2.9.1.1
2.9.1.1.1
2.9.1.1.2
2.9.1.2
2.9.1.3
2.9.1.4
2.9.1.5
2.9.1.6
2.10
2.11
3.0
3.1
3.1.1
3.1.1.1
3.1.1.2
3.1.1.3
3.1.2

3.1.3

3.1.4
3.1.5

3.1.6
3.1.7
3.2
3.2.1
3.2.2
3.2.3
IMMEDIATE IMPACT-HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE
EXISTING RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT
RADIONUCLIDES IN PHOSPHATE DEPOSITS
The Uranium Series
Uranium Equilibrium
Radon Progeny
Background Radioactivity
Subsurface Radioactivity
Surface Water Quality
Groundwater Quality
Summary
CULTURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT
ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECT OF PROPOSED NEW SOURCE
AMBIENT AIR QUALITY WITH THE PROPOSED SOURCES
AIR EMISSIONS FROM PROPOSED SOURCES
Sulfur Dioxide Emissions from Proposed Sources
Parti cu late Matter Emissions from Proposed Sources
Fluoride Emission from Proposed Sources
CALCULATED SULFUR DIOXIDE LEVELS WITH PROPOSED
SOURCES
CALCULATED TOTAL SUSPENDED PARTI CULATE MATTER
LEVELS WITH PROPOSED SOURCES
THE ENVIRONMENT WITH PROPOSED FLUORIDE EMISSIONS
PROJECTED EMISSION BURDENS OF CARBON MONOXIDE,
NITROGEN OXIDES AND HYDROCARBONS
NOISE LEVEL IMPACT/CONSTRUCTION
NOISE LEVEL IMPACT/ OPERATION
LAND AND WATER RESOURCES
TOPOGRAPHY AND DRAINAGE BASINS
GEOLOGY
SOILS
101
103
103
104
104
106
107
107
113
113
116
121
123
126
127
127
127
129
129

129

133
136

136
138
138
140
140
140
140
                          iv

-------
                        CONTENTS  (CONTINUED)
  3.2.3.1     Erosion Control                                          140
  3.2.3.2     Dust Potential                                           141
  3.2.3.3     Land Use and Gypsum Stack  Retirement                    141

    3.2.4     SURFACE WATER QUANTITY                                   142

  3.2.4.1     Average Flow of  Swift Creek                             142
  3.2.4.2     Low Flows of Swift Creek                                 142
  3.2.4.3     Flood Flows  of Swift Creek                              143
  3.2.4.4     Suwannee River Flows                                    143

    3.2.5     GROUNDWATER  QUANTITY                                    143

  3.2.5.1     Surficial Aquifer                                       143
  3.2.5.2     Floridan Aquifer                                        143

    3.2.6     SURFACE WATER QUALITY                                    144

  3.2.6.1     Composition  of Discharge from the Proposed Swift
               Creek Chemical  Plant                                   144
  3.2.6.2     Impact of Nonprocess Water Discharges                    145

3.2.6.2.1     Phosphates                                              145
3.2.6.2.2     Total  Nitrogen                                           150
3.2.6.2.3     Fluoride                                                151
3.2.6.2.4     Sulfate                                                 151
3.2.6.2.5     Total  Organic Carbon                                    151

  3.2.6.3     Impact of Treated Process  Water Discharge               152
  3.2.6.4     Summary                                                 152

    3.2.7     GROUNDWATER  QUALITY                                     154

  3.2.7.1     Characteristic of Process  Water                         154
  3.2.7.2     Seepage from Proposed Gypsum Stack-Cooling
               Pond Complex                                           154
  3.2.7.3     Observation  Well  Network at the Suwannee
               River Plant                                           156
  3.2.7.4     Impacts of Swift Creek  Chemical  Plant  on Groundwater
               in the Surficial  Aquifer and Hawthorn Formation        158
  3.2.7.5     Impacts of the Proposed Facility on Water Quality
               in the Floridan Aquifer                                166

    3.2.8     IMPACTS FROM ACCIDENTS  AND SPILLS                       167

      3.3     ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED  CHEMICAL
               COMPLEX ON BIOLOGY AND ECOLOGY                        169

    3.3.1     SITE CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS                                169

  3.3.1.1     Vegetation Impacts                                      169

-------
                     CONTENTS (CONTINUED)


  3.3.2    BIOLOGY AND ECOLOGY                                           169

3.3.2.1    Aquatic Communities                                           169
3.3.2.2    Terrestrial Communities of the  Area                           169
3.3.2.3    Environmentally Sensitive Areas                               170
3.3.2.4    Endangered, Threatened and Rare Plants and Animals            170
3.3.2.5    Migratory Wildlife and Habitat                                 170
3.3.2.6    Wildlife Benefits of the Area to Man                          170

  3.3.3    LONG-TERM VS.  SHORT-TERM IMPACTS                              171

3.3.3.1    Aquatic Impacts                                               171
3.3.3.2    Terrestrial Impacts                                           171

  3.3.4    REVERSIBILITY                                                  171

3.3.4.1    Aquatic Impacts                                               171
3.3.4.2    Terrestrial Impacts                                           171

    3.4    SOCIOECONOMIC  IMPACT                                          172

  3.4.1    INTRODUCTION                                                  172
  3.4.2    LOCAL IMPACTS                                                  172
  3.4.3    STATEWIDE IMPACTS—EMPLOYMENT,  INCOME, TAX RECEIPTS           177
  3.4.4    NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL IMPACTS—OCCIDENTAL-
             USSR TRADE AGREEMENT                                        179

3.4.4.1    Effects on U.S. Balance of Payments and Balance
             of Trade                                                    179
3.4.4.2    Depletion of a Valuable Natural Resource                      180
3.4.4.3    Energy Implications of the Occidental-Soviet
             Union Trade                                                  181

  3.4.5    SOCIOECONOMIC  PROJECTIONS                                     181
  3.4.6    SUMMARY                                                       184

3.4.6.1    State and Local                                               184
3.4.6.2    National and International                                    184

    3.5    RADIOLOGICAL                                                  187

  3.5.1    RADIOACTIVITY  BALANCE                                         187
  3.5.2    IMPACT OF RECLAIMED LAND ON GAMMA RADIATION                   190
  3.5.3    SURFACE WATER SURVEILLANCE                                    190
  3.5.4    SOURCE WATERS                                                 190
  3.5.5    GROUNDWATER SURVEILLANCE                                      192
  3.5.6    OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURES                                        193

3.5.6.1    External Gamma                                                193
3.4.6.2    Randon Progeny                                                193

  3.5.7    SUMMARY                                                       196
                               VI

-------
                   CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
4.0
4.1
4.1.1
4.1.2
4.1.3
4.1.4
4.1.4.1
4.1.4.2
4.1.4.3
4.1.5
4.2
4.3
4.3.1
4.3.2
4.4
4.4.1
4.4.2
4.5
4.5.1
5.0
5.1
5.1.1
5.1.1.1
5.1.1.2
5.1.1.3
5.1.2
5.1.2.1
5.1.2.2
ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED SOURCE
SITE LOCATION
SUWANNEE RIVER SITE
MISSISSIPPI RIVER SITE
CENTRAL FLORIDA LOCATION
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS
Comparison of the Two Sites With Respect to
Aquatic Communities
Vegetation: Comparison of the Two Local Sites
Faunal Comparison of the Two Local Sites
ALTERNATIVES FOR DISCHARGE OF NONPROCESS WATER,
RAINFALL RUNOFF AND TREATED PROCESS WATER
PRODUCT
PROCESS ALTERNATIVES
CLARIFICATION PROCESS ALTERNATIVES
HEMIHYDRATE WET PROCESS PHOSPHORIC ACID PROCESS
POLLUTION CONTROL MEASURES
COOLING OF SPA
RETROFIT OF EXISTING SRCC SULFURIC ACID PLANTS
ALTERNATIVE OF NOT CONSTRUCTING A NEW SOURCE
THE ECONOMIC EFFECTS OF A NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE
MITIGATIVE MEASURES
AIR QUALITY AND NOISE
AMBIENT AIR QUALITY
Parti cu late Matter
Sulfur Oxides (Sulfur Dioxide)
Flourides
EMISSION REGULATIONS
Sulfuric Acid Plants
Phosphate Processing
199
200
200
200
200
201
201
201
201
202
202
202
202
202
203
203
203
204
204
205
206
206
206
206
206
206
207
207
5.1.3    PREVENTION OF SIGNIFICANT  DETERIORATION              208
                              vn

-------
                   CONTENTS (CONTINUED)


  5.2    LAND AND WATER RESOURCES                             208
5.2.1
5.2.2
5.2.3
5.2.3.1
5.2.3.2
5.2.3.3
5.2.4
5.2.5
5.2.5.1
5.2.5.2
5.2.6
5.2.6.1
5.2.6.2
5.2.6.3
5.2.6.4
5.2.7
5.2.8
5.3
5.3.1
5.3.2
5.4
5.5
5.6

1.4-1
1.4-2
1.4-3
1.4-4
1.4-5
TOPOGRAPHY
GEOLOGY
SOILS
Erosion Control
Dust Control
Gypsum Stack Retirement
SURFACE WATER QUANTITY
GROUNDWATER QUANTITY
Surficial Aquifer
Floridan Aquifer
SURFACE WATER QUALITY
Construction Phase
Treated Process Water Discharge
Nonprocess Water Discharge
Retirement Phase
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
ACCIDENTS AND SPILLS
BIOLOGY AND ECOLOGY
AQUATIC COMPONENTS
TERRESTRIAL COMPONENTS
MITIGATIVE MEASURES FOR SOCIOECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT
RADIOLOGICAL
CULTURAL RESOURCES
FIGURES
Area Location Map - Occidental Chemical Company
Water Summary - MGD Swift Creek Complex
Water Systems - Occidental Chemical Company -
Swift Creek Complex
Stream Flow, MGD at Stream Monitoring Point 001
Water Balance - Proposed vs. Existing
208
208
208
208
209
209
209
210
210
210
210
210
210
211
212
213
213
215
215
215
215
216
217

7
12
14
16
17
2.1-1     Annual  Wind Direction Distribution, Valdosta,
           Georgia 1972-1976                                   30
                            vm

-------
                      FIGURES  (CONTINUED)

 2.2-1     Annual Average S02 Levels  (ug/m3), 1977-78
            -Occidental Chemical Company, Hamilton County,
            Florida                                                 34
 2.2-2     Air  Quality  Monitoring Network for S02 and TSP            37
 2.2-3     Annual Average TSP Levels,  1977-78,  Including
            31  ug/m3 Background                                     39
 2.2-4     Fluoride Effects Monitoring Sites Air, Grass
            and Cattle                                             43

 2.3-1     Swift Creek  Drainage Basin  and Location of
            Sampling Stations                                       50

 2.4-1     Geologic Section at  the  Study Site                        52
 2.4-2     Geologic Log of Deep Core  Hole                            53

 2.6-1     Piezometric  Levels at Various Depths in Geologic
            Profile                                                 59
 2.6-2     U.S.G.S. Stations  in the Suwannee River Basin             63

 2.7-1     Major Forcing Functions  and Components of the
            Occidental Area  Ecosystem and Sampling Stations         83
 2.7-2     Benthic Natural Substrate  Macroinvertebrate System
            Quality  Indices  from the Fall, 1977 and the
            Winter,  1978 Sampling  Periods                           88
 2.7-3     Artificial Substrate Macroinvertebrate System
            Quality  Indices  from the Fall, 1977 and the
            Winter,  1978 Sampling  Periods                           89
 2.7-4     Ecosystem  Diagram  of the Area of Concern Showing
            Principal  System Components, Flows and
            Controlling Influences                                 99

 2.9-1     Uranium-238  Decay  Series                                105
 2.9-2     Gamma-Ray  Log of a Deep  Well  in West Central
            Florida                                                109

2.10-1     Cultural Resource  Survey - Occidental
            Chemical Company                                      122

 3.1-1     Calculated SO? Levels  (ug/m3) with  Proposed Sources
            -  1979                                                 131
 3.1-2     Calculated Total Suspended Particulate Matter
            Levels  (ug/m3) with  Proposed Sources -  1979            134

 3.2-1    Conceptual  Layout of  Proposed  Gypsum Stack and
            Cooling  Pond                                           155
 3.2-2     Layout  of  Monitoring and Sampling Stations  (SRCC)        157
 3.2-3     Fluoride Concentration  Profiles at  Suwannee River
            Gypsum Stack and Cooling Pond                          159
 3.2-4     Sulfate Concentration  Profiles at Suwannee River
            Gypsum Stack and Cooling Pond                          160
 3.2-5     pH Profiles  at Suwannee  River Gypsum Stack and
            Cooling  Pond
 3.2-6     Ortho Phosphate  Concentration Profiles at Suwannee
            River Gyspum Stack and Cooling Pond                   162
 3.2-7     Conductivity Profiles  at Suwannee River Gypsum
            Stack and  Cooling  Pond                                163

                             ix

-------
                     FIGURES  (CONTINUED)
3.2-8    Gross Alpha Radiation  Profiles  at Suwannee  River
           Gypsum Stack and  Cooling  Pond                           164
3.2-9    Radium-226 Profiles at Suwannee River  Gypsum
           Stack and Cooling Pond                                  165

3.4-1    Occidental's Total  Income Impact as  Compared  to
           Estimated Labor and  Proprietors Income  in
           the Immediate Impact Area,  1980                         176
                           TABLES

1.4-1     Process Plants and Support Facilities                      9-10
1.4-2    Water Summary - MGD Swift Creek Chemical  Complex
           - Overall  Balance for Complete Complex                     13
1.4-3    Water Balance Existing vs. Proposed Facilities               18
1.4-4    Expected Process Water Analysis - Swift Creek
           Chemical  Complex Based on Suwannee River
           Chemical  Complex Sampling                                 20
1.4-5    Expected Effluent Quality Produced by Two-Stage
           Limestone-Lime Treatment                                  21
1.4-6    Process Chemicals - Sulfuric Acid Plant Boiler
           and Cooling Tower Chemicals                               24

2.2-1    Summary of Air Quality Modeling for 1977-78 S02
           Levels, Occidental Chemical Company                       35
2.2-2    Summary of Measured Ambient S02 Levels for
           Occidental Chemical  Company, Hamilton County,
           Florida for May 1977-January 1978                         38
2.2-3    Summary of Air Quality Modeling for 1977-78 of  Total
           Suspended Particulate Matter Levels for                   3g
           Occidental Chemical  Company
2.2-4    Summary of Total Suspended Particulate Matter
           Monitoring Data for Occidental Chemical Company,
           Hamilton County, Florida for October 1975-
           October 1977                                              41
2.2-5    Summary of Ambient Air and Grass Fluoride Concentration
           Data for November 1977-April 1978, Occidental
           Chemical Company, Hamilton County, Florida                44
2.2-6    1977-78 County-Wide Carbon Monoxide Hydrocarbon,
           and Nitrogen Oxide Burden for Hamilton  County,
           Florida                                                   46

2.6-1    Flow Parameters of Suwannee River and Principal
           Tributaries                                               56
2.6-2    Comparison of Swift Creek, Rocky Creek, White
           Springs Groundwater and Occidental Deep Wells
           for Selected Chemical Parameters                          64
2.6-3    Annual Means, Minimums and Maximums for Selected
           Chemical Parameters from the USGS Sampling
           Station in Swift Creek                                    65

-------
                    TABLES  (CONTINUED)


2.6-4    Ranges of Values Obtained in the Current Sampling
           Program of Streams                                     66-67
2.6-5    One-Way Analysis of Variance Comparing  Annual  Means
           for Selected Chemical  Parameters  as Measured
           by USGS                                                69
2.6-6    Heavy Metals Concentrations in Surface  Waters             70
2.6-7    Concentrations of  Total  Ammonia (NH3 +  NH4 +)  Which
           Contain an tin-ionized  Ammonia Concentration  of
           0.020 mg/1 NH3                                         71
2.6-8    Conditions in Swift Creek Necessary to  Determine
           NH3 Levels                                             72
2.6-9    Mass Loadings Under Average Flow of Selected
           Parameters for Swift Creek and Downstream
           Suwannee River Stations                                72
2.6-10   Mass Loadings Under Low Flow (M7, 10)  of
           Selected Parameters for Swift Creek  and
           Downstream Suwannee River Stations                     73
2.6-11   Water Use in 1975 in  the Three-County  Area
           (Columbia, Hamilton and Suwannee)                      80

2.7-1    Periphyton Community Indices for Swift Creek and
           Nearby Streams                                         84
2.7-2    Results of Sediment Sampling for Macroinvertebrates
           in Study Area Streams                                  85
2.7-3    Results of Hester Dendy Sampling for Macroin-
           vertebrates in Study Area Streams                      91
2.7-4    One-Way Analysis of Variance for Macroinvertebrate
           Data Collected from Natural Substrates, Comparing
           Pooled Swift  Creek Stations with  the  Pooled
           Controls                                               91
2.7-5    One-Way Analysis of Variance for Macroinverterbrate
           Data Collected from Artificial Substrates,
           Comparing  Pooled Swift Creek  Station  with Pooled
           Controls                                               91
2.7-6    One-Way Analysis of Variance for Fish  Diversity
           Indices  Between  Swift  Creek  and  Local  Control
           Streams                                                92
2.7-7    One-Way Analysis of Variance  for Fish  Biomass
           Estimates  Between Swift  Creek and Local Control
           Streams                                                92
2.7-8    Comparison of Small Mammals Assessed by Traplines in
           Natural  and Mined Communities                         93
2.7-9    Expected  and Confirmed  Bird Species in Swift
           Creek Natural Communities and Swift  Creek/
           Suwannee River  Mined  Lands                             94
2.7-10   Estimated Bird Pairs  of Rookery in Active
           Settling Area 8 on  Suwannee River Mine                94

-------
                    TABLES (CONTINUED)
2.7-11    Potential and Confirmed Terrestrial
           Vertebrate Species in Swift Creek  Natural
           Communities and Mined Lands                          95
2.7-12   Summary of Occurrence of Rare and Engangered
           Species                                              95

2.8-1    Key Historic Socioeconomic Data for  Florida and
           Columbia, Hamilton and Suwannee Counties            102

2.9-1    Average Doses from Radiation in the  United States
           in 1970                                             108
2.9-2    Mean Gamma Field Averages and Ranges by Land Type in
           the North and Central Florida Mining Regions        110
2.9-3    Comparison of Radium-226 Concentrations:
           Occidental Property versus West Central Florida     112
2.9-4    Radium-226 in Surface Waters in the  U.S.A. and
           Florida                                             114
2.9-5    Summary of Radium-226 Data in Central Florida
           Aquifers                                            115
2.9-6    Summary of Gross Alpha and Radium-226 Data from
           the Groundwater Study in the Osecola National
           Forest                                              117

3.1-1    Sulfur Dioxide Emission Data for Proposed Sources
           for Occidental Chemical Company, White Springs,
           Florida                                             128
3.1-2    Particulate Matter Emission Data for Proposed
           Sources for Occidental Chemical Company,
           White Springs, Florida                              130
3.1-3    Summary of Maximum Calculated Ambient S02 Levels
           from Proposed and Existing Sources for Occidental
           Chemical Company, Hamilton County, Florida          132
3.1-4    Summary of Maximum Calculated Ambient TSP Levels
           from Proposed and Existing Sources for
           Occidental Chemical Company, Hamilton County,
           Florida                                             135
3.1-5    Projected Emission Burdens of CO, NOX and
           Hydrocarbons for Hamilton County, Florida           137

3.2-1    Estimated Concentrations and Mass Loads for
           Nonprocess Discharges of Proposed Swift
           Creek Phosphate Plant                               146
3.2-2    Mass Loading and Concentrations at Mouth of
           Swift Creek Under Present Conditions and With
           Added Discharge from Swift Creek Chemical
           Plant Nonprocess Water                              147
3.2-3    Mass Loadings and Concentrations Along the
           Suwannee  River Below Swift Creek Under Present
           Conditions and with Added Discharge from
           Swift  Creek                                         148
                                xii

-------
                    TABLES  (CONTINUED)
3.2-4    Concentrations  Along  the  Suwannee  River  Below
           Swift Creek Under Present Conditions and
           With Added Discharge  from Swift  Creek
           Chemical  Nonprocess Water                             149
3.2-5    Predicted Increases in  Phosphate and  Fluoride
           Concentrations  in Swift Creek and the  Suwannee
           River Due to  the Discharge of Treated  Process
           Water from SCCC                                       153

3.4-1    Summary of Occidental's Impacts on Incomes  in  the
           Area of Immediate Impact for 1978,  1979 and
           1980                                                  174
3.4-2    Summary of Occidental's Impacts on Employment  in
           the Area of Immediate Impact for 1978, 1979  and
           1980                                                  174
3.4-3    Employment, Labor Force,  Population and  Other
           Impacts of Occidental's Expansion Program             175
3.4-4    Summary of Occidental's Impacts on Income in the
           State of Florida, 1978, 1979, 1980                     178
3.4-5    Summary of Occidental's Impacts on Employment
           in the State  of Florida, 1978,  1978,  1980             178
3.4-6    Energy Requirements of  Occidental  -
           Soviet Union  Trade                                     182
3.4-7    Projections of  Population, Labor  Force,  Employment,
           Earned Income and Other Socioeconomic  Variables
           for the Three-County  Area with  and  Without
           Occidental's  Expansion                                183
3.4-8    Projected School  Enrollments, Public  Service Costs,
           and Revenues, with  and Without  Occidental's
           Expansion (Within Local Impact  Area)                   185

3.5-1    Radioactivity Balances  for Phosphoric Acid
           Plants and Fertilizer Production:   Occidental
           Chemical Company Compared to West Central
           Florida                                               189
3.5-2    Radioactivity in Selected Source  Waters  at the
           Suwannee River Complex
3.5-3    Results of Gamma Radiation Measurements  for
           Potential Occupational Hazards  in Florida
           Phosphate Chemical  Complexes                          I94
3.5-4    Results of Airborne Radon Progeny Measurements
           for Potential Occupational Hazards                     195
                           xiii

-------
              SECTION 1.0



DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED NEW SOURCE

-------
This environmental impact statement (EIS) was prepared by the Region IV
office of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

The purpose of this statement is to fulfill the requirements of the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the resulting EPA, January
11, 1977 regulations; viz: Preparation of Environmental Impact Statements
for New Source NPDES Permits (40 CFR 6.900).

This is a site specific EIS which has evaluated the impact of a proposed
expansion of a phosphate fertilizer processing facility in North Florida.

The proposed plant will be located adjacent to an existing phosphate mine
and beneficiation plant and will upgrade phosphate rock to a high analy-
sis liquid phosphate for agricultural use.

Both primary impacts and secondary impacts have been reviewed to deter-
mine the effect of the expansion on the present environment.


                             1.1  OVERVIEW
The applicant, Occidental Chemical Company (Occidental) is a member of
the Agricultural Products Group of the Hooker Chemical Corporation, a
subsidiary of Occidental Petroleum Corporation.

The Florida operation of Occidental, located in Hamilton County, north
of White Springs, Florida, is one of many fertilizer grade phosphate
rock processing complexes in the State of Florida.

Occidental desires to increase the capacity of its North Florida Complex.
This development will provide fertilizer-grade phosphates by upgrading
phosphate rock and concentrating to high analysis liquid phosphate known
as superphosphoric acid (SPA).

The expansion is planned for a site adjacent to the existing Swift
Creek Mine located five miles west of the Suwannee River Chemical Complex.

The facility will require approximately 50 acres for plant and 275 acres
each for a cooling pond and by-product gypsum storage, and will  further
involve small acreage for utilities and transportation rights-of-way.
The project is located mainly in Section 36, Township 1 North, Range 14
East.

The superphosphoric acid product (SPA) will be shipped and become part
of a balanced fertilizer produced near the user.  In return, the SPA will
be traded for natural gas products — ammonia and urea — and potash
in connection with a Global Agreement with the U.S.S.R.

-------
To satisfy the agreement, facilities will  be constructed in two phases.
Each will produce approximately half the SPA required.

Phase I (as an "existing source"), is currently in construction at the
Suwannee River Chemical Complex and will be complete in late 1978.
This phase provides for diversion of part of the existing phosphoric
acid capacity from granular fertilizers to SPA.

Needed facilities include phosphoric acid clarification and evaporators
to remove water and concentrate to SPA.

Phase II (as a "new source"), is proposed for the Swift Creek mine site
and is planned for completion in late 1979.  This phase provides for
manufacture of sulfuric acid and combination with phosphate rock to
produce phosphoric acid.

Needed facilities will also include phosphoric acid clarification and
evaporators to remove water and concentrate to SPA.

The Phase II expansion addressed herein is expected to result in the
trade of approximately 0.5 million metric tons per year SPA for 0.75
million metric tons per year of ammonia, 0.5 million metric tons per
year of urea, and 0.5 million metric tons per year of potash.  The overall
energy trade is favorable to the United States.


                  1.2  SUMMARY OF EXISTING FACILITIES
Occidental is the only company presently mining and processing phosphate
in northern Florida.   The operation which began in 1964 is situated on
reserves encompassing an area of approximately 144,000 acres.  There are
two phosphate rock plants and one chemical complex: the Swift Creek
Mine, the Suwannee River Mine and the Suwannee River Chemical Complex.

The Suwannee River Mine started in 1964; Swift Creek Mine in December,
1975.  Each mine has  the capacity to produce about 2.5 million tons of
phosphate rock concentrate per year.

The mining and recovery of phosphate is a process of removing phosphate
ore (matrix) from the ground by draglines and transporting it hydrau-
lically to the beneficiation plants where the clays (approximately 23
percent) and sand (approximately 57 percent) are screened and removed.
The remaining (approximately 20 percent) phosphate concentrate is stored
aboveground and graded according to the quality of the material.

Florida law requires  reclamation of mined lands.  Approximately 6000
acres have been mined by Occidental since 1964 and the majority of the
land is in use as water storage, cooling ponds, clay settling and plant
sites.  The remainder of the land has been, or is in the process of
being, reclaimed.

-------
The existing Suwannee River Chemical Complex started in 1966 and was
expanded in 1975.  This operation uses approximately two-thirds of the
Suwannee River Mine production for the chemical upgrading of the rock
into products for agriculture, chiefly high-analysis fertilizers.  The
chemical processing is necessary to convert the phosphate into a form
that is available to plant life.

Wet phosphate rock is carried to the Suwannee River Chemical Complex by
conveyor and reacted with sulfuric acid, filtered to remove a calcium
sulfate (gypsum) by-product, and evaporated to form a concentrated
phosphoric acid.  This material is sold as a "merchant grade" liquid
fertilizer or further processed to a granular, high-analysis fertilizer
called triplesuperphosphate (TSP).  Another granular product is produced
by the reaction of ammonia with the phosphoric acid and granulated to
form diammonium phosphate (DAP).  A third granular product is produced
by a process that calcines phosphate rock into a form suitable for use
as an animal feed supplement.

A facility currently in construction provides for diversion of part of
the existing phosphoric acid capacity from the above products to SPA.
Thus, equipment for acid clarification, concentration, storage and
loading of SPA will be complete in late 1978.

The facilities now employ approximately 1100 people.  The plants operate
on a twenty-four hour, seven-day-a-week schedule to ship products to
domestic and overseas customers.
                 1.3  SUMMARY OF NEW SOURCE (PHASE II)
The new facilities will be capable of producing and shipping 500,000
metric tons per year of SPA.  The SPA will contain 68-70 percent ?2®5
(i.e. 350,000 metric tons per year of PoOch with 25-40 percent con-
version of total PgO^ to polyphosphates.  This product will  be used to
produce stable solutions of balanced liquid fertilizers near the user.

Process units and related facilities will include:

     --  conveying of wet phosphate rock between existing mine and
         new processing plant,
     —  manufacture of sulfuric acid and combination with phosphate
         rock to produce phosphoric acid,
     --  clarification of phosphoric acid,
     --  evaporation of phosphoric acid to SPA, and
     —  storage, loading and shipping of SPA.

This complex will produce up to 4,000 short tons per day of sulfuric
acid as an intermediate product in the production of 1,400 short tons
per day of £®  as SPA<

-------
By-product steam from the burning of sulfur to produce sulfurlc acid
will be used to generate 60 percent of the electric power to run the
complex.

By-product gypsum will be stored in an impoundment serving a dual purpose
as an evaporative cooling pond.

The development will be self-contained for sewage treatment, fire pro-
tection, potable water, storm drainage and garbage disposal.

Process water will be contained in a pond system designed, constructed,
and operated to maintain a surge capacity equal to the run-off from
the 25-year, 24-hour rainfall event.  When chronic or catastrophic
precipitation cause the water level to equal or exceed the midpoint of the
surge capacity, process waters will be treated at a neutralization station
to meet U.S. Environmental Protection Agency guidelines, 40 CFR, Section
418.15(c).  Nonprocess waters, with rainfall run-off, will meet 40 CFR,
418.15(d).

-------
         1.4  DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED FACILITIES
1.4.1  EXISTING FACILITIES

Detailed descriptions of the existing facilities — Swift Creek Mine,
Suwannee River Mine, and Suwannee River Chemical Complex and Phase I
Expansion — are contained in the Appendix of the Occidental Chemical
Company EIS Resource Document (Resource Document).  Phase I expansion of
the Suwannee River Chemical  Complex is now under construction.


1.4.2  SWIFT CREEK CHEMICAL  COMPLEX PROPOSED FACILITIES — PHASE II
       EXPANSION ALTERNATE 1:  DIHYDRATE WET PROCESS PHOSPHORIC ACID
       PLANT

Engineering for the proposed Swift Creek Chemical Complex, Phase II of
the Russian SPA project, was started in April 1978; start of site prepa-
ration activities are scheduled for the summer of 1978; and plant start-
up is scheduled for October  1979.  Two alternate wet process phosphoric
acid processes are being considered. Alternate 1 {herein described)
would use a conventional dihydrate process, and Alternate 2 would use a
new proprietary Occidental hemihydrate process, as described in Section
4.3.2 of this document and in Section 4.3.3 of the Resource Document.

Location of the proposed Swift Creek Chemical Complex (SCCC) will be in
Hamilton County in North Florida, north of White Springs, Florida, east
of U.S. Highway 41 between White Springs and Jasper, Florida, and adjacent
to the Swift Creek Mine (SCM) as shown on Figure 1.4-1, Area Location
Map. UMT coordinates are 320,860 East, 3,369,750 North.

A detailed description of the proposed SCCC is contained in Section 1.4
of the Resource Document.  The Appendix to Section 1.0 of that document
also contains a detailed description of the existing Swift Creek Mine
(which is about five miles west of the existing Suwannee River Chemical
Plant and Mine), and the existing Suwannee River Chemical Complex and
Mine.

The chemical complex site will be adjacent to the beneficiation plant of
the existing Swift Creek Mine.  Site requirements are approximately 50
acres for the chemical plant and 550 to 600 acres for the gypsum stack
and cooling ponds with further small acreage for utilities and transpor-
tation rights-of-way.


1.4.2.1  Chemical Plant Description

1.4.2.1.1  Products

Final products shipped from the SCCC will consist of 70 percent P205
superphosphoric acid (SPA) and a small amount of sulfuric acid.  SPA
will be shipped by rail car and sulfuric acid by rail car and truck.

-------
Tl
o
c
3D
m
                                      PROPOSED"
                                   V_ SWIFT CREEK
            1 - PROPOSED COOLING POND
            2 - PROPOSED RETENTION POND
            3 • PROPOSED GYPSUM STACK
            4 - PROPOSED CHEMICAL PLANT
            5  BENEFICIATION PLANT
              SETTLING  AREAS
              GYPSUM STACK
              COOLING POND
              CHEMICAL PLANT
           10 - RETENTION POND
           11 - WATER TREATMENT AREA
           12 - SURGE AREA
           13 - ALTMAN BAY LAKE
           14 - EAGLE LAKE
           15 - LIMING POND
0   5000 10000
      J_
    FEET
            AREA LOCATION MAP-OCCIDENTAL CHEMICAL COMPANY

-------
1.4.2.1.2  Capacity

Total production at the complex will be 350,000 metric tons per year
as SPA.  Sufficient sulfuric acid will be produced on-site to satisfy
process requirements.  It is planned to supply the phosphate rock from
the existing Swift Creek Mine (SCM).


1.4.2.1.3  Raw Materials

Sulfur will be supplied by rail car, limestone and lime by truck, and
phosphate rock by conveyor belt.  Wet unground phosphate rock will be
used to feed the phosphoric acid plant and phosphate rock drying and
grinding facilities will not be required; thereby saving energy and
reducing particulate emissions to the atmosphere.


1.4.2.1.4  Process Units

Intermediates and final products will be processed or produced on-site
using the proposed facilities which consist of a phosphate rock transport
system, one dihydrate wet process phosphoric acid plant, phosphoric acid
evaporation facilities, two contact double absorption sulfuric acid plants,
a phosphoric acid clarification plant, and two SPA plants.

Substantial energy savings will be realized by onsite generation of 11.2
megawatts of electrical power using process steam from the sulfuric acid
plants.  The balance of electric power requirements will be supplied by
Florida Power Corporation.

The SCCC has fourteen State and Federal Environmental Permits for the
proposed Phase II expansion.  Principal facilities and their nominal
planned capacities are listed in Table 1.4-1.


1.4.2.1.5  Support Facilities

Support facilities at the SCCC will consist of administrative offices, a
central laboratory, maintenance shop, supplies warehouse, product acid
storage and shipping facilities, one gypsum stack with associated cooling
pond, fuel oil and miscellaneous chemicals storage, electric power
substations, roads, railroads, deep freshwater well, domestic sewage
treatment plant, compressed air, interconnecting piping (for raw materials,
intermediates, products, potable water, fresh water, cooling water,
steam, reagents), a fire water system, and a two-stage limestone-lime
treatment station.
                                  8

-------
Table 1.4-1  Process Plants and Support Facilities
       Name
 Process Units
      Type
Nominal  Capacity
Sulfuric Acid Plants E&F



Phosphate Rock Transport

Phosphoric Acid Plant D



27%- 54% Po05 Evaporation
and Clarification

Superphosphoric Acid Plants
C&D

SPA Storage & Shipping
Sulfur Burning Double Absorption
Contact Type, 98% Acid, Water
Treatment, Aux. Boiler

Conveyor Belt & Storage Bin

Wet Process Di hydrate Type Using
Wet Unground Phosphate Rock and
98% Sulfuric Acid

Forced-Circulation Type Steam
Heated Phosphoric Acid Evaporators

Forced-Circulation Type Steam Heated
Superphosphoric Acid Evaporators

Two Acid Storage Tanks and Rail
Shipping System
 2,000 STPD each
   280 STPH Wet Rock

 1400 STPD P-0.
    as 30% PoO? acid
1400 STPD
   as 54%
                acid
 1400 STPD PpO,
    as 70% ?yl acid

24,000 Metric Tons
 Acid Total
Electric Power Generation
Steam Turbine-Generator Using
Sulfuric Acid Plant Process Steam
    11.2 Megawatts

-------
Table 1.4-1 continued
Page Two
        Name
Support Facilities
      Type
 Nominal Capacity
Gypsum Stack & Cooling Pond
Process Water Treatment System
Nonprocess Water System
Domestic Water Treatment System
Deep Well
General
Above and/or Below Ground Gypsum
Stack and Cooling Pond
Two-stage Limestone-lime Neutralization
System with Settler and Two Settling
Ponds

Fresh Water Ditch No. 1 to Surge Pond
to Fresh Water Ditch No. 2 to
Section 10 Pond

Extended Aeration Followed by
Chlorination

Vertical Fresh Water Well  - 800 ft.
Casing

Office Building, Laboratory, Maintenance
Shop, Warehouse, Roads, Electrical
Substations, Railroads, Compressed  Air,
Water Systems (Potable, Process, Pond,
Fire), Interconnecting Piping, etc.
  550 to 600 Acres
  Total Rainfall Catchment
  & 230 to 250 Wet Acres
  for Evaporation

2,000 GPM Pond Water
  Surge Pond - 30 Acres
  x 20 ft. Deep
25,000 GPD - 180
  Population

 7,000 GPM

-------
1.4.2,1.6  Water Use and Discharge

Proposed Swift Creek Chemical Complex:  One 7,000 GPM freshwater well
at a depth of about 800 feet will supply all process and nonprocess
water for the complex.  The well will be installed in parallel with two
existing 7,000 6PM Swift Creek Mine wells and will also supply water to
the SCM.  One 500 GPM potable water well at a depth of about 300 feet
will supply all potable water uses.  Treated domestic water will be
discharged to the Swift Creek Mine water circuit.

Detailed water balances prepared for each process unit and support
facility of the proposed SCCC (Phase II Expansion) were based on operation
at design capacity.  Occidental Chemical Company's project scope; product
slate and tonnages; material balances; process unit operating sequences;
raw material, intermediate, and product specifications; performance
requirements of air pollution control equipment; proposed designs of
the gypsum stack and cooling pond; local weather data; and other infor-
mation was used to develop the detailed water balances.  These are
included in the description of each unit or support facility in the
Resource Document, Section 1.4.

An overall water balance is summarized in Figure 1.4-2 and Table 1.4-2 for
the SCCC (Phase II) in terms of MGD (millions of gallons of water per
day).  Fresh well water requirements are 3.76 MGD (2,611 GPM) and nonprocess
water discharge is 1.65 MGD (1,142 GPM).  The gypsum stack and cooling
pond system shows a deficit process water balance of 0.23 MGD (158 GPM).
This deficit will be satisfied from the nonprocess water discharge
from the plant.

Sources of nonprocess water are discharges from air compressor coolers,
oil coolers, vacuum pump seals, filter skirt sprays, boiler blowdown,
cooling tower blowdown, steam condensate, rainfall run-off from the
plant site, safety showers and eye wash fountains, and washing of process
equipment for maintenance.

Nonprocess water discharges flow east from the proposed chemical complex
site to the proposed nonprocess surge pond of 30 acres prior to discharge
east and then south in the freshwater ditch to Section 10 Lake for final
clarification before discharge to Swift Creek.  Rainfall run-off from
the SCCC flows into the freshwater ditch from the proposed plant site.

Water discharge routes shown on Figure 1.4-3 are the actual routes
proposed for operation.  Average daily discharge rate of nonprocess
water (exclusive of chemical complex site rainfall run-off - 50 acres)
averages 1.40 MGD for 365 days per year.
                                   11

-------
                                         SCRUBBER
                                          STACKS
                                           0.04
                COOLING
                TOWER
                EVAPORA-
                 TION
                 1.66
                                                               ALL VALUES IN AVERAGE MGD(sJ 310 DRY OPERATING TIME
          WELL
          WATE^
           3.76
                       RAW
                    MATERIALS
                       0.13
T]
O
C
3D
m
VENT
AIR
0.03




RAINFALL
(2)
0.01
       SWIFT CREEK
                                          CHEMICAL COMPLEX
         PHASE 11
                    RAINFALL

                      2.26
                                        NO. 1 GYPSUM STACK
                                          & COOLING POND
  TOTAL
DEPOSITED
   IN
GYPSUMI1)
   1.00
 POND
WATER
DEFICIT
    (4)
 0.23
                 SANITARY
                 & REGEN.
                 TO MINE
                    0.06
              BY-
            PRODUCTS
              0.04
                                                                                             NOTES:
                   NON-
                 PROCESS
                  WATER
                      (3)
                   1.65
             SUPER
             ACID
            CHEMICAL
             WATER
            (O.OS)(4)
                                                                         SURGE

                                                                          POND
 SOLAR
EVAPORA-
  TION
  1.03
                                              PROCESS
                                             EVAPORA-
                                               TION
                                               0.89
 1. INCLUDES CHEMICALLY
   COMBINED AND FREE
   WATER IN GYPSUM PLUS
   CHEMICALLY COMBINED
   WATER IN SULFURIC
   ACID.
2. LIMITED TO RAINFALL
   INTO PROCESS AREAS
   DRAINING TO COOLING
   PONDS.
3. DISCHARGED TO NON-
   PROCESS WATER SURGE
   POND.
4. () DENOTES NEGATIVE
  VALUE.
5. MILLIONS OF GALLONS
  PER DAY.
                      WATER SUMMARY - MGD SWIFT CREEK CHEMICAL COMPLEX

-------
Table 1.4-2   Water Summary (Based on 310 DPY Operating Time)
              -MGD-Swift Creek Chemical Complex-Overall Balance
              for Complete Complex
                                              MGD
                                       In              Out
Well Water                            3.76
Rainfall                              2.27
Vent Air (Including
  Combustion Water)                   0.03
Water in Raw Materials                0.13
Natural Evaporation                                   1.03
Process Evaporation                                   0.99
Deposited Water with Gypsum                           0.53
Chemically Combined Water                             0.25
Chemically Combined Water in H2S04                    0.17
Scrubber Stacks                                       0.04
Cooling Tower Evaporation                             1.66
Water in Products & By-products                       0.04
Nonprocess Water' '                                   1.65
Sanitary & Regeneration Water to
  Mine Water                                          0.06
Deficit:  Gypsum Stack & Cooling
  Pond                                0.23
Total Overall Balance on
  Complete Complex:                   6.42            6.42

(1)  To freshwater ditch; see individual process units for description-
     excludes rainfall run-off.
                              13

-------
o
c
33
rn
4-
w
                             LIMING
                             POND
RETENTION
    POND
                                                   REATED PROCESS
                                                      WATER
                                     SWIFT CREEK
                                     CHEMICAL COMPLEX
                                                                             SUWANNEE RIVER
                                                                             CHEMICAL COMPLEX
                                      NONPROCESS
                                       WATER &
                                     RAIN RUN-OFF
                                                      SECTION 10
                                                        POND
                                                                NPDESSTREAM
                                                             MONITORING POINT 001
                                                                                                  2CM-1.0MILE
       WATER SYSTEMS-OCCIDENTAL CHEMICAL COMPANY-SWIFT CREEK CHEMICAL COMPLEX

-------
Process water discharge is not expected unless excessive rainfall occurs.
If discharged, process water would be treated by a two-stage neutraliza-
tion system using limestone and lime and settled in a settler and settling
ponds.  Discharge of treated water would then flow from the east end of
the settling pond to intercept the freshwater ditch or to the Swift Creek
Mine water circuit.

Existing NPDES discharge points are to Swift Creek, about five miles (8.3
km) southeast of the SCCC plant site.

Actual flows at existing EPA stream monitoring point 001 for NPDES
Permit FL-0000655, located in Swift Creek, from January 1976 through
September 1977 are shown in Figure 1.4-4.  These flows include the SRCC,
SRM, and SCM discharges plus rainfall run-off.  During this period,
average flows (based on daily measurements) ranged from 4.0 MGD in May
1977 to 146 MGD in February 1976, with daily flows ranging from zero in
May 1977 to 188.5 MGD in March and April 1976.


SCCC Vs. Existing Facilities;  Operation of the proposed SCCC has a small
effect on existing fresh well water requirements and surface water
discharges as shown by the water balance on Figure 1.4-5.  Fresh well
water increases by 3.76 MGD or 11.8 percent of the existing well water
use of 31.82 MGD.  Surface water discharges, greatly reduced by extensive
reuse of nonprocess water, will increase by 1.65 MGD or 7.7 percent of the
existing discharge of 21.36 MGD.  Table 1.4-3 shows flows for each
existing facility, the total, and for the proposed SCCC.  Footnotes on
the table explain the make-up of the various water categories.


1.4.2.1.7  Process Water Treatment Facilities

Treatment Requirements:  The gypsum stack and cooling pond facility has
a  negative water balance of 158 GPM on an annual average basis; however,
seasonal imbalances of excess rainfall over evaporation during a portion
of each year may require infrequent treatment and discharge of treated
process water.  Based on the New Source Effluent Guidelines, the
facility must be designed, constructed and operated to maintain a surge
capacity equal to the run-off from the 25-year 24-hour rainfall event.
The cooling pond will be designed to maintain 1.5 times the volume of
run-off from the 25-year 24-hour storm.  Hydro!ogic studies have
concluded that a treatment rate of 2,000 gallons per minute will adequately
provide the necessary capacity to maintain this requirement.
                                15

-------
 STREAM
  FLOW
   MGD
200 —
160 —
120 —
 80 —
 40 —
                                             KEY




                                          MAX. DAILY


                                          AV. MONTHY


                                          MIN. DAILY
       1  I
       J  F
M
I   I   1   I   I   I   I   I
AMJ   JASON
                                 I   I
                                 F   M
A  M
                          1976
  I
  J


1977
I   I   I
J   A   S
         STREAM FLOW. MGD AT STREAM MONITORING POINT 001
                              FIGURE 1.4-4

                                   16

-------
              WATER BALANCE-PROPOSED vs.  EXISTING
                    MGD (MILLIONS GALLONS PER DAY)
^
WELL WATER

RAINFALL
OTHER

3.76 }
K
2.27 }
V
0.39N
	 1/
PROPOSED
SWIFT CREEK
CHEMICAL
COMPLEX
PHASE II

L SURFACE WATER

EVAPORATION
CONSUMED
OTHER
iv
DISCHARGE 1.65>
V
N
3.72 y
V
0.95N.
0.1 OK.
 WELL WATER
 RAINFALL
 GROUND WATER
I OTHER
31.82
21.97
  8.12
•N
I    .
    1.84
        EXISTING

     UWANNEE  RIVER
        CHEMICAL
        COMPLEX

      WITH PHASE I
                              SUWANNEE
                             RIVER  MINE
                                SWIFT
                             CREEK MINE
                              FIGURE 1.4-5
                                   17
                                            SURFACE WATER
                                            DISCHARGE
                                             EVAPORATION
                                             CONSUMED
                                             OTHER
                                          21.36
                                           21.63
                                           19.60
                                             1.16

-------
Table  1.4-3  Water Balance—Existing vs. Proposed Facilities (MGD)
Water Source
or
Termination
Well Water
(1 \
Rainfair u
Other(2)
1 0\
Groundwaterv '
Surface Water, ^
_, Discharge *
00 lz\
Evaporation^ '
Consumed^
(7]
Otheru'
Total
Suwannee River Suwannee
Chemical River
Complex Mi ne
In Out In Out
12.00 10.15

3.20 14.89
1.57 0.18
4.20
l ^
} 8.31 8.40
6.35 11.35
1.64 9.09

0.47 0.58
16.77 16.77 29.42 29.42
Swift Total
Creek Existing
Mine Facilities
In Out In
9.67 31.82

3.88 21.97
0.09 1.84
3.92 8.12

4.65
3.93
8.87

0.11
17.56 17.56 63.75
Out






21.36
21.63
19.60

1.16
63.75
Proposed
Swift Creek
Chemical Complex
In Out
3.76

2.27
0.39
_

1.65
3.72
0.95

0.10
6.42 6.42
(1)  Does not include rainfall  run-off from plant  area  or  area outside of mine water circuit
 2   Includes vent air,  water in  raw materials,  and  transfer water between chemical plants and mines
(3)  Includes pit seepage and water in matrix.
(4)  Nonprocess water for chemical  plants  and mine circuit water  for mines.
(5)  Natural  & process evaporation  from ponds, cooling  towers, and stacks.
 6)  Includes chemically bound  water and water deposited in waste gypsum, clays, tailings, and mud balls
(/)  Includes product moisture  and  transfer water  between chemical plant and mines.

-------
A chemical analysis of the process water within the impoundment expected
for the SCCC, based on Occidental's existing SRCC operation is shown in
Table 1.4-4.  These values vary widely on a seasonal basis as influenced
by the amount of rainfall.  Process water chemical analysis varies with
the phosphate rock processed and the chemical processes used.  There is
no typical analysis in the phosphate industry.


Treatment Facilities:  Latest available technology for treatment of
process water Ts~ generally referred to as "double liming".  Two-stage
neutralization ("double liming") has proven to be the most effective
process for treatment of process water and has been established as the
Best Available Demonstrated Control Technology (BADCT).

A combination of limestone followed by lime treatment in the first stage,
followed by settling between each stage for solids removal, followed by
slaked lime treatment in the second stage, followed by settling, is
planned for Swift Creek.

Process water will  be first reacted with ground limestone to a pH of
3.0 and settled in  a settler.  The clear overflow will then be reacted
with slaked lime to a pH of 5.5 and settled in a small pond.  Clear
liquor from the lime-treatment settling pond in the first stage will be
further reacted with slaked lime in Stage II to a pH of 9.0 and settled
in a pond.  The clear overflow discharged to surface waters is expected
to have a pH of 9.0, fluoride content of 1220 MG/L, and phosphate content
of 1-13 MG/L as phosphorus, and other impurities as shown in Table
1.4-5.

Use of ponds or lagoons for settling and sludge storage precludes
combination of sludges from both lime treatment stages, due to the treat-
ment requirement for separate, intermediate clarification.  Sludge from
the first lime treatment stage will be combined with the calcium carbonate
sludge for disposal with gypsum.


1.4.2.1.8  Nonprocess Water Contamination Control & Treatment Facilities

Nonprocess water discharge at 1.65 MGD (1,142 GPM), plus rainfall run-off,
will normally be suitable for direct discharge.  In the event of contamination,
the discharge will  be diverted to the second stage of the neutralization
station as discussed below.

Nonprocess water may become contaminated with process water, phosphoric
acid, sulfuric acid, or rainfall run-off.  Experience in the phosphate
industry has shown that when contamination does occur, the levels of
fluorides, phosphate, and/or sulfuric acid are generally much lower than
for process water.   Neutralization of contaminated nonprocess water in
the process water neutralization system has been practiced successfully
for many years by most Florida phosphate companies and the required
effluent limitations can be achieved.
                                  19

-------
Table 1.4-4  Expected  Process Water Analysis—Swift Creek Chemical
             Complex Based on Suwannee River Chemical  Complex Sampling
Analysis (1)
pH, Std. Units
Total Acidity, as CaCOg
Mineral Acidity, as CaCOj
Fluoride, as F
Total Phosphorus, as P
Total Suspended Solids
Total Dissolved Solids
Sulfate, as S04
Chloride, as Cl
Conductivity, as umhos
Sodium, as Na
Silica, as Si
Aluminum, as Al
Iron, as Fe
Magnesium, as Mg
Lead, as Pb
Manganese, as Mn
Calcium, as Ca
8/20/77
1.65
34,385
20,976
6,500
4,290
35
26,250
5,700
45
24,000
1,094
1,406
389
263
44
-
-
500
12/8/77
1.70
32,800
-
6,600
3,960
69
25,952
6,200
72
-
896
1,294
409
204
76
<0.1
7.88
77
(1)   All  values  expressed  as mq/1 unless otherwise noted.
                             20

-------
Table 1.4-5  Expected  Effluent  Quality  Produced  by Two-stage  Limestone-
             Lime Treatment
Analysis^
pH, Std. Units
Acidity, as CaC03
Fluoride, as F
Total P
Total Suspended Solids
Chlorides, as Cl
Sul fates, as S04
Sodium as Na
Calcium, as Ca
Magnesium, as Mg
Aluminum, as Al
Chrome, as Cr
Zinc
Iron, as Fe
Manganese, as Mn
Boron, as B
Lead, as Pb
Process
Water
1.70
32,800
6,600
4,000
69
72
6,200
896
77
44
389
0.43
1.46
263
7.9
0.90
<0.10
Stage II
Supernatant
9.0
-
12-20
1-13
15
75
2,709
900
375
22
<0.2
<0.10
<0.10
0.10
0.03
<0.50
<0.10
 (1)  All  values in mq/1  unless otherwise noted.
                             21

-------
Nonprocess water will discharge to a freshwater ditch in the chemical
plant, which discharges to a nonprocess surge pond, which discharges to
a second freshwater ditch, which discharges to the Section 10 pond,
which discharges to Swift Creek.  Prevention and control of contamination
of nonprocess water will be accomplished in several ways.

First, all acid process and storage areas will be curbed, and separated
from nonprocess waters and rain run-off areas.  Acid leaks and spills
will be collected and returned to the process or to the process water
(pond water) system.

Second, any point source nonprocess water that could become contaminated
by leaks will be pH monitored in each process area on a routine basis
and diverted, if required, from the first freshwater ditch to the process
water (pond water) system until the leaks are repaired and the pH has
returned to normal (>pH 5.5).

Third, nonprocess water that cannot become contaminated and rain run-off
from nonprocess areas will go directly by way of the first freshwater
ditch to the nonprocess water surge pond.  This pond will be 30 acres in
size, 20 feet deep, and have a retention time of over 100 days except
during rainfall periods.  Inlet and outlet of the pond will be continuously
pH recorded and alarmed for low pH levels (instruments will be located
in a process control room) so that prompt and proper corrective action
can be taken. The long retention time will dampen any contamination
caused by leaks or spills.  These alarm systems are set for a pH 5.5
level.

Fourth, if the pH leaving the nonprocess surge pond to the second fresh-
water ditch becomes too low, the discharge will be diverted to the Stage
II neutralization station, treated with lime, and settled in a pond.
Effluent limitation requirements are identical to process water.

Fifth, overflow from the Stage II settling pond will be discharged back
to the second freshwater ditch going to the Section 10 pond for final
clarification before discharging to Swift Creek.  The Section 10 pond
is 150 acres and 20 feet deep and has a retention time of 156 days,
except during rainfall periods (based on nonprocess water discharge rate
and Swift Creek Mine water discharge rate).  This long retention time
will allow clarification of the nonprocess and mine discharge water for
removal of suspended solids and will dampen out any pH or contaminant
changes should all of the first four control actions malfunction
simultaneously-which is highly unlikely.


1.4.2.1.9  Description of Environmental Aspects of Support Facilities - SCCC

Gypsum Stack and Cooling Pond System:  A new gypsum stack and cooling pond
will be provided to store by-product waste gypsum from the phosphoric
acid plant and to provide atmospheric cooling for process water (pond
                                    22

-------
water) recirculated to the process units.  The gypsum stack, cooling
pond and surge pond areas will total 550 to 600 acres for rainfall
collection and have a total wet area of 230 to 250 acres for cooling and
solar evaporation. Process heat removal by atmospheric cooling will also
result in evaporation of water from the cooling pond.

Cool pond water from the cooling pond will be recirculated to the process
units at a rate of 64 MGD to 84 MGD (44,000 to 58,000 GPM) depending on
demand, for process use or condensation of steam in the phosphoric acid
plant, 28-54 percent P205 evaporators, clarification, the superphosphoric
acid plants, and SPA storage and shipping.  The warm pond water will be
recirculated to the cooling pond for cooling.  A portion of the warm
water will be used to slurry the by-product gypsum cake from the phos-
phoric acid plant filter and the slurry will be pumped to the gypsum
stack.  The gypsum will settle in the stack and the separated pond water
will overflow to the cooling pond.

The gypsum stack-cooling pond system has a deficit water balance of 158
GPM and will not discharge to the treatment system except following
periods of exceptionally heavy rainfall.  Design of the system provides a
water surge volume of 1.5 times the surge required for a 25-year 24-hour
rainfall event.   In case of discharge, the water will be sent to the
treatment system described in Section 1.4.2.1.7 (Treatment Facilities).

Fresh Water Supply:  A new deep well with a capacity of 7,000 GPM will
supply all fresh water requirements for the proposed chemical plant.
This well will  be operated in parallel with the two existing 7,000 GPM
wells at the Swift Creek Mine so that two wells will be operating with
one well as a spare for most of the year.  Casing depth of the new well
will be about 800 feet and it is expected that the water analysis will
be very similar to the existing Swift Creek Mine wells.


Process Chemicals and Supplies:  Process chemicals required for boiler
feed water and cooling tower^water treatment, as shown in Table 1.4-6, are
based on Sulfuric Acid Plants C&D at the existing SRCC.  The expected con-
centration increase of the nonprocess water in the freshwater ditch
resulting from the use of these chemicals is also shown in Table 1.4-6.

Defoamer use will be budgeted at 700 metric tons per year and is used in
Phosphoric Acid Plant D, 27-54 percent Evaporation, Clarification, and
the SPA Plants for foam control.  A water soluble defoamer is used and
ends up in the SPA acid and the process water circuit.  No discharge
occurs to the nonprocess water system.
                                   23

-------
 Table 1.4-6
Process Chemicals-Sulfuric Acid Plant Boiler and
Cooling Tower Chemicals (at Rated Capacities)
Water Treatment Chemical
Su If uric Acid
Unit Material Plants E & F
Boiler Liqui-Treat 187
NA-5 12
" Corrogen 36
Cooling Betz 430 or 431 112
Slimicide J-12 42
Chlorine 21
EFFLUENT LOADINGS^
sO>
nescription
Orqanic & Inorganic Chelates
Neutralizing Amine
Catalyzed Sodium Sulfite
L.W. Polymer and Phosphonate
Disoersant
Non-Oxidizinq Biocide
Chlorine

Sulfuric Acid Concentration
Plants E & F Increase in ,0,
Chemical Ibs/day Non-Process Wateru'
Sulfate & Sulfide
as S04 2,467
Chloride as Cl 139
Calcium as CaC03 1,646
Magnesium as CaC03 623
Silica as Si02 275
Total Phosphate as PO. 43
Total Copper as Cu 0.15
Total Iron as Fe 3.7
Soluble Zinc as Zn 0.25
179 Mfi/L
10.1 Mfi/L
120 MR/L
453 - MG/L
20 MG/L
3.1 MG/L
10.9 yGM/L
0.28 MG/L
18.2 yGM/L
(1)   Betz Laboratories,  Inc.  to  Occidental Chemical,  12/23/77 for SRCC,
     adjusted  for  SCC  plants  capacity
(2)   Based on  Fresh  Mater  Ditch  Flow of 1.65 MGD—excludes rainfall
     run-off
                               24

-------
Inorganic chemicals, budgeted at 13,000 metric tons per year, will leave
the plant site as a by-product.  No discharge occurs to the nonprocess
water system.

Limestone will be budgeted at 6,268 metric tons per year and will leave
the plant site as a by-product and used to treat nonprocess water when
it becomes contaminated.  Lime will be budgeted at 643 metric tons per
year and will also be used to treat nonprocess water.


Electric Power: 11.2 MW electric power will be generated onsite using high
pressure steam from Sulfuric Acid Plants E & F and the balance will be
supplied by Florida Power Corporation.


Fuel Oil;  A low sulfur commercial distillate fuel oil fired in auxiliary
boilers to supply high pressure steam will be stored in tanks surrounded
by an embankment to contain leaks or spills.


Domestic Wastewater Treatment Facilities:  The proposed waste treatment
plant will service the office, laboratory, shops, Phosphoric Acid Plant
D, Sulfuric Acid Plants E & F, 28-54 percent PoOc Evaporation, Purification
Plant, Superphosphoric Acid Plants C & D, and SPA storage and shipping.
A 25,000 gallon per day design to serve a population of 180 persons is
proposed. Treatment will consist of an extended aeration process followed
by chlorination with effluent to mines water recirculation system. The
allowable effluent limitation in Florida is 90 percent treatment or
better.
                                  25

-------
                          LIST OF REFERENCES
                             (Section 1.4)
Aerial photographs of Suwannee River Chemical  Complex plant site.
     Scale of photographs is 1" = 333'.

Ardaman and Associates, Inc.  Rainfall  and solar evaporation areas for
     Gypsum Stack and Cooling Pond (telephone  conversation).

Florida, State of, Department of Environmental  Regulation (FDER),
     Construction Permits.

Occidental Chemical Company, Aerial photograph of Suwannee River
     Chemical Complex area including ponds and NPDES Discharge Point
     001—scale, 1" = 1000'.  Nonprocess water, process water, and
     rainfall routes outlined by Occidental Chemical Company's
     Environmental personnel.

Occidental Chemical Company, Information from  various Occidental
     Chemical Company environmental, operating, management, and
     SPA project personnel  (meetings, written  communications,
     telephone calls).

OXY/SPA Project Scope Addendum.
                                  26

-------
              SECTION 2.0



ENVIRONMENT WITHOUT THE PROPOSED ACTION
                     27

-------
                 2.1  METEOROLOGY AND CLIMATOLOGY
2.1.1  CLIMATOLOGY

The Occidental site is characterized by dry winters and rainy simmers,
a high percentage of sunshine, and high humidity.  The site seldom
experiences strong winds or severe cold weather.
2.1.2  PRECIPITATION AND EVAPORATION

The rainfall in North Florida can be divided into two regions; the wet
summer months (June-September) and the dry fall and winter months.
The rainfall during the summer months is characterized by intense,
localized thunderstorms which account for approximately half the
annual precipitation.  During this period, the monthly rainfall
averages 5 to 8 inches and precipitation can be expected one day
in two.

During the remaining period (October-May), precipitation is associated
with the passage of frontal systems and is usually widespread and of
low intensity.  Monthly rainfall during this period averages 2 to 4
inches.

Severe rainfall  can occur any time throughout the year but is usually
associated with thunderstorm activity or the passage of tropical dis-
turbances.  The mean annual rainfall for the area averages 54 inches
with variations from 33 inches to 75 inches.

The average annual open water evaporation in Hamilton County is approxi-
mately 46 inches per year (Visher and Hughes, 1969) and the evapotrans-
piration rate from soil and vegetation averages 40 inches per year
(Fisk, 1977).
2.1.3  ATMOSPHERIC VENTILATION

Atmospheric ventilation includes wind speed, wind direction,
mixing depth and atmospheric stability.  Valdosta, Georgia surface
observations and Waycross, Georgia upper air data for the period 1972-
1976 were used as a source of these data.  Wind speed at the site is
quite moderate.  The annual average speed is 3.1  meters per second
(7 mph); that exceeded 10% of the time is 5 meters per second (11 mph).
                                 28

-------
Wind direction shows a slight northeast-southwest predominance annu-
ally.  Seasonably the wind direction distributions are more skewed
(Figure 2.1-1).

The stability of the atmosphere, defined by insolation and wind speed,
is classified unstable 25% of the time, natural 33% and stable 42%.

The mixing depth can be expected to be low enough to influence air
quality (120 meters) approximately 4.5 percent of the time.  The
greatest occurrence of these conditions will exist during the period
October through April when a mixing height of less than 120 meters
can be expected to occur 6 days per month averaging 7 hours per
occurrence.  The annual morning mixing depth at the site averages 500
and the afternoon mixing depth averages 1450 meters.

Atmospheric ventilation at the site is classified as quite good
(Holzworth, 1972).

More detail on these items will be found in the Resource Document.
 2.1.4  SEVERE WEATHER

 The probability of severe weather occurring in Hamilton County is
 quite low.  The chance of a hurricane-force wind in a given year is
 less than one in 50.  The mean annual frequency of a tornado occurring
 in a one degree square (4145 square miles) is 0.65.  The probability
 of a tornado hitting any given spot in Hamilton County is once in
 2260 years.  The extreme wind expected once in 100 years is 110 miles
 per hour with gusts to 143 miles per hour.  No hail storms causing
 significant damage ($100,000) have ever been reported in Hamilton
 County.
                                      29

-------
                               SOUTH
                           SCALE:  1 INCH = 4%                   s
ANNUAL WIND DIRECTION DISTRIBUTION    VALDOSTA.GEORGIA   1972-1976
SOURCE: NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE     SCALE FOR INSETS: 1/2 INCH = 5%
                           FIGURE 2.1-1
                                30

-------
                          LIST OF REFERENCES
                             (Section 2.1)


Fisk, D.W.  (1977),  "Water Balance, Suwannee River Water Management
     District"; Information Circular No.  3.  September 1977.

Holzworth,  G.C. (1972), "Mixing Heights,  Wind Speeds, and Potential
     for Urban Air  Pollution Throughout the Contiguous United States";
     U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,  AP-101.  January 1972.

Visher, F.N.  and G.H. Hughes (1969), "The Difference Between Rainfall
     and Potential  Evaporation in Florida"; Florida Department of  Natural
     Resources, United States Geological  Survey, Map Series No. 32.
     August 1969.
                                  31

-------
                         2.2  AIR QUALITY
Preconstruetion air quality was established for the 1977-78 period.
The pollutants considered in defining air quality are fluorides and the
EPA designated "criteria pollutants" sulfur dioxide, (S02), total
suspended particulate matter (TSP), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen
oxides (NOX) and hydrocarbons.

The procedure used for establishing ambient levels of 862 and TSP was
air quality modeling with measured levels of these pollutants being
used to establish background concentrations.  The procedure for estab-
lishing the preconstruction impact of fluoride emissions involved a
combination of ambient measurements and the observation of sensitive
receptors.  Only emission inventories were prepared for CO, NOX and
hydrocarbons since these contaminants are emitted in small amounts
throughout the .study area.
2.2.1  METHODOLOGY

The development of an emission inventory for SOo and particulate matter
and the subsequent evaluation of the impact of these emissions by air
quality modeling was quite straightforward.  The emission rates of both
were readily measurable or could be estimated with confidence and air
quality models are applicable for estimating the dispersion and trans-
port of these materials.

The evaluation of fluoride emissions presented some difficulties,
however.  Because of the uncertainty in establishing an emission rate of
fluorides from gypsum and cooling ponds (estimated range from 0.1 to 10
pounds per acre day) and the fact that fluoride emissions from the pond
surfaces cannot readily be simulated with air quality models, an alter-
native approach was used for establishing existing fluoride impact.

The impact of existing fluoride emissions was defined in terms of:

     1.  Measured ambient air fluoride concentrations.

     2.  Measured fluoride concentrations in grass.

     3.  Observed effects of fluorides on cattle.

     4.  Observed effects of fluoride on vegetation.

The emission burden of CO, NOX and hydrocarbons were estimated for
Hamilton County using emission factors developed by EPA (1976).

Air quality modeling to establish preconstruction levels of S02 and
TSP was conducted in accordance with guidelines published by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA 1977).  The Air Quality Display
Model  (AQDM) was used for simulating annual conditions and the PTMTPW
was used for simulating short-term conditions.
                               32

-------
Both models incorporated the Briggs plume rise equation and were used
with a calibration factor of 1.0.

A five-year record of meteorological  data from Valdosta and Waycross,
Georgia, was used with these models (see Section 2.1).

For all Occidental sources,  the only sources significantly impacting
on the study area, an annual average emission rate and  a short-term
maximum emission rate for S02 and  particulate matter was determined.
The maximum emission rates were determined by emission  measurements
or were calculated from known process variables.  The annual average
emission rates were calculated from the maximum emission rates taking
into account annual average  production rates and the fraction of time
each source operated during  an annual period.  The annual average and
short-term emission data for the Occidental  sources for the 1977-78
period are available in the  Resource Document.
2.2.2  EXISTING AIR QUALITY

Reconstruction air quality for the 1977-78 time period was determined
for S02 and TSP by air quality modeling and ambient air quality moni-
toring.  Ambient fluoride levels in the ambient air and in grass were
monitored during the 1977-78 period.    Surveys were made in 1977 and
1978 to determine the effects of fluorides on vegetation and in 1978
to determine the effect of fluorides  on cattle.
2.2.2.1   Existing Sulfur Dioxide Levels

Ambient  levels  of S02 in the study area were determined by air quality
modeling techniques.   In addition, ambient sulfur dioxide levels have
been measured at four sites with continuous monitoring instrumentation
since May,  1977 using Meloy Model SA-285 equipment.


2.2.2.1.1   Calculated Sulfur Dioxide Levels

Ambient  SOg levels were calculated for the annual average, 24-hour, and
3-hour periods  using  procedures described in Section 2.2.1.

Isopleths of annual average S02 concentrations for the 1977-78 period
are presented as Figure 2.2-1.   Table 2.2-1 summarized these annual data
along with calculated 24-hour and 3-hour concentrations.

The highest predicted 1977-78 24-hour S02 concentration for the study
area occurs on  Occidental property.  This level is projected to be
254 micrograms  per cubic meter and will occur one kilometer northwest
of the existing chemical complex.

At the Swift Creek site, the site of the proposed expansion, the
maximum  predicted existing 24-hour S02 concentration will be 105 micro-
grams per cubic meter.  This level is the result of emissions from
the existing chemical complex.
                                   33

-------
o
c
33
m
M
            i	y_\	
              - POINT OF MAXIMUM 24 HOUR IMPACT .SRCC

           • 2 - POINT OF MAXIMUM 24 HOUR IMPACT. SCCC

       \   B3 - POINT OF MAXIMUM 3 HOUR IMPACT, SRCC

       "^C~ B4 - POINT OF MAXIMUM 3 HOUR IMPACT, SCCC



           X,
                 PROPOSED SWIFT CREEK CHEMICAL COMPLEX
                                                                          SUWANNEE RIVE
                                                                         CHEMICAL COMPLEX
               EXISTING
               BENEFICIATION
        ANNUAL  AVERAGE SO2  LEVELS  (ug/m3) 1977-1978 OCCIDENTAL Ch
COMPANY
.TON COUNTY

-------
Table 2.2-1    Summary of Air Quality Modeling for 1977-78 S02 Levels,
               Occidental Chemical Company

Averaging
Time
Annual
24-Hour
3- Hour

FDER Air
Quality
Standard
60
260
1,300
Maximum Calcul
Concentration
Occidental
scccO)
7
105
35
ated S02
(Mg/m3)
Occidental
SRCCO)
20
254
1214
 (1)  SCCC = Swift Creek Chemical Complex and SRCC = Suwannee River
     Chemical Complex.
                                   35

-------
The highest calculated 3-hour S02 level for the 1977-78 period was
calculated to be 1214 micrograms per cubic meter.  This concentration
is expected to occur south of the existing Chemical complex.  The
maximum 3-hour S02 concentration predicted for the Swift Creek site
is 35 micrograms per cubic meter, and will result from emissions from
the existing chemical complex.

All calculated S02 levels are below applicable state and federal air
quality standards.
2.2.2.1.2  Measured Sulfur Dioxide Levels

Ambient air monitoring for SOg has been conducted by Occidental since
1973.  Since May, 1977, S02 levels have been monitored with four con-
tinuous sulfur dioxide monitors.  The location of these monitors is
shown in Figure 2.2-2.

The data show that the long-term arithmetic mean $63 level  is quite
low; in the range of 1 to 10 micrograms per cubic meter during normal
plant operation.  The highest measured 24-hour S0£ level under periods
of normal plant operation was 197 micrograms per cubic meter.  The
highest second-high measured 24-hour S0£ level was 85 micrograms per
cubic meter (Table 2.2-2).  These levels are all below applicable air
quality standards.
2.2.2.2  Existing Total Suspended Particulate Matter Levels

Total suspended particulate matter (TSP) levels in the study area were
determined by air quality modeling techniques for the 1977-78 period.
In addition to the air quality modeling, TSP levels have been monitored
in the area since October, 1975.


2.2.2.2.1  Calculated Total Suspended Particulate Matter Levels

Ambient TSP levels were established for 1977-78 using air quality
modeling techniques.  For both periods of time, the annual  average
and 24-hour TSP levels were calculated.  The modeling techniques used
are described in Section 2.2.1.

Annual average TSP levels for the 1977-78 period are presented as Figure
2.2-3.  These data are also summarized in Table 2.2-3.  The maximum
concentrations predicted for the study area was only 3 micrograms per
cubic meter above the background level of 31 micrograms per cubic meter
(Figure 2.2-3).

The highest calculated 24-hour TSP level occurs just west of the
existing chemical complex on Occidental property.  During the 1977-78
period, this level was projected to be 116 micrograms per cubic meter
including 61 micrograms per cubic meter of background particulate
matter.
                                  3fa

-------
PROPOSED SWIFT CREEK CHEMICAL COMPLEX
                      PROPOSED
                      CHEMICAL
                      PLANT
             SUWANNEE RIVER
            CHEMICAL COMPLEX
                                                                       EXISTING
                                                                       CHEMICAL
                                                                       PLANT
                                   E *TING
                                   BENEFICIATION
                                   PLANT
                     BENEFICIATION
                     PLANT
                                                                                  SO2 MONITOR
NETWORK  FOR  SO2 AND TSP
                      QUALITY MONITORING

-------
Table 2.2-2    Summary of Measured Ambient SOo Levels for Occidental
               Chemical Company, Hamilton County,  Florida for  May
               1977-January 1978
Site Number^1)

Number of 24-
Hour Periods
Arithmetic Mean'2'
(ug/m3)
3 4
196 252.5
1.0 3.1
7
210.5
9.8
Lime Station
248.5
2.0
Highest Measured'2'
  24-Hour Cone.
  (yg/m3)
2nd Highest (2)
  Measured 24-Hour
  Cone. Ug/m3)
                           35
                           16
                    149
                     56
197
 85
34
32
(1)  See Figure 2.2-4
(2)   Measured during normal plant operations.
 Table 2.2-3
Summary of Air Quality Modeling for 1977-78 of Total
Suspended Particulate Matter Levels for Occidental
Chemical Company
Maximum Calculated TSP
Concentration (yg/nr)
Averaging
Time
Annual ^)
24-Hour^3)
FDER Air
Quality
Standard
60
150
Occidental
scccv''
33
77
Occidental
SRCCO)
34
116
 (1)   SCCC = Swift Creek Chemical  Complex and  SRCC  =  Suwannee River
      Chemical  Complex.
 (2)   Includes  background of 31  micrograms  per cubic  meter.
 (3)   Includes  background of 60  micrograms  per cubic  meter.
                                   38

-------
                                                              1 - POINT OF MAXIMUM 24 HOUR TSP IMPACT , SRCC
                                                              2 - POINT OF MAXIMUM 24 HOUR TSP IMPACT , SCCC
 /,     PROPOSED SWIFT CREEK CHEMICAL COMPLEX
/      \L      1
                              PROPOSED
                              CHEMICAL
                              PLANT
                                                   SUWANNEE RIVER
                                                 ,CHEMICAL
                                                                                CHEMICAL
                                                                                PLANT
                                                                                        3ENEF1CIATION
                             BENEF C AT Or
                                                                       ug/mj  BACKGROUND
ANNUAL AVERAGE  FSP LEVELS-1977
78 INCLUDING 31

-------
At the proposed Swift Creek chemical complex site the highest projected
24-hour total suspended particulate matter level for the 1977-78
period is 77 micrograms per cubic meter.  This is the result of partic-
ulate matter emissions from the existing phosphate rock beneficiation
plant located near that site.

The predicted annual average TSP levels and the 24-hour TSP levels for
the 1977-78 period are well below applicable state and federal air
quality standards.


2.2.2.2.2  Measured Ambient Total Suspended Particulate Matter Levels

TSP levels have been monitored at the Occidental site since October,
1975 and the program is continuing.  Measurements have been made at six
sites shown in Figure 2.2-2 using the high-volume sampling method
specified by EPA (40 CFR 50, Appendix B).  At the present time, monitor-
ing is being conducted at only four of these sites; those identified as
4, 5, 6, and 7.  The data show 24-month geometric mean levels of TSP
ranging from 25 to 45 micrograms per cubic meter.  Individual concen-
trations ranged from 5 to 757 micrograms per cubic meter.  The extreme
high concentration and other high levels measured on February 24, 1977
were due to a large scale dust cloud passing over north Florida.  The
presence of this cloud was confirmed by high volume samplers located
throughout northern and central Florida.  A summary of the TSP data is
presented in Table 2.2-4.

An annual TSP background level of 31 micrograms per cubic meter and a
24-hour TSP background level of 61 micrograms per cubic meter were
derived from data from sites 1, 2, and 5.


2.2.2.3  Existing Fluoride Data

2.2.2.3.1 Sources of Fluorides

The impact of existing fluoride emissions is being evaluated in terms of
measured ambient concentrations of fluoride and observed fluoride effects.
As a basis for projecting these observations, a 1977-78 fluoride emissions
inventory was prepared.

In a phosphate fertilizer complex, fluoride emissions result from unit
processes and from cooling water ponds and gypsum ponds. Permitted fluoride
emissions from point sources within the existing Occidental Chemical
Complex average 0.20 Ibs of fluoride per ton of ?2^5 fec* to the phosphoric
acid plants.  Fluoride emissions from gypsum and cooling water ponds
were recently examined by EPA (EPA, undated).  This document summarizes
the major theoretical and field studies that have been conducted over
the past eleven years.  The only consensus that has been reached is that
fluoride emissions from ponds range from 0.1 to 10 Ibs per acre per day.
The parameters that result in this wide range of estimates are not
understood.

In the existing Occidental complex, the permitted PpOs feed rate to phos-
phoric acid plants is 1895 tons per day and the pond area is 412 acres.
                                 40

-------
Table 2.2-4   Summary of Total Suspended Particulate Matter Monitoring
              Data for Occidental Chemical Company, Hamilton County,
              Florida for October 1975-October 1977

}b 2C
Number of Samples 47 100
Geometric Mean
Cone, (pg/m3) 25 31
Expected Second
Max. Cone, (vg/m3) 69 81
95th Percent! le
Cone, (ug/m3) 48 58
Site
4
91
43
148
100
Number^
5
97
38
96
82

6
28
41
(c)
(c)

7
93
37
140
73
     Figure 2.2-2.

^Sites discontinued  in May 1977.

^Sample size too small.
                                 41

-------
The permitted process fluoride emission rate will therefore be 379 Ibs per
day and pond emissions will be proportional to the pond  area.


2.2.2.3.2  Fluoride in the Environment

Since there is no agreement in the scientific community on the fluoride
emission rate from ponds (EPA, undated), and since emissions from ponds
cannot be reasonably simulated with air quality models, the impact of
existing fluoride emissions was determined by:

     1.  Measuring gaseous fluoride concentrations in the ambient
         air.

     2.  Measuring the fluoride concentrations in grass.

     3.  Observing the effects of fluorides on cattle.

     4.  Observing the effects of fluorides on vegetation.


Airborne Fluorides:  Gaseous fluorides in the ambient air have been
measured at five monitoring sites (Figure 2.2-4) since November 1977.
The monitoring data through April 14, 1978, are summarized in Table 2.2-5.
It will be noted that there is very little spatial variation in ambient
fluoride levels.   The average concentrations range from 0.7 to 1.0
micrograms per cubic meter.  The average concentration for all sites is
0.8 micrograms per cubic meter.  24-hour concentrations range from 5.1
micrograms per cubic meter to 0.1 micrograms per cubic meter.


Fluoride in Grass:  One of the potential economic impacts of fluoride
in the environment is the damage caused to livestock by ingestion of
forage materials containing fluorides.  In significant concentrations,
the fluorides create a condition known as fluorosis.  This manifests
itself in mottling and/or softening of the teeth of livestock, and in
more severe cases, in alterations of bone structure.

The threshold concentration in forage material at which these effects
become noticeable in beef and dairy heifers is 40 ppm of a soluble
fluoride and 60 ppm of an insoluble fluoride.   (National Academy of
Sciences, 1974).   For other species, higher dietary fluoride levels
can be tolerated.

To determine the level of fluorides in potential forage materials near
the Occidental site, ten sampling locations were selected.  Eight of
these represented potential pasture land, one site was on the dike of
a cooling water pond and one site was located an intermediate distance
from the cooling water pond.   These sampling sites are shown in Figure
2.2-4.   In addition to these sites, a background site was selected in
Gainesville, Florida.
                              42

-------
o
c
3
m
                                                                            t
                                                                         AT 3375 km N
                                                                                        GRASS SAM



                                                                                      Q AMBIENT Al
                   R AND GRASS SAMPLING SITES
                                     L
                                                                                        CATTLE EXAMINED
                  PROPOSED SWIFT CREEK CHEMICAL COMPLEX
                          i       I      .       i
                                         PROPOSED

                                         CHEMICAL

                                         PLANT
 SUWANNEE RIVER

CHEMICAL COMPLEX
               EXISTING

               CHEMICAL

               PLANT
 0=
EXISTING
                                                                                                       ENEFICIATION
                                        BENEFICIATIOI*


                                        PLANT
                                 LUORIDE     :ECTS MONITORING

-------
Table 2.2-5  Summary of Ambient Air and Grass  Fluoride Concentration  Data  for  November  1977  - June  1978,
             Occidental Chemical  Company,  Hamilton  County,  Florida
sit.*"
Air Grass
A
B
C
D
E






10
9
8
5
4
1
2
3
6
7
Background

Ambient Air
Number
24»hr
Samples Max.
24 5.1
24 4.3
24 3.1
21 3.1
22 2.5







Fluoride
Concentration
(ug/md) Grass (mg/kg)
Min. Avg.
0.1 1.0
0.1 0.8
0.2 0.8
0.1 0.7
0.3 0.9






Number
Monthly
Samples
7
7
7
7
5
7
7
7
7
7
5

Soluble*25
34.3
33.4
35.9
28.4
17.6
20.6
32.3
32.1
229.0
47.3
16.3
Average
Insoluble*35
8.7
6.2
10.5
8.7
9.3
4.4
7.5
5.8
94.0
23.3
2.3

Total
43.0
39.6
46.4
37.1
26.9
25.0
39.8
37.9
323.0
70.6
18.6
• Max.
Total
81.9
69.3
88.1
52.9
50.1
55.8
81.4
72.2
474.0
137.4
36.1
Min.
Total
8.3
7.6
10.9
13.4
6.1
5.2
11.6
9.7
205.0
30.6
6.7
(1)  See Figure 2.2-4
(2)  Soluble Fluoride is defined as  that remaining  in  leaf  after washing  for  15 min.  in ultra-
     sonic cold water bath.
(3)  Insoluble Fluoride is defined as that washed from leaf surface.

-------
The fluoride levels in the grass samples collected during the period
December through March are presented in Table 2.2-5.  It should be noted
that this is the period of the year when fluoride levels in vegetation
are traditionally the highest from the point of view that this is the
season of least rainfall (EPA, 1978).

Monthly fluoride concentrations ranged from 5 to 87 ppm total fluoride
in grass away from the existing chemical plant.  The fraction of fluorides
contained in the grass (soluble) averaged 69 percent.  The fraction
contained on the surface of the leaf (insoluble) averaged 31 percent.

The grass from the monitoring site located on the dike of the cooling
water pond exhibited an average fluoride concentration of 300 ppm with
approximately 57 percent of the fluoride being contained in the leaf of
the grass.  Grass a moderate distance (800 meters) from a cooling water
pond had an average fluoride concentration of 75 ppm with approximately
58 percent of the fluoride being contained in the grass leaf. Fluoride
concentrations in grass samples collected in Gainesville, Florida during
this period averaged 8 ppm.


Observed Effects of Fluorides on Livestock:  Cattle from three sites
were examined in April, 1978, by a veterinarian experienced in the
effects of fluorosis  (Crum, 1978).  The study was made to determine
if cattle born and raised near the Occidental site are affected by
fluorides in the forage provided them.

The area is utilized primarily for pulpwood production.  There are,
however, a number of small farms and pasturelands located within a
5-miles radius of the plant.  The three sites investigated are shown
on Figure 2.2-4.

All cattle examined were raised in the area where they were examined.
They had free access to pasture grasses year round and in some cases
received locally grown hay and corn as a winter feed supplement.

The cattle were examined to determine if individual animals had con-
sumed excessive fluorides during their early dentition periods
(first five years of age) as evidenced by changes in the structure
and wear of teeth.  Twenty-one animals, ranging in age from 10 months
to 13 years, were examined.  Eight animals were examined at the south
and east sites and five were examined at the southwest site.

The examination showed  the greatest  effect to  be  that defined:

     Slight Effect-slight mottling of enamel,  best  observed as
     horizontal sfriations  with transmitted light; may  have
     slight staining  but no increase  in normal  rate  of wear
      (National Academy  of Sciences,  1974).

This effect was exhibited  in  a  total  of nine teeth  from  six  of  the  21
animals  examined.  The  number  of teeth  showing  effects  in  these  six
animals  ranged  from  one to  three.
                                  45

-------
Table 2.2-6   1977-78 County-wide Carbon Monoxide, Hydrocarbon,
              and Nitrogen Oxide Burden for Hamilton County,
              Florida
Source
Automotive
Space Heating
Point Sources
Total

CO
5001
1
53
5055
Pollutant (tons/year)
Hydrocarbons
635
0
11
646

NOX
873
6
640
1519
Note:  These estimates based upon EPA document "Compilation of
       Air Pollutant Emission Factors", Feb. 1976.
                              46

-------
The examination further revealed the cattle to be free from skeletal
fluorosis.  It was concluded that none of the effects were sufficient
to cause a loss of productivity.


Effects of Fluorides on Vegetation:  Surveys, conducted in the area
since 1974, have revealed no significant fluoride effects on vegetation
anywhere in the area.  The latest survey was conducted in March, 1978.
The only effects noted at that time were moderate tip necrosis on a
few pine trees located on the dike forming one of the cooling water
ponds.  Maple, sweet gum, willow and other shrubby material on the
dikes showed no fluoride effects.  Pine trees, a few hundred meters
from the ponds, were normal (Brandt, 1978).

Observations in the vicinity of the Swift Creek site revealed no
fluoride effects.
2.2.2.4  Existing Carbon Monoxide, Nitrogen Oxides and Hydrocarbon Burden

The 1977-78 CO, NO^ and hydrocarbon burden in Hamilton County is very
small.  Because ofthe small existing burden and the correspondingly
small impact on air quality, only the burden of each of these pollutants
has been estimated using EPA emission factors (EPA, 1976).

The sources considered were automotive, space heating, and fuel
combustion at the Occidental complex.  The burden of each of these
pollutants for the 1977-78 period is presented in Table 2.2-6.


2.2.3  NOISE STUDY

Noise surveys on three separate dates established average day-night
(Ljp) noise levels at 40 dB/\ for the proposed site of the Swift Creek
Chemical Complex.  Noise level measurements were made using a Precision
Sound Level Meter and the average baseline noise level measured was
typical of rural areas.  Measurements were also made at the site of
the existing Suwannee River Chemical Complex to determine noise levels,
frequency spectra and directionality of noise sources similar to those
for the proposed complex.  The average, continuous, A-weighted level
for all noise sources was near 80 dB^ at 50 feet from the source.
Sulfuric acid plants were highly directional; 10 dB^ above average
at one end of the plant and 10 dB/\ below average at the opposite end.
All other sources were nondirectional.  No pure tone characteristics
were detected for any noise source.  Attenuation of noise levels was
determined to be 6 dB/\ for each doubling of distance from the noise
source.  The data from these measurements provided the basis for
prediction of noise levels during operation of the proposed Swift
Creek Chemical Complex.
                                    47

-------
                          LIST OF REFERENCES
                             (Section 2.2}


Brandt, C.S. (1978), "Field Survey - Occidental  Chemical  Company,
     White Springs, Florida"; Prepared for Sholtes & Koogler Environ-
     mental Consultants, Gainesville, Florida.   March 1978.

Crum, J.B. (1978), "Cattle Study - Hamilton County, Florida"; Prepared
     for Sholtes and Koogler Environmental Consultants, Gainesville,
     Florida, April 1978.

EPA (Undated), "Evaluation of Emissions and Control Techniques for
     Reducing Fluoride Emissions from Gypsum Ponds in the Phosphoric
     Acid Industry"; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Chemical
     Processes Section, IERL, Contract 68-02-1330, Task No.  3,
     Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.

EPA (1976), "Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors"; 2nd Ed.
     U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, OAQPS, Research Triangle
     Park, North Carolina.  February, 1976.

EPA (1977), "Interim Guideline on Air Quality Models"; OAQPS No.
     1.2-080.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
     Park, North Carolina.  October 1977.

EPA (1978), "Central Florida Phosphate Industry Area-wide Impact Assess-
     ment Program"; Volume VII.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
     Region IV, Atlanta, Georgia.  March 1978.

National Academy of Sciences (1974), "Effects of Fluorides in Animals:
     Subcommittee on Fluorosis"; Committee on Animal Nutrition, National
     Research Council, Washington, D.C.

Sholtes & Koogler Environmental Consultants (1977), "Air Duality Impact
     Analysis for PSD and New Source Review"; Occidental  Chemical
     Company, White Springs, Florida.  SKEC, Gainesville, Florida.
     November 22, 1977.
                                   48

-------
                            2.3  TOPOGRAPHY


2.3.1  GENERAL TOPOGRAPHIC SETTING

Most of Hamilton County including the Occidental property is a moder-
ately flat, poorly drained region that ranges in elevation from about
50 feet (MSL) to about 150 feet (MSL).  The county is drained by the
Alapaha, Withlacoochee and Suwannee Rivers.  The eastern part of the
county, where the Occidental property lies, is drained by the Suwannee
River.
2.3.2  SWIFT CREEK DRAINAGE BASIN

The proposed chemical plant lies within a moderately flat area at
approximately Elevation 140 feet (MSL) on the west side of the water
shed of Swift Creek, a tributary of the Suwannee River.  A map of the
Swift Creek drainage basin is shown in Figure 2.3-1.

The northwest half of the drainage area is dominated by a regional
surficial depression, "Swift Creek Swamp", which is located approximately
120 feet above mean sea level and forms the headwaters of Swift Creek.

The channel of Swift Creek falls at an average rate of 7.5 feet per mile
for 5 miles, then plunges in the last 2 miles at a rate of approximately
17 feet per mile to the Suwannee River, which lies at an elevation  of
about 50 feet (MSL).  The channel varies in depth from 5 to 8 feet  near
the headwaters to as much as 50 feet as it approaches the Suwannee
River.

The drainage area of Swift Creek has undergone certain natural and  man-
made changes.  During mining operations certain areas have been added or
occluded from natural drainage, as shown in Figure 2.3-1.  A large  part
of the intercepted runoff is recirculated in the mining systems, evapo-
rated and/or tied up in phosphatic clays.  The remainder is released to
Swift Creek. Occidental's reclamation plans are such that, after mining,
there will be no significant change to the natural drainage boundaries
of the area streams and creeks.
                                     49

-------
 PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY

-------
                             2.4   GEOLOGY
 2.4.1  PHYSIOGRAPHY
The regional geologic setting is within  two  distinct  physiographic
divisions, the Northern Highlands and  the  Coastal  Lowlands.  Because
of the presence of low permeability clastic  surficial sediments, sink-
holes are uncommon in the  highlands and  shallow, low  velocity streams
have developed to carry the surface water  runoff.  Limestone is close to
the surface in the Coastal Lowlands and  the  density of sinkholes is
high, especially in the channel of the Suwannee River.  The Occidental
Chemical Company site is located within  the  Northern  Highlands.


2.4.2  STRATIGRAPHY

2.4.2.1.  Regional Stratigraphy

A stratigraphic cross-section constructed  using the geologic log of a
deep core hole at the proposed plant site  and the  geologic logs prepared
by the Florida Bureau of Geology for two existing  wells located approximately
5 miles due east of the site shows the approximate thickness of the
sedimentary units (see Figure 2.4-1).

The various marine limestone formations  beneath the Hawthorn Formation
are highly permeable and form the Floridan Aquifer, the primary source
of water for most of North-Central Florida.

The Hawthorn Formation is  primarily composed of layers of grey to green,
sandy phosphatic clay, phosphatic sand,  and  phosphatic limestone.  The
upper portions, generally  above 90 feet  (MSL), contain the commercial
phosphate deposits.  The lower, more clayey  portions, act as confining
beds separating the surficial deposits from  the Floridan Aquifer.  As
can be seen, the Hawthorn  Formation, which separates the Floridan
Aquifer from the surficial deposits, has a total thickness of over 100
feet beneath the Occidental property.


2.4.2.2  Site Specific Stratigraphy

A total of ten 100-foot to 160-foot deep Standard  Penetration Test (SPT)
borings and numerous shallow SPT borings (<50 feet deep) were made to
determine the nature of the deposits underlying the proposed site.   In
addition, a continuous, 300-foot deep core boring was made at the site
to determine the formation contacts and  to better define the characteristics
of the confining layers.   The geologic log and a gamma ray log for the
deep core hole are presented in Figure 2.4-2.  The site specific strati-
graphy is consistent with the regional stratigraphy.
                                   51

-------
 200 -i
                                                                     r-200
DEEP CORE HOLE
       SED
      AT PROPO
      PLANT SITE
                               APPROXIMATE LAND SURFACE
                                HAWTHORN FORMATIO



                                      PARK LIMESTONE^


      	-    .	,^_
                                 LAKE CITY LIMESTONEp=g£=f=gri



         _.!	'^S1 :L'^^'——.^^C=J—— -^-^

                        PSOLDSMAR  LIMESTONE

                                                               g=C2C=3j	v,£^

-1000
-1400
                                                                          = --1401
               GEOLOGIC   SECTION  AT  THE   STUDY  SITE


                                           52
                                                                 FIGURE 2.4 -I

-------
 PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY

-------
2.4.3  SITE SUSCEPTIBILITY TO SINKHOLES

The site is located along the western perimeter of an area identified
by the Florida Geological Survey as least probable for sinkhole activity.


2.4.4  EARTHQUAKE SUSCEPTIBILITY

Florida has experienced no damaging earthquakes.  However, several  ground
movements of Intensity V and VI (minor damage) on the Modified Mercalli
scale have been experienced in north Florida.
                              2.5  SOILS
2.5.1  GENERAL DESCRIPTION
The surface soils of Hamilton County range from sloping well-drained
sands to nearly level very poorly drained sandy soils.  The more well-
drained soils generally occur west of the Alapaha River and southwest
of Jasper.  Slightly sloping to nearly level, somewhat poorly to very
poorly drained soils dominate the eastern portion of Hamilton County,
where the site is located.

There are several major soil associations in the Swift Creek Drainage
Basin.  The proposed plant will be constructed within the Leon-Mascotte-
Rutlege Association.  The major soil series comprising this association
generally consist of a three to five foot thick layer of slightly silty
fine sands overlying clayey sands.  These soils are characterized by
a low shrink-swell potential, low dust and erosion potential, and a water
table that is within one foot of the surface during the wet season.  A
more detailed discussion of the surficial soils and post-mining soil
characteristics is given in Section 2.5 of the Resource Document.


2.5.2  AGRICULTURAL USES

The USDA Soil Conservation Service divides soils into 8 classifications
of suitability for cropland and pastureland.  Those range from Capabi-
lity Class I, which has few limitations for agricultural purposes, to
Capability Class VIII, which is unsuitable for commercial plants. At the
site, the major soil series comprise the Leon-Mascotte-Rutlege Association
having capability units ranging from IIIw to IVw.  These are moderately
suitable soils limited in usage because of poor drainage and a high
water table.
                                   54

-------
                            2.6  HYDROLOGY
2.6.1  HYDROLOGIC CYCLE
Specific data on various phases of the hydrologic cycle are essential
for establishing background conditions and assessing the impacts of the
proposed facility.  The main water input is from precipitation supple-
mented by surface water and groundwater inflow.  Outputs from the
system consist of open-water evaporation, evapo-transpiration from soil
and vegetation, surface runoff, base flow into streams, recharge to the
underlying aquifers and groundwater outflow from the aquifer system.

Section 2.1 of the Resource Document summarizes relevant climatological
and meteorological data for the site.  The difference in the long-term
average rates of precipitation and evapo-transpiration, equaling
approximately 11 to 14 inches per year, consists of surface runoff,
water exiting as base flow into creeks and water entering and recharging
the underlying aquifers (which amount is controlled by the leakance and
head difference across confining beds).  Runoff in Hamilton County
generally exceeds 10 inches per year but may be subject to significant
local and yearly variations.


2.6.2  SURFACE WATER QUANTITY

The proposed plant site lies on the west side of the Swift Creek drain-
age basin.  Swift Creek is a tributary to the Suwannee River, the major
river drainage in this section of North Florida.  The flow characteris-
tics of both the Suwannee River and Swift Creek are important environ-
mental considerations.
2.6.2.1  Suwannee River Flows

The Suwannee River has its headwater in Georgia in the Okefenokee Swamp
and flows south to White Springs, Florida where it turns west, then
winds its way south to the Gulf of Mexico.  At White Springs, the river
drains 2,430 square miles, with approximately half the drainage area
flow originating in Georgia.  The flow up to this point is composed
almost entirely of swamp drainage.  At White Springs, the river starts
to pick up large amounts of base flow from numerous limestone springs,
and the character of the water, as well as flow conditions, change
significantly.  Since 1969, the records at White Springs indicate a
maximum daily flow of as much as 38,000 cfs, a low flow of about 30 cfs,
and an average flow of about 1,880 cfs.

The flow of the Suwannee River has been measured by the United States
Geological Survey (USGS) at Station 02315500, Suwannee River at White
Springs, just upstream from the Swift Creek confluence, since 1927.
The monthly and yearly flow statistics for this station are presented in
Table 2.6-1.   Other principal long-term streamflow characteristics for
                                    55

-------
                                                                                            TABLE 2.6-1-

                                                                     FLOW PARAMETERS OF SUUANNEE RIVER AND PRINCIPAL TRIBUTARIES
en
uses
Station
Number
02314500
02314986
C2315COO
02315500
02315520
02315550
02317500
0231900
02319500
02320000
02320500
02322500
location
Suwannee River at Fargo Georgia
Suwannee River above Rocky Creek
Rocky Creek near Belmont, Florida
Rocky Creek at mouth
Suwannee River near Ben ton, Florida
Suwarnee River at White Springs, Florida
Suwannee River above Swift Creek
Swift Creek at Facll, Florida
Swift Creek at mouth
Suwannee River at Suwannee Springs, Fla.
Suwannee River above Alapaha River
Alapaha River near Statenvllle, Georgia
Alapaha River at mouth
Suwannee River above Withlacoochee River
Withlacoochee River at Plnctta. Florida
Withlacoochee River at mouth
Suwannee River at Cllaville, Florida
Suwannee River at Luraville, Florida
Suwannee River at Bran ford, Florida
Suwannee River above Santa Fe River
Santa Fe River at Ft. White. Florida
Santa Fe River at mouth
River
HI let
222
199.4
199.1
199.1
196.5
171.8
162.8
162.8
162.8
150.3
134.8
. 138.4
138.4
127.2
127.2
127.2
127.0
98.0
76.0
65.7
65.7
65.7
Drainage
Area*
Sg Ml
1200
2015
71.0
71.6
2090
2430
2490
37.9
41.9
2630
2690
1400
1840
4610
2120
2360
6970
7330
7880
7970
1017
1380
Central Values
Average
Flow
1104
1640
31
31
1670
1879
1935e
31
35
2020
2500e
1032
BOOtSOO
4600e
1666
1900e
6548
66708
6960
7120
1637
2300
Median
Yearly
1024
1440
20
20
1460
1599
17106
23
26
1795
1840«
912
4200e
1444
1650e
5843
61406
6363
65006
1477
2000e
(cfs)
Median
Dally
195
430

4406
500
5506
8
10
6SOe
13006
360
36006
600
6806
4300
4600e
4900
1170
Low Flows (cfs)**
M7.2
69
23
.02-. 04
.04-. 05
236
54.6
806
1 - 2
4-5
144e
300e
50
0
1370e
139
155e
1530
2030
2367
26006
959
1300e
M7.10
1.2
1.5
0
0
1.5«
9.9
226
0 - .2
0 - .4
656
1506
25
0
910e
89.2
100e
1010
1360
1673
19006
716
1000e
M30.2
no
65
0.6-.7
0.8-1.0
66
97
1306
2-3
4-6
2006
4D06
62
0
1620e
160
130e
1810
2320
2700
3010e
1020
1400*
M30,10
3.2
4
0
0
4
15.4
3Q6
.3 - .5
.5 - .7
78e
200e
30
0
940e
96
110e
1050
1400
1770
2000e
754
1100°
02
4270
7570
855
922
7670
8130
8200
710
836
8370
95006
5060
5060e
120006
9320
9700e
18300
17000
16200
1500Q6'
4240
4800
Peak Flows (cfs) '
$5
8020
13400
1620
1690
13600
14400
14500
1300
1530
14800
9110
1SOOO
• 33000

27500
7100
525
14800
21700
3530
3680
20000
23300
23500
2840
3340
24000
16700
40700
61400

48100
12200
i**
Q100
20900
22600
5900
6150
27800
29400
29700
4740
5380
30300
24200
65700
90100

68300
16900
        02323500   Suwannee River near Wilcox.  Florida
                                                       33.5
9640
998Qf    91006     75006    4970
3682
54006
42006     17100    27600    46500     64900
             +Based on  Corps  of Engineers
             'Areas of  the Suwannee  River  are  all  approximate  because of  Indetermlnant area of Okefenokee Swamp at Its orfgln.
             e£st1mated.
             ^Adjusted  to equivalent 46-year average  Including 1932-41.
            ""The first numeral refers  to  the  duration  in days,  the  second  to  the recurrence  interval in years,  for example. H7.10 is the
                                                                                                                  a probability of occurence once every
   7-day flow to which flows will  recede once 1n 10 years.   ,        ,    „'.,..,.      ,. *•<     u<  u  h  .  .
•"The numeral refers to the recurrence Interval In years.   For example, Q,5 1s the peak flow which  has  a
   '(.<•> years,  i.e., flows equal to or larger than this flow will occur on the average once every 25 years.

-------
the Suwannee River and its main tributaries are also presented in this
table.  Swift Creek, the Alapaha River, the Withlacoochee River and
the Santa Fe River flows represent approximately 0.5, 8, 19 and 23
percent, respectively, of the Suwannee River flow near Mil cox, Florida.
2.6.2.2  Swift Creek Flows

Runoff in Swift Creek, as in most area streams, varies significantly in
response to variations in rainfall.   Miscellaneous discharge measure-
ments have been made since 1969 and daily discharge records were col-
lected starting May, 1976 at the USGS Gauging Station 02315520,  Swift
Creek at Facil.  These records reflect current mining operations and do
not correlate well with records for nearby gauged streams of similar
hydrologic characteristics.  Therefore, use was made of correlations of
the available data with concurrent records of the difference in  the
flows recorded at Suwannee River near White Springs, Florida and Suwannee
River at Fargo, Georgia, in order to establish long-term natural stream-
flow characteristics for Swift Creek.
2.6.2.2.1  Natural Flows of Swift Creek

Based on the above correlations, the natural  average flow of Swift Creek
prior to development was estimated at 0.8 cubic feet per second per
square mile (cfs per mi2}.  The flow is assumed to be distributed in
time the same as the difference in flows between the Suwannee River at
White Springs, Florida and Fargo, Georgia. Table 2.6-1 presents the
generated natural flow parameters for 43 years based on this estimate.


2.6.2.2.2  Effect of Mining Operations on the Average and Low Flows
           of Swift Creek

The actual measured flows at the USGS gauge,  Swift Creek at Facil,
indicate a maximum daily discharge of about 1,200 cfs and a minimum of
about 2 cfs.  Swift Creek is a partially controlled discharge stream and
hence its measured averages do not reflect natural flow conditions.  The
storm-runoff patterns are not readily apparent from recorded discharge
data because the artificial discharges maintain the flow at relatively
high levels even during the dry season and occasional curtailment of
releases provides misleading reductions in flow.

Under current conditions, the measured flows  do not include natural flow
that would normally run off from areas occluded from Swift Creek.
The overall effects of occlusion of certain areas from natural drainage
(reduction of 6 to 11 cfs) and augmentation by nonprocess water releases
(31 cfs) appear to provide an average increase of 20 to 25 cfs for
conditions existing during the period of data collected for Swift Creek.
This would indicate a long-term average flow of about 50 to 55 cfs for
the USGS Gauging Station at Facil for current conditions.  At times when
the plant had shut down, USGS records showed  sudden reductions of flow
of up to 40 cfs.  This comparison does not provide a check of the estimated
long-term flow but does provide a rough check that the above estimates
are in the correct range.
                                  57

-------
The lowest flows in Swift Creek will occur when the plants are not
operating or when the discharge is curtailed.  Estimates of the natural
7-day and 30-day low flows are presented in Table 2.6-1.  These estimates
will have to be increased by the discharges from Occidental operations
during drought periods.  It is unlikely that Occidental would not
curtail its discharges to conserve water required in the circulation
system during droughts.


2.6.3  GROUNDWATER QUANTITY

2.6.3.1  Hydrogeologic Setting

Within the region, there is a correlation between the physiographic
provinces and the hydrogeologic environment.  In the Northern Highlands,
the Floridan Aquifer is under artesian conditions because it is overlain
by low permeable sediments of the Hawthorn Formation which confine the
water in the aquifer.  The more permeable zones within the Miocene
sediments comprise a secondary artesian aquifer while the sands over-
lying these sediments form a surficial aquifer.  In the Coastal
Lowlands region, where the Miocene deposits are absent, the Floridan
Aquifer is under water-table conditions.

Four sets of monitoring wells, each set consisting of three to five
piezometers installed at different depths, have been located at the
site of the proposed chemical plant.  In addition, six sets of moni-
toring wells, each set consisting of three to four piezometers, have
been installed at the site of the existing chemical plant (see Figure
2.3-1).  These wells were installed to determine the existing hydraulic
gradient between the surficial and Floridan aquifers and to obtain water
samples from both aquifers and the confining unit for water quality
testing.  The piezometric levels associated with the aquifers and confin-
ing deposits, as measured in these observation wells, are presented in
Figure 2.6-1.

 At both sites, a head difference exists between the surficial aquifer
and the Floridan Aquifer.  At the proposed plant site, the head difference
between the two aquifers is 80 feet.  At the existing plant site, the
head difference between the two aquifers is 57 feet.  At both sites,
most of this head difference is dissipated across one or more layers of
plastic clay present within the Hawthorn Formation between Elevations 40
feet (MSL) and 85 feet (MSL).  At one monitoring station, however, the
head was dissipated over a thicker section of the Hawthorn Formation.


2.6.3.2  Surficial Aquifer

On  the Occidental property, the surficial aquifer consists of: 3  to 15
feet of Pleistocene sands, Post-Miocene silty and clayey sands, sands of
the phosphate matrix,  and some of the weathered  limestone just beneath
the matrix.  The total thickness of the surficial aquifer is approximately
                                    58

-------
           en
           10
10
m
ro
b>
                         PIEZOMETRIC  WATER ELEVATION, FEET(MSL)

                       0          50          100         ISO
                    ISO-
                    100-
                  8 50-
                     o-l
                  V)
                   f-50-
                  i
                   -100-
-150-
                         SWIFT  CREEK
                             SITE
                                             2.2
                        DATE - 3/17/78
                       OBSERVATION  WELL
                          • SET I
                          X SET 2
                          & SET 3
                          QSET 4
                                                PIEZOMETRIC WATER ELEVATION, FEET(MSL)

                                                         50          100         ISO
                                                SUWANNEE RIVER
                                                       SITE
  DATE - 3/17/78
OBSERVATION  WELL
   • SET I  	
   X SET 2
   A SET 3
   O SET 4
   Q SET 5
   G) SET 6
                      PIEZOMETRIC  LEVELS  AT VARIOUS  DEPTHS  IN  GEOLOGIC   PROFILE

-------
40 feet at the existing plant site and approximately 60 feet at the
proposed plant site.

The water level in the surficial aquifer is a subdued reflection of the
topography.  The water table is at or within a few feet of the ground
surface, and fluctuates on the order of several feet per year in re-
sponse to water inputs and outputs.  Recharge is primarily from pre-
cipitation and water outputs include evapo-transpiration, groundwater
flow to streams, lakes or swamps, and recharge to the underlying Floridan
aquifer.  Because of the low hydraulic gradients arising from the low
degree of topographic relief, lateral flow of the surficial groundwater
is localized.

The results from a pumping test performed at the proposed plant site
indicate that the post-Miocene silty and clayey sands act as a semi-
confining bed with a leakance of about 0.17 day~', and that the trans-
mi ssivity of the layers beneath the semi-confining bed is on the order
of 500 ftVday.  Wells tapping the surficial aquifer typically yield
less than 50 gallons per minute.


2.6.3.3  Hawthorn Confining Unit and Secondary Artesian Aquifer

The Hawthorn confining unit consists of plastic clays, clayey sands,
sandstone and limestone.  The clay layers impede the downward movement
of water.  Permeable zones composed of sand and/or limestone found
within the Hawthorn Formation form a minor secondary artesian aquifer.
The secondary artesian aquifer is not areally extensive and wells
tapping the aquifer generally yield less than 50 gpm.

At the Occidental site in Hamilton County, the Hawthorn Formation is
approximately 100 feet thick.  No permeable zones were found within the
Hawthorn confining unit that are of sufficient thickness to be considered
an aquifer.

As part of its investigation in the Osceola National Forest, some twenty
miles southeast of the Occidental site, the USGS determined a maximum
value of 0.30 inches per year for the annual recharge rate through the
Hawthorn confining unit (Miller et al, 1977).

At the Osceola site, the Hawthorn Formation contains two identifiable
confining units.  At the proposed plant site, only one of these units
(Member B) is present.  The leakage coefficient for Member B at the
Osceola site, based on the above recharge rate, was found equal to 3.6
x 10-6 day1.  This value agrees very well with a value of 2.9 x 10-°
day"1, calculated using results from laboratory permeability tests
performed on samples from the clayey layers obtained from the core
boring drilled at the proposed plant site.


2.6.3.4  Floridan Aquifer

The Floridan Aquifer is the primary source of groundwater in the area.
The Floridan Aquifer is under artesian conditions in the Northern
Highlands and under water-table conditions in the Coastal Lowlands.  In
the Northern Highlands, the primary water inputs are groundwater
recharge from the surficial aquifer by leakage through the Hawthorn


                                 60

-------
confining unit and groundwater inflow from upgradient areas.  The water
outputs include groundwater discharge to surface-water bodies, ground-
water withdrawals and groundwater underflow to downgradient areas.

As discussed in the Resource Document, the major discharge from the
Floridan Aquifer is into the Suwannee River, particularly downstream of
White Springs.

Area pumping tests suggest that the transmissivity of the Floridan aquifer
is on the order of 66,000 ft2/day and that the storage coefficient is
about 0.0001 (Miller et al, 1977).
2.6.3.5  Effect of Mining Operations on Groundwater Flows

Phosphate mining operations in Hamilton County have impacted and will
continue to impact the hydrologic system.  These activities alter the
stratigraphy of the surficial aquifer and cause localized changes in
the direction and amount of groundwater flow around mining areas.  The
topography is altered from flat to gently rolling and the reclaimed
land is less stratified and looser than it was prior to mining.  In
addition, the number of surface water-bodies is increased by the
creation of lakes and the presence of mined-out pits.  In areas of
active mining, the water-table is lowered due to dewatering.  Upon
reclamation, the water-table recovers to reflect the gently rolling
topography.

Occidental Chemical Company currently withdraws approximately 30 MGD
from the Floridan Aquifer for its mining and processing facilities.
Eight industrial supply wells withdraw groundwater needed at the
Suwannee River Chemical Complex, Suwannee River Mine and Swift Creek
Mine.  Miller et al (1977) analyzed long-term records from an obser-
vation well in Jennings, a well 3.5 miles west of White Springs, a well
in Lake City and a well near Valdosta, Georgia.  They concluded that
pumping by Occidental Chemical Company has not produced a regional
decline in the potentiometric surface.
                                61

-------
2.6.4  SURFACE WATER QUALITY

2.6.4.1  General Setting

The Suwannee River is an acidic system for most of its length in Florida
due to high levels of organic acids derived from its headwaters in the
Okefenokee Swamp and run-off from forests and swamps as it flows to the
Gulf.  Water from the aquifer enters the Suwannee River along most of
its length.  Below White Springs, springs are particularly common and
important modifiers of water quality.

Flow enters Florida as typical swamp drainage with low pH (mean pH
*4,5), high color, low hardness, low alkalinity and low specific con-
ductivity. The river, under these conditions, is relatively infertile
(FSBH, 1966).  As the Suwannee flows to the south, large inputs of
groundwater have an increasing influence on water quality.  The chemical
composition of waters below White Springs varies more than that of most
other streams due to the proportionately high input of water from the
Floridan Aquifer (Miller et al., 1977).  For example, White Springs,
Suwannee Springs and Ellaville Springs add 44, 23 and 50 cfs, respec-
tively (Ferguson, 1947).  There are many other unnamed and unmonitored
springs adding both flow and materials to the Suwannee.  At Branford
(Figure 2.6-2), the pH is above 7 and alkalinity, hardness and specific
conductivity, among others, increase due to ground water contributions.
By the time the Suwannee River reaches Vista, swamp waters probably
comprise less than half of the total flow (FSBH, 1966).

Swift Creek is similar to the Suwannee River in that it also receives
drainage with high color and  low pH.   However, Swift Creek receives a
regular discharge from Occidental mining and chemical plant operations.
The discharge is composed of  nonprocess waters  (well water origin),
rainfall run-off, pit water discharge from the mining areas, and,
infrequently, treated process water.  This stream subsidy maintains a
relatively constant  flow in Swift Creek.

The  influence of the well water portion of the  discharge to Swift Creek
can  be considered generally analogous to the springs entering  the
Suwannee River  inasmuch as  they originate in the same aquifer.  The
nonprocess water contains higher levels of phosphate, nitrogen, sulfate
and  sodium which are attributed to  processing activities.  A comparison
of the chemical characteristics of  Swift Creek, natural springs,
Occidental well water and nonprocess water are  given  in Table  2.6-2.


2.6.4.2   Data

To assess  long-term trends  and water quality, USGS  and  FDER  data were
obtained  from STORET (Table 2.6-3)   These data  were supplemented by:
 (1)  a sampling  program  in the study area during July, October,  November,
December,  1977; January and February,  1978  (Figure  2.7-1)  (Table 2.6-4)
and;  (2)  a report  by the  Florida State  Board  of Health  (1966),  which
documented the  pre-mining condition in  Swift  Creek  and  the Suwannee
                                   62

-------
                                                            OKEFENOKEE
                                                               SWAMP
                           STATENVILLE
                           023175OO
                                            WHITE
                                            SPRINGS
                                            02315500
             	LAFAYETTE
                  DI x"l E
            SUWANNEE
              1


GULH OF MEXICO
                                    U.S.G.S. GAGING STATION
           U.SG.S. STATIONS  IN  THE SUWANNEE RIVER BASIN



                              FIGURE 2.6-2

                                     63
o
I

33
O
—
DO
CO
C
DO
^r
CO
—
m
^

-------
                   Table  2.6-2
en
Comparison of Swift Creek, Rocky Creek,  White Springs Groundwater,
Occidental Deep Wells  and Nonprocess  Water for Selected Chemical
Parameters
Typical

Parameter
Specific conductivity
(i-mhos/cm)
Organic nitrogen
Ammonia nitrogen
Nitrate nitrogen
Ortho phosphate as P
Total phosphate as P
Total organic carbon
Fluoride
Sodium
Potassium
Sulfdte
Total hardness
Chloride
Iron
Mercury
Manganese
Cadmium
Cobalt
Copper
Lead
Zinc
Chromium
1 Mean of USGS data from
2 Mean of data from USGS
Stream

Swift Creek Rocky Creek

456.25'
0.94'
5.60'
1.73'
32.97'
18.50'
18.48'
6.52'
29.40'
1.61'
151.80'
166.63'
19. 481
0.562
(V)
0.0732
(V)
0.0012
(V)
0.0062
0.0152
(V)
STORET (1967-1977)
bi -monthly samolln

86.68'
1.061
0.06'
< 0.01'
0.17'
0.01'
51.16'
0.31'
3.87'
0.19'
8.60'
16.19'
7.56'
0.732
(V)
0.0262
(V)
0.0012
(2,3)
0.004Z
0.0102
(2.s)
.
Q oroaram. 47th 1
Groundwater from
White Springs

275.00
0.22
0.18
< 0.01
0.12
0.14
9.00
0.30
5.40
0.70
14.00
150.00
8.20
0.20
( )
0.02
( ' )
( J )
( ' )
( 3 )
0.01
( 3 )

ieuort (Coffin. 1977).
OXY Deep Uells *
(mini

329.00
...

0.15
0.05
...
—
0.38
6.00
0.93
24.00
120.00
4.50
0.19
—
< 0.05
—
...
< 0.01
...
0.00
...


(max)

528.00


0.36
0.36


1.60
18.00
2.10
145.00
312.00
21.00
0.94






0.12



Typical
Nonprocess
(min)

493.00
0.40
13.00
0.60
—
2.50
—
4.50
	
...
183.00
126.00
12.00
0.13
—
—
—
—
—
...
	
...


Water
(max)

965.00
0.60
37.80
1.20

17.00

22.00


530.00
413.00
32.00
0.49










                     None detectable.
                     All well data provided by Occidental Chemical Company.
                   Note:   All  values in mg/1  unless otherwise noted.

-------
Table 2.t>-3
               Annual  means, Ilinimums arid Haximums
               USGS  Sampling Station in Swift Creek
for Selected chemical
 (Station 02315520).*
Parameters from  the
Year (Range)
190?
IScS
Range
Rjn'je
VJ70
Range
1971

13 T?
ftarcio
19/1

197-1

'if?i
Rar,)p
19/6

N'7
Range
AVERAOE
Spue. Ciifid.
iimhOS/Ciil
pll
Alk. as
Total P
3lfi.O 6.50 18.00
Unly Unc Oetcrmiiiatlnn Made
490.0 6.25 17.50
4iO. 0-510.0 6.l-»i. 4 9.0-26.0
347.0 6.47 46.00
200-540. 0
424.6
210.0-578.0
509.3
2W.O-664.0
433.5
217.0-6MI.O
335.2
535. 0-680.0
')*» B
38.X 0-807.0
585.5
400.0-070.0
465.0
2%. 0-670.0
497.6
250.C-670.0
456.2
5,72-7.10
5.87
3.7-6.5
6.47
5.2-7.0
5.62
3.7-6.5
5.34
4.1-0.6
5.73
4.8-6.6
5.9!-
4.6-6.7
6.40
5.9-6.8
6.49
6.2-6.7
6.19
23. U 69.0
6.50
1.0-12.0
7.00
7.0 .'.0
5.00
3.0-7.0
in.ou
9.0-11.0
Z.OO
2.0-2,0
7.67
1.0-17.0
11.10
0.00-34.0
5.50
0.00-13.0
12.3
...
...
...
19.50
0. 5-26.0
12.33
I.R-21.0
11.38
7.2-16.0
26.50
11. 0-4?. 0
20.50
9.2-36.0
21.55
8.6-38.0
17.71
11.0-23.0
18.49
Ortho-PO..
wg/1 '
123.00
23.0-23.0
IO.R7
4.6-15.0 '
57.17
11.0-130.0
53.83
25.0-74.0
20.00
20.0-20.0
....
,.„
M-»
-.,
mrmm
...
...
...
...
...
32.97
DIss.-F
mg/1
3.70
6.35
5.0-7.7
5.18
2.4-9.5
11.95
2.5-29.0
7.. 18
4.1-10.0
0.13
3.1-10.0
4.62
3.7 6.0
7.88
4.3-12.0
6.37
2.3 -11.0
5.20
2.0-9.5
5.00
3.4-7.7
6.523
3>1
100.00
1?O.CO
114-126
124.50
109.0-140.0
131.50
13fi. 0-132.0
185.00
170-200
160.00
130.0-190.0
124.00
76.0-172.0
285.00
280.0-290.0
170.0
130-240
159.00
12C.fK>30.0
110.75
69.0-180.0
151.79
TOC
...
...
18.00
14.0-22.0
14.00
11.0-17.0
15.20
0. 00-40. 0
i
16.08
2.0-36.0
13.83
10.0-44.0
17.50
10.0-23.0
23.42
13.0-39.0
23.83
18.0-30.0
1R.4H
OKG-N
...
...
0.72
0 00-1.20
0.51
0.0-1.4
0.73
0.0-Z.2
0.63
0.07-1.6
1.00
0.42-2.00
1.00
0.86-1.1
1.92
0.17-7,90
0.99
0.30-2.60
.917
NH3-N
mg/l
...
...
—
—
5.10
1.8-8.4
2.83
1.1-4.8
3.55
0.57-5.4
8.18
1.6-23.0
6.18
2.6-11.0
6.25
3.2-10.0
7.07
3.9-13.00
5.59
NO,-N
rog/1
...
...
—
—
0.87
0.04-1.70
2.46
0.06-5.00
1.19
0.30-2.00
2.35
1.1-3.7
2.20
1.2-4.1
1.71
0.01-2.60
1.37
0.92-3.2
1.73
BOD,
»g/l5
3.00
2.6-3.4
3.64
0.7-6.5
3.64
1.1-5.7
3.75
0.9-6.0
3.88
0.4-7.7
3.42
1.2-5.5
6.47
4.8-9.0
6.36
4.5-8.6
4.63
1.1-10.0
4.31
* Oat?, ff.m SfORET

-------
Table  2.6-4   Ranges  of  Values Obtained  in the Current  Sampling Program of  Streams.
Parameter
Alkalinity as CaCO,
BOD
Calcium
Chloride
Chlorophyll
Color (ALPHA units)
Conductance (umhos/cm)
Dissolved Oxygen
DOC
Flow (cfs)
Fluoride
Total Hardness as CaCO,
Magnesium
Nitrogen
Ammonium
CTi Nitrite + Nitrate
CTi
Organic
Oil and Grease
pH
Phosphate as P
Ortho
Total
Potassium
Redox Potential (ORP)
Silica
Sodium
Solids (Dissolved)
Solids (Suspended)
Sulfate
Sulfide
Surfactants (MBAS)
Temperature °C
Turbidity (NTU)

SC-1
2.0-54.0
<1.0-1.4
47.0-70.0
14.0-21.0
37.0-52.0
15-110
530-700
4,2-9.5
13.0-39.0
19.7-40.1
4.1-7.6
183.0-290.0
16.0-23.0

3.99-20.00
1.14-4.40
0.95-1.60
<1
6.2-7.1

14.4-65.0
15.4-76.0
1.6-2.0
+50-+250
17.0-50.0
25.6-27.0
248-768
4.0-14.0
156.0-310.0
<0.1-0.8
0.001-0.045
8.0-28.0
1.5-8.0

SC-2
1 1.0-95.0
<1.0-2.4
47.0-68.0
7.1-17.0
43.0-58.0
7-no
550-750
4.4-9.2
13.0-42.5
25.0-41.0
4.2-8.9
184.0-290.0
16.0-23.0

4.76-18.40
1.03-4.18
0.90-1.64
<1
6.4-7.1

13.9-98.0
15.7-100.0
1.6-2.0
+75-+260
17.4-42.0
25.8-26.5
418-794
1.0-16.0
152.0-380.0
0.2-0.5
0.013-0.051
7.0-28.3
0.9-7.5

SCT-3
3.0-11.0
<1.0
7.8-10.8
1.8-19.0
0.6-1.0
25-200
104-195
7.2-12.4
6.0-29.5
<0.1-0.8
0.2-0.5
8.9-37.0
1.6-2.3

0.02-0.25
0.22-0.98
0.48-0.79
<1
5.7-6.8

0.6-1.1
0.7-1.1
0.7-1.0
+80-+270
6.9-10.4
3.4-4.3
34-120
1.0-14.0
3.9-11.0
0.2-1.1
0.011-0.062
7,0-28.5
0.9-1.8

SC-4
14.0-100.0
1.0-2.6
45.5-73.0
12.0-16.0
61.0-71.0
15-130
600-650
3.7-17.0
12.0-29.0
23.6-38.5
4.5-9.7
2.6-292.0
14.9-23.0

0.02-20.90
1.03-3.33
1.01-2.41
<1
6.3-7.0

12.9-110.0
14.1-112.0
1.6-1.9
-70-+280
15.8-36.0
25.2-26.6
414-716
2.0-26.0
153.0-548.0
0.3-1.1
0.018-0.05
7.0-28.5
0.7-8.0
S T A T 1
SCf-5
8.0-18.0
<1.0
7.8-9.5
9.8-13.0
0.7-1.6
5-120
68-140
6.1-13.0
4.0-21.5
0.2-1.1
0.3-0.4
27.0-34.0
1.8-2.2

0.02-0.15
0.24-1.60
0.15-0.42
<1
5.7-7.1

0.5-1.1
0.6-1.3
0.2-0.7
-30-+260
6.8-9.8
3.3-3.4
10-118
1.0-18.0
4.0-8.6
0.2-1.0
0.010-0.034
8.0-28.8
0.1-1.8
0 N S •
5C-6
6.0-106.0
1.0-2.7
44.0-69.0
12.0-25.0
67.0-73.0
15-110
380-780
4.6-18.5
12.0-29.5
7.3-33.1
4.1-12.0
95.0-243.0
15.1-23.0

1.13-20.50
0.62-3.24
0.98-2.52
1-2
5.6-7.2

11.2-114.0
14.3-11£.0
1.6-2.0
+70-+290
15.1-53.0
24.8-27.3
366-764
1.0-38.0
154.0-570.0
0.2-0.6
0.008-0.041
7.5-30.8
1.5-10.0

SC-7
28.0-105.0
1.0-2.9
44.0-62.0
13.0-16.0
75.0-82.0
15-110
335-650
2.7-12.6
12.0-29.0
1.6-44.0
3.8-7.4
174.0-288.0
15.6-22.0

8.05-22.20
0.33-3.33
0.80-3.60
1-3
6.3-7.0

9.9-70.0
13.5-75.5
1.6-1.9
+90-+280
25.6=64.0
24:6-27.4
360-736
1.0-29.0
24.0-350.0
0.1-0.7
0.024-0.034
7.8-29.0
1.5-20.0

ABC-8
30.0-99.0
1.0-2.2
43.0-75.0
12.0-19.0
120.0-130.0
5-18
650-777
1.8-16.6
8.0-20.5
6.3-32.7
3.6-12.0
171.0-345.0
15.3-28.0

8.54-40.60
0.31-3.21
1.11-2.90
<1
6.6-6.9

9.6-135.0
11.0-155.0
1.6-2.6
-80-t260
26.8-78.0
24.0-38.2
350-882
1.0-63.0
28.3-550.0
<0.1-0.6
0.022-0.051
9.5-30.8
1.2-42.0

SC-9
0.0-106.0
<1.0
14.0-32.0
12.0-16.0
3.1-9.2
65-400
172-433
8.0-12.2
10.0-42.0
0.0-16.9
0.4-1.0
63.0-129.0
6.8-12.0

0.07-0.31
0.02-0.60
0.51-2.28
<1
3.7-8.9

0.2-16.8
0.5-6.0
0.2-0.4
+50-+325
13. 7-24. U
7.5-8.6
164-236
6.0-122.0
15.3-75.0
0.4-1.1
0.008-0.025
7.0-31.8
1.0-32.0

SC-9. 5
0.0-109.0
<1.0
12.0-21.0
8.3-16.0
4.3-45.0
50-400
171-335
4.7-11.3
32.0-48.0
0.0-16.1
0.4-0.7
55.0-136.0
6.1-13.0

0.02-0.25
0.03-0.54
0.48-2.24
<1
3.5-7.0

<0.1-14.5
0.1-7.4
0.4
+60-+350
16.0
8.3
146-242
6.2-103.0
15.0-75.0
0.4-1.5
0.002
7.0-17.0
1.5-42.0
  SC= Swift Creek station; SCT= Swift Creek tributary; ABC= Altman Bay Canal
  Range given is based on the sampling program conducted from July 1977 to February 1978.

-------
                            Table 2.6-4  (Continued)
en

Parameter
Alkalinity as CaCO)
BOO
Calcium
Chloride
Chlorophyll
Color (AtPHA units)
Conductance (|jiihos/cm)
Dissolved Oxygen
DOC
Flow (<.fr,)
Fluoride
Total Hardness as CaCOi
Magnesium
Nitrogen
Ammonium
Nitrite » Nitrate
Organic
Oil and Grease
PH
Phosphate as P
Ortho
Total
Potassium
Redox Potential (ORP)
Silica
Sodium
Solids (Dissolved)
Solids (Suspended)
Sulfate
Sulfide
Surfactants (MOAS)
Temperature "C
Turbidity (NTU)

ST-7
0.0-18.0
1,0
1.4-5.4
6.0-8.1
0.3-0.4
200-370
48-105
7.8-12.0
26.5-45.5
265.0
0.1-0.2
7.0-20.0
0.9-1.9

0.02-0.35
0.01-0,04
0.49-0.72

-------
River.  Data on spring waters were obtained from Florida Springs
(Ferguson, 1947) and through personal communications with USGS in
Tallahassee, Florida. The data are presented in detail in the Resource
Document.
2.6.4.3  Swift Creek

USGS has monitored Swift Creek at Facil (Station 02315520) since 1967.
To determine if significant trends developed during this period, the
annual means of important parameters (Table 2.6-3) were compared statis-
tically.  The analysis indicated no significant differences in concen-
trations of organic-nitrogen, ammonia-nitrogen, nitrate-nitrogen, total
organic carbon, dissolved fluoride and orthophosphate for the period of
record (Table 2.6-5).  A slight increase occurred in sulfate and total
phosphate as P concentrations from 1971 through mid-1977 (Tables 2.6-3  and
2.6-5).  This indicates that Swift Creek has been receiving relatively
constant concentrations of nutrients for a number of years and that the
present aquatic system should have fully responded to the change from
pre-1965 conditions.

Both USGS data and data collected during this study indicate that Swift
Creek has significantly higher concentrations of phosphate as P, nitrogen,
fluoride, sulfate and sodium than do other area streams  (Table 2.6-4).
However, concentrations of the heavy metals: cadmium, copper, lead,
mercury, cobalt and zinc are low in both Swift Creek and other area
streams not affected by phosphate mining and processing  (Table 2.6-6).

Although the Swift Creek nutrient concentrations have been consistently
higher than background levels for a number of years, no reports of
problems associated with high nutrient  levels in Swift Creek have been
located for review.  A turbidity problem existed for a period in 1975.
None of the parameters discharged down  Swift Creek have a potential for
toxic problems at their present concentrations, with the possible excep-
tion of ammonia-nitrogen.  Ammonia-nitrogen is toxic only in the un-
ionized form which is pH and temperature dependent.

Comparisons of Tables 2.6-7 and 2.6-8  indicate that ammonia toxicity
could exist under the maximum pH, temperature and ammonia-nitrogen
levels.  The biological indicators of  water quality, however, do not
indicate a toxicity  stress.

Biological indicators of water quality tend to give a much better indi-
cation of long-term water quality than do  grab samples for chemical
analyses, since grab samples only yield information about a single  point
in  time.

Data  on the aquatic  communities in Swift Creek  (Section  2.7.4)  indicate
that  organisms in Swift Creek have not been adversely impacted  by the
concentrations of the referenced  parameters and  the increased,  but
relatively stable,  flow conditions.
                                  68

-------
Table 2.6-5
One-way analysis  of variance comparing annual means for  selected
chemical parameters as measured by  U.S.G.S.
Parameter
Period of Record Analysis of Variance
Specific Conductivity
1968-1977
Organlc-N as N
1970-1977
NH3-H - Total
1971-1977
N03-N
1971-1977
TOC
1970-1977
Fluoride - D1ss.
1968-1977
Ortho-P as POA
1968-1971 *
ANOVA
Source
Treatments
Error
Total
SS
279429.10
1194840.34
1474269.44
df
9
51
60
MS
31047.68
23428.24

F
1.33

P < 0.26
ANOVA
Source
Treatments
Error
Total
SS
13.09
57.18
70.27
df
7
45
52
MS
1.87
1.27

F
1.47

P < 0.21
ANOVA
Source
Treatments
Error
Total
SS
132.93
513.29
646.22
df
6
38
44
MS
22.16
13.51

F
1.64

P < 0.16
ANOVA
Source
Treatments
Error
Total
SS
10.79
50.30
61.08
df
6
37
43
MS
1.80
1.36

F
1.32

P < 0.27
ANOVA
Source
Treatments
Error
Total
SS
611.03
3636.09
4247.12
df
7
40
47
MS
87.29
90.90

F
0.96

P < 0.47
ANOVA
Source
Treatment
Error
Total
SS df
275.24 9
780.56 52
1055.80 61
MS
30.58
15.01


F
2.04

P < 0.53
ANOVA
Source
Treatment
Error
Total
SS df
5795.11 3
12350.57 13
19145.68 16
MS
1931.70
950.04

F
2.03

P < 0.19
Total P
1971-1977
Sulfate
1968-1977
ANOVA
Source
Treatment
Error
Total
SS
1055.40
2745.04
3800.44
df
6
41
47
MS
175.9
66.95

F
^.63

P < 0. 03
ANOVA
Source
Treatment
Error
Total
SS
51654.12
36805.75
88459. 87
df
9
21
30
MS
5739.35
1752.65

F
3.27

P < 0.02
                                       69

-------
   Table  2.6-6   Heavy Metal Concentrations 1n  Surface Waters  (mg/1)
Station*
8C-1
8C-2
8C-)
8C-4
SC-5
8C-6
BC-7
ABC-1
SC-9
SC-9. 5
SB- 7
SD-6
ftC-2
DO- 2
IIC-1
Cfl-1
CB-J
Cfl-J
Data
July.
Oct.,
July.
Oct.,
July,
Oct.,
July,
Oct.,
July.
Oct.,
July.
Oct.,
July.
Oct.,
July,
Oct.,
July,
Oct.,
July,
July.
July,
July,
July,
July,
July,
July,
July,

1977
1977
1977
1977
1977
1977
1977
1977
1977
1977
1977
1977
1977
1977
1977
1977
1977
1977
1977
1977
1977
1977
1977
1977
1977
1977
1977
K-aonic
mi/1
0.011
r
D
r
D
r
D
r
D
P
0.026
r
0.0)1
r
0.040
r
0.033
F
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
Cadmium
B
D
B
D
B
0
B
D
B
D
B
D
B
D
a
0
B
D
D
D
P
0
D
0
D
D
D
Chromium
mi/1
B
0.006
B
0.006
B
0.004
0.00)
0.006
B
0.004
B
0.004
B
0.004
B
0.006
B
0.004
0.006
0.002
0.002
0.002
0.002
0.00)
0.004
0.00)
0.001
Copper
•tfl/1
0.004
C
0.002
C
B
C
0.002
C
B
C
0.002
C
0.002
C
B
C
B
C
C
C
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
Iron
ma/1
0.156
0.224
0.104
0.218
0.490
0.486
0.4)6
0.200
0.600
0.216
0.4)0
0.270
0.216
0.2)6
0.164
0.210
0.124
1.140
1.190
0.198
0.442
0,696
0.220
0.174
0.478
0.146
0.12)
t*«d
0.002
0.002
O.OOS
0.001
0.002
0.044
0.002
0.009
0.002
0.007
0.002
0.007
0.001
0.005
0.002
0.047
0.001
0.017
0.01)
0.007
0.001
0.002
0.002
0.005
0.00)
0.002
0.014
Manganoaa
mq/1
0.050
0.040
O.OSO
0.045
0.017
0.020
0.070
O.OSS
0.065
0.015
0.071
0.080
0.060
0.083
0.050
0.175
0.015
0.0)5
0.0)5
0.020
0.015
0.025
O.OOS
0.015
0.02)
0.01)
O.OOS
Mercury
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
0.0005
A
0.0001
A
A
A
0.0002
A
A
A
A
0.0001
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
Zinc
wg/l
0.003
O.OOS
0.002
0.00?
0 . 004
0.004
0.004
O.OOfi
0.016
0.019
0.004
0.009
0.004
0.014
0.004
o.ooe
0.004
0.010
0.059
0.003
0.004
0.005
0.016
0.007
0.007
0.016
0.007
•  Sec Flgur* 2.3.) (or location of sampling akatlona.



Detection Limiti  A,  B, C, D,  E, and r r*pr«aont 0.0002, 0.002.  0.004. 0.006, 0.006 and 0.020 mg/1,  respectively.

-------
Table 2.6-7  Concentrations of total  anmonia (NH_ + NH^+J  which contain

             an un-iom'zed ammonia  concentration of 0.020 mg/1 NH3*.
Tempe
ture
5
10
15
20
25
30
ra-
6.0
160.0
110.0
73.0
50.0
35.0
25.0
pH Value
6.5
51
34
23
16
11
7.9
7.0
16.0
11.0
7.3
5.1\
3.5 x
2.5
7.5
5.1
3.4
2.3
1.6
1.1
0.81
8.0
1.6
1.1
0.75
0.52
0.37
0.27
8.5
0.53
0.36
0.25
0.18
0.13
0.099
9.0
0.18
0.13
0.093
0.070-
0.055
0.045
9.5
0.071
0.054
0.043
0.036
0.031
0.028
10.0
0.036
0.031
0.027
0.025
0.024
0.022
Table 2.6-8  Conditions in Swift Creek necessary to determine NH- levels.
Date
12-7-71
2-7-73
6-5-73
2-12-74
4-3-74
6-11-74
10-8-74
9-29-75
12-8-75
2-2-76
4-5-76
5-3-76
5-21-76
8-30-76
10-4-76
11-1-76
11-30-76
1-31-77
2-28-77
4-13-77
6-6-77
8-1-77
10-3-77
Anmonia
8.4
5.4
5.3
23.0
7.2
9.0
6.2
10.0
11.0
6.5
7.4
6.0
9.1
5.0
8.4
10.0
5.6
6.1
5.1
6.9
6.3
8.2
13.0
PH
6.8
6.3
5.8
6.4
5.5
4.8
5.7
6.7
6.3
6.3
6.7
6.5
6.6
6.7
6.4
6.8
6.5
6.5
6.7
6.7
6.5
6.3
6.5
Temperature l
15*
15
24
15
20
26
25
25
14
14
21
23
23
26
22
18
18
152
152
202
252
252
232
 1  Based on monthly averages.
 2  Estimated
previous years.
                                  71

-------
ro
       Table 2.6-9   Mass loadings under average flow of selected parameters for Swift Creek and downstream
                     Suwannee River stations.  (All values in kg/day).
Station
Suwannee River at White
Springs (USGS #02315500)
Swift Creek at mouth
Suwannee Springs
(USGS #02315550)
Alapaha River near
Statenville
Withlacoochee River at
mouth
Suwannee River at
Branford (USGS #02320500)
Sante Fe River at Ft. White
Suwannee River at Wilcox
(USGS #02323500)
Total
Phosphorous
(P)
428
2,300
2,850
261
639
3,340
317
3,830
Total
Nitrogen
(N)
3,676
1,019
4,515
*
3,528
10,633
*
14,530
Total Or-
ganic Carbon
(TOO
148,000
2,760
139,000
39,500
67,400
212,000
*
269,000
Sulfate
(SOa)
20,400
21,700
50,800
4,490
22,400
147,000
82,900
295,000
Fluoride
(F)
912
766
1,900
398
1,380
3,920
*
5,770
       *  Insufficient data

-------
CO
          Table 2.6-10  Mass  loadings  under  low  flow  (M7,10) of  selected parameters for Swift Creek and downstream
                        Suwannee River stations.   (All  values  in kg/day).
Station
Suwannee River at White
Springs (USGS #02315500)
Swift Creek at mouth
Suwannee Springs
(USGS #02315550)
Alapaha River near
Statenville
Withlacoochee River at
mouth
Suwannee River at
Branford (USGS #02320500)
Sante Fe River at Ft. White
Suwannee River at Wilcox
(USGS #02323500)
Total
Phosphorous
(P)

9.33
1,050
618
25

78

1,110
139

1,370
Total
Nitogen
(N)

23
485
499
*

244

5,450
*

13,455
Total Or-
ganic Carbon
(TOO

460
917
2,330
363

2,590

22,100
*

52,500
Sulfate
(S04)

257
1 1 ,000
4,080
136

6,570

93,100
62,600

273,000
Fluoride
(F)

6.6
347
98
15

133

848
327

2,170
          *  Insufficient data

-------
Macro-invertebrates and periphyton, which are often used as indicators
of water quality, and fish were not significantly stressed by the
higher concentrations of phosphate, nitrogen, fluoride and sulfate
(Section 2.7.4 of the Resource Document).

No significant differences were detected (P<0.05) between diversity
indices for fish populations in Swift Creek and those in streams which
represent a natural state with no mining influences.  Periphyton and
macroinvertebrate diversity and equitability indices were both above
the levels indicating stress (EPA, 1973) and were not significantly
different (P<0.05) from indices for natural streams (Section 2.7.4
of the Resource Document).

The biological indicators of water quality do not indicate any significant
stress or degradation in Swift Creek water quality, even though concentra-
tions of nutrients, sulfate and fluoride are higher than concentrations in
natural streams.
2.6.4.4  Influence of Swift Creek and Other Major Tributaries on the
         Suwannee River

Swift Creek discharges into the Suwannee River just below White Springs.
Mass loadings for important parameters were calculated based on flows and
chemical parameters measured at USGS stations on Swift Creek, the Suwannee
River and its major tributaries (Figure 2.6-2).  The discharge of chemical
parameters into the Suwannee River were calculated on a mass basis for
phosphate, total nitrogen, total phosphate, dissolved fluoride and
sulfate under average flow (Table 2.6-9) and low flow (M7, 10) conditions
(Table 2.6-10).  These values were used to assess the contribution of
nutrients to the Suwannee River from Swift Creek and other major tributaries,
The calculated percentages should be considered the maximum possible
contributions because some of the nutrients entering the Suwannee River
from Swift Creek may be lost or tied up in biomass by the time the water
reaches Suwannee Springs.  According to reports by Cox (1971) and Ferguson
(1947), numerous springs begin discharging into the Suwannee after it
passes White Springs, some with flows as high as 55 cfs, which is equiv-
alent to the flow in Swift Creek.  These springs add varying amounts of
sulfate, phosphate and fluoride.  A typical analyses of spring water is
given in Table 2.6-2.

Based on calculations from available data, the following conclusions
were drawn.  Swift Creek could contribute up to a maximum of 81 percent
of the phosphate, 40 percent of the fluoride, 43 percent of the sulfate
and 23 percent of the total nitrogen measured under average flow conditions
at Suwannee Springs USGS Station 02315550 on the Suwannee River.  The
percentage contributions from Swift Creek drop to a maximum of 73 percent
of the phosphorus, 13 percent of the fluoride, 7 percent of the sulfate
and 7 percent of the total nitrogen measured in the Suwannee at USGS
                                 74

-------
Wilcox Station 02323500.  These relatively high percentage increases
should not be misinterpreted.  While a mass balance allows determinations
of the relative importance of the various sources and sinks of materials
in a system, the actual impact is a function of concentration.  The
concentrations at the respective stations are 1.11 mg/1 P, 0.21 mg/1 P
and 0.17 mg/1 P at Suwannee Springs, Branford and Wilcox, respectively.

Under low flow (M7, 10) conditions, determinations of Swift Creek contri-
butions are unreliable for total phosphate as P, sulfate and flouride,
since the mass at Suwannee Springs is below the amount computed to be
added by Swift Creek.

Possible explanations for this apparent decrease are:  (1) that the
estimated discharge from Occidental is too high for the periods of low
flow; or (2) a portion of the phosphate as P, sulfate and fluoride may
be present as suspended particles which could settle out in the Suwannee
due to its slower velocity at low flow.

Swift Creek contributes the majority of the phosphate as P contained in
the Suwannee River.  It contributes from 4 to 9 times the amount added
by the other major tributaries.  Swift Creek was shown to have natural
high levels (1.6 mg/1 P) even before Occidental began mining in the area
(FSBH, 1966).  The present concentration in Swift Creek is 18.5 mg/1 P.
While the majority of the phosphates appears to enter the Suwannee from
Swift Creek, this does not appear to be the case for other parameters
measured under average flow conditions.

Three times as much nitrogen enters the Suwannee River from the Withla-
coochee as from Swift Creek (Table 2.6-9).  Although insufficient data
were available to make calculations for the Alapaha and Santa Fe Rivers,
they probably add similar amounts.   Run-off from agricultural lands and
forests is a contributing factor in the nitrogen content of these tributaries

Swift Creek adds relatively small  amounts of total organic carbon to the
Suwannee River.  The Alapaha and Withlacoochee Rivers both add 15 to 20
times the Swift Creek mass contribution of total organic carbon (Table
2.6-9).  Runoff from forest and drainage from swamps probably also adds
high amounts during periods of run-off.

The Withlacoochee, Alapaha and Santa Fe Rivers'  sulfate mass contri-
bution are 103 percent, 21 percent and 380 percent, respectively of the
Swift Creek contribution (Table 2.6-9).  This probably reflects the
relative amounts of groundwater they receive, since sulfate is relatively
high in groundwater.  The high sulfate concentrations in Swift Creek
result from groundwater (Table 2.6-2)  and from that picked up in the
nonprocess water due to plant activities.
                                 75

-------
Fluoride concentrations in the Suwannee River are below both the FDER 10
mg/1 maximum for Class III waters and the 1.6 mg/1 maximum for Class I
potable waters.  Major contributors of fluoride to the Suwannee at
average flow are Swift Creek (766 kg/day), the Alapaha River (398 kg/day),
and the Withlacoochee River (1380 kg/day).  The Santa Fe is also probably
a major contributor; however, there were insufficient data to project a
fluoride loading (Table 2.6-9).

A study is underway to assess the effect of fluoride on aquatic and
terrestrial organisms in Swift Creek and the Suwannee River.  It is
anticipated that data will be included in the final EIS documents.


2.6.4.5  Summary

2.6.4.5.1  Swift Creek

Swift Creek has high concentrations of sulfate, phosphate, and fluoride
when compared to other area streams.  It is strongly influenced by the
discharge from Occidental Chemical Company.

Biological indicators of water quality which give a long-term assessment
of conditions in streams indicate no severe stress to the aquatic system
in Swift Creek.  Community diversity and biomass are not significantly
different from other area streams.

2.6.4.5.2  Suwannee River

Based on mass loadings calculated for average flow conditions in each of
the major tributaries of the Suwannee, Swift Creek contributes the
majority of phosphate to the Suwannee, while the Withlacoochee contri-
butes the majority of the total nitrogen, total organic carbon and
fluoride.  The Santa Fe River contributes the majority of sulfates to
the Suwannee.

Since nitrogen and phosphate concentrations in the Suwannee River are
high and there have been no indicators of nutrient related problems,
other nutrients or physical factors must be limiting to aquatic plants
in the river.  The mixing due to the relatively high velocity of the
river and its highly colored water which limits light penetration are
probably major limiting factors preventing utilization of the available
nutrients.

After Occidental began mining operations in 1965  and water quality stabi-
lized, based on a report by Coffin  (Coffin, 1977), significant water
quality changes have not occurred since 1967.
                                  7fi

-------
2.6.5  GROUNDWATER QUALITY

2.6.5.1  Sampling Program

Several analyses for major and minor chemical constituents were per-
formed on samples from four series of observation wells located around
the proposed Swift Creek site (Figure 2.3-1).  Three to five wells of
varying depth ranging from 10 to 300 feet were drilled in each set.
In addition, several existing water supply wells at the Swift Creek
Beneficiation Plant were analyzed for chemical composition.


2.6.5.2  Water Quality in Surficial Aquifer and Hawthorn Formation

Water quality resulfs are presented in the Resource Document.*

In general, the surficial aquifer has acidic water (pH between 4.5 and
6.5).  A trend of increasing pH with depth is evident; pH ranged from
about 6 to 7.5 in the phosphate matrix layer, and above 7.0 at greater
depths.  Specific conductance levels were generally low (60-200 ymho/cm)
in the surface wells and were higher in the Hawthorn Formation (200-400
ymho/cm).

Fluoride levels ranged between 0.12 and 1.8 mg/1 in all the well analyses,
but only 4 of 46 measurements were above 1 mg/1.  There were no significant
trends with depth.

Total hardness generally increased from the shallow wells to the wells
in the Hawthorn Formation; but within the latter formation, concentrations
were variable with no trends over depth.  The surficial wells had very
low levels of alkalinity. With one exception, chloride levels were low
(3-9 mg/1) in all wells.  Sulfate levels were rather consistent with
depth and seldom above 10 mg/1.

Orthophosphate concentrations ranged from less than 0.1 mg/1 P to
about 3.0 mg/1 P in the surficial aquifer.  The matrix zone had generally
higher but rather variable concentrations (0.13 to 9.2 mg/1 P).  Deeper
in the Hawthorn Formation, orthophosphate ranged up to about 3.2 mg/1 P.
Nitrate levels were very low (<0.1 mg/1 N at all sites and depths.
Ammonium concentrations tended to increase with depth.  Concentrations
were generally less than 1.0 mg/1 N, and most results were less than 0.5
mg/1.  The surficial aquifer had concentrations ranging from <0.02 to
0.20 mg/1 N.

Color is essentially absent in the deeper wells, but the surficial
aquifer had up to 180 Pt units.  Iron concentrations were high (0.9 to
7.5 mg/1) in the surficial aquifer and in all cases exceed the recommended
maximum (0.3 mg/1) for drinking water.  In the phosphate matrix and the
lower part of the Hawthorn Formation, iron values were somewhat lower
(0.2 to 5.2 mg/1) but still exceeded the drinking water standard. Manganese
* Section 2.9 discusses the radio-chemical data.
                                 77

-------
levels were lower, and most samples were within the recommended drinking
water standard.  Other heavy metals had low to undetectable levels in
all wells.

In summary, groundwater quality in the surficial and Hawthorn layers at
the Swift Creek site is rather variable over depth and time. The water
is soft, acidic, somewhat colored, and high in iron in the surficial
aquifer; the Hawthorn Formation has generally hard water with neutral to
alkaline pH.  Levels of phosphate are relatively high in this zone, as
expected from the geochemistry of the region.  Iron is also high through-
out the Hawthorn formation and frequently exceeds drinking water standards
Heavy metal pollution is absent and concentrations of other major ions
are in the typical range for waters of the Hawthorn Formation.


2.6.5.3  Water Quality in Floridan Aquifer

Groundwater quality in Occidental supply wells tapping the Floridan
Aquifer is in general agreement with the regional data (Meyer, 1962;
Miller, et a!., 1977).  The Floridan Aquifer water in wells at the Swift
Creek site and in other wells in the area is characterized by a pH
generally between 7.0 and 8.0, total hardness ranging from 120 to 350
ppm as CaC03» and dissolved solids less than 500 mg/1.  Occidental
supply wells had (at the Swift Creek Beneficiation Plant) orthophosphate
levels ranging from 0.08 to 0.36 mg/1 P. Concentrations of iron ranged
from 0.06 to 1.1 mg/1, and about half the values are above the drinking
water standard.  All but one manganese analysis were below the drinking
water standard of 0.05 mg/1.  Heavy metals are low to undetectable.

At great depths, the Floridan Aquifer contains more mineralized water.
The thickness of the potable water zone is estimated to range from 1000
to 2000 feet (Klein, 1975).


2.6.6  WATER USES AND ISSUES

2.6.6.1  Hater Supply

The proposed Swift Creek Chemical Complex lies in Hamilton County,
Florida, within the jurisdiction of the Suwannee River Water Management
District.

Direct surface water withdrawals comprise only a small part of the
source of water supply in Hamilton County.  By far, the principal
source of water for industrial, municipal, agricultural and domestic
uses in Hamilton County and in the Suwannee River Water Management
District comes from groundwater.  Three aquifers exist in the District:
(1) the "surficial aquifer," (2) the "secondary artesian aquifer," and
(3) the "Floridan aquifer."
                                  78

-------
The surficial and secondary artesian aquifers are sources of water
supply for small domestic, stock and some agricultural  uses.  The
Floridan Aquifer is the principal source of groundwater in Hamilton
County as well as in the district as a whole.
2.6.6.2  Water Uses

Water uses in the three-county area of Columbia, Hamilton and Suwannee
are summarized in Table 2.6-11.  Municipal supply systems use only
groundwater as a source and include incorporated cities and towns as
well as unincorporated small communities having a central supply system.
All other residents are counted as rural domestic users.  These users
also pump groundwater as tKe only source of domestic supply at an
estimated rate of 100 gallons per day per .person (SRWMD, 1977).  Live-
stock water consumption which uses both surface and groundwater sources
is included in the rural water use category.

The main industrial user of groundwater in the three-county area is
Occidental Chemical Company whose groundwater withdrawals consist of
approximately 30 MGD.  Occidental also recycles approximately 305 MGD
of water within their hydraulic systems.  Occidental does not withdraw
any water directly from surface streams or natural lakes.  Evaporation
losses in the settling ponds are more than replenished by precipitation.

The main user of surface water in the three-county area is a thermo-
electric power plant in Suwannee County.  Its usage includes approxi-
mately 172 MGD of surface water withdrawn then returned to the source,
heated to some extent, but otherwise unaltered in quality.
                                 79

-------
                              Table 2.6-11

              WATER USE IN 1975 IN THE THREE-COUNTY AREA
                  (COLUMBIA, HAMILTON, AND SUWANNEE)
           (All Values in Millions of Gallons per Day - MGD)
                           GW = Groundwater
                          SW = Surface Water
County


Columbia

Hamilton

Suwannee


TOTAL
Municipal
GW SW
1.68
0.60
1.12
3.40
0
0
0
0
>
Rural
GW
1.60
0.69
1.52
3.81
SW
0.17
0.07
0.02
0.26
Irrigation
GW SW
10.75
1.34
1.42
13.51
i
1.19
0.15
0
1.34
/
Thermo- Electric
and Industrial
GW
1.12
30.30
2.40
33.82
SW
0
O1
173. 732
173. 73 l
                   3.40
4.07
14.85
207.551*2
                     TOTAL USE
  229.87 MGD1'2
1305 MGD of water wholly recycled within the hydraulic systems of the
 phosphate industry is not included in these data.

2172 MGD of water used in conjunction with thermo-electric power is re-
 turned to the Suwannee River.
Data from Leach (1977)
                               80

-------
                          LIST OF REFERENCES
                            Section 2.6
Coffin, J.E. (1977), "Suwannee River Basin Water Quality Monitoring
     Program"; U.S. Geological Survey and Suwannee River Authority.
     Unpublished Report.

Cox. D.T. (1971), "Stream Investigations"; Ann. Prog.  Rept.   Project
     F-25-4.  Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission.   209 pp.

EPA (1973), "Biological Field and Laboratory Methods for Measuring the
     Quality of Surface Waters and Effluents";  U.S. Environmental
     Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development,  Cincinnati,
     Ohio.  171 pp.       \

EPA (1976), "Quality Criteria for Water"; U.S. Environmental Protection
     Agency, Washington, D.C.  501 pp.

Ferguson, G.E., C.W. Lingham, S.K. Love, and R.O. Vernon (1947), "Springs
     of Florida"; Florida Geological Survey Bulletin,No. 31:1-196.

FSBH (1966), "Interim Report - Survey of the Suwannee River"; June -
     August, 1965.  Florida State Board of Health, Tallahassee, Florida.
     15 pp., plus Appendix.

Klein, H. (1975), "Depth to Base of Potable Water in the Floridan Aquifer";
     Florida Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Geology, Map
     Series No. 42.

Leach, S.D. (1977), "Water Use Inventory in Florida, 1975";  U.S. Geologi-
     cal Survey, Open File Report 75-577.

Meyer, F.W. (1962), "Reconnaissance of the Geology and Ground-Water
     Resources of Columbia County, Florida";  Florida Bureau of Geology,
     RI No. 30.

Miller, et al (1977), "Impact of Potential Phosphate Mining  on the
     Osceola National Forest, Florida"; U.S. Department of the
     Interior, Geological Survey.  159 pp.

Suwannee River Water Management District (1977), "District Water Use
     Plan"; I.C. 4 (Draft 3).
                                    81

-------
                     2.7  BIOLOGY AND ECOLOGY
2.7.1  AREA ECOSYSTEM MODIFIERS

Forestry management, agriculture and phosphate mining and processing
are the major area ecosystem modifiers.   Urbanized areas are relatively
small and limited to Jasper and White Springs.  Agriculture is confined
to the well-drained strip of soil along the Suwannee River.  Long-term
management for pine production has modified the surrounding natural
flatwoods association (Figure 2.7-1).  Phosphate mining and processing
has occurred in the area since the mid-1960's.  Discharge from mining
and processing operations is via Swift Creek and Hunter Creek into the
Suwannee River from the existing Suwannee River Mine and Chemical
Complex.  The discharge quality of the Swift Creek Chemical Complex will
be similar to that of the Suwannee River Complex and will be discharged
into Swift Creek.
2.7.2  AQUATIC COMMUNITY

2.7.2.1  Swift Creek

The discharge to Swift Creek is composed primarily of waters released
through Altman Bay Lake (EPA 001-7),* from the Suwannee River Mine;
and out of the SRCC retention pond (EPA 001-2);* and from the Swift
Creek Mine.  These are clear, relatively high nutrient waters, and the
stable base flow which they provide has probably modified the original
natural community composition.  Aquatic macrophytes are uncommon due to
shading.  Limited flooding has opened the canopy near the creek mid-
section allowing several marsh vegetation species to become established.

The plankton dominated systems of Altman Bay Lake and the retention pond
discharge provide a plankton input to the creek which is atypical of
area streams.  The mean diversity of the replicated Swift Creek stations
(Table 2.7-1) indicates a relatively diverse periphyton community and
low stress conditions.  Of the sampled Swift Creek stations, 88 percent
had a higher diversity than the mean diversity of streams not influenced
by mining,  ^quitability values of Swift Creek stations were about 0.5
or greater (x = 0.64).  The mean equitability of nearby streams sampled
was 0.52.  The means were not significantly different (p <_ 0.05).

The addition of plankton to Swift Creek from Altman Bay Lake has resulted
in a more diverse plankton community which provides a richer trophic
base upon which higher trophic levels can feed.  This gives Swift
Creek the potential for a more diverse and stable aquatic community.

Macroinvertebrates were sampled from natural substrates for baseline
conditions and with artificial substrates to compensate for substrate
variability and to provide an indication of water quality conditions.
   Proposed EPA NPDES FL 0000655 permit outfall numbers

-------
                                                              OKEEFENOKEE
                                                             SWAMP DRAINAGE ,
                PINE FLATWOODS
                   DRAINAGE
   PINE FOREST
  MANAGEMENT
    PRACTICES
                                MANAGED
                             PINE FLATWOODS
                                 FOREST
                   MANAGED PINE FLATWOODS
       PROPOSED
         E:c AND
        LISTING
         MINE::o
SUWANNEE RIVER
 CHEM.COMPLEX
   AND MINE
                                       URBAN
                                       AREAS
                                      WHITE
                                     SI'HINGS
MAJOR FORCING FUNCTIONS AND COMPONENTS OF THE OCCIDENTAL AREA
ECOSYSTEM AND SAMPLING STATIONS
                              FIGURE  2.7-1

-------
Table 2.7-1  Periphyton community indices for Swift Creek and nearby
             streams.
Swift Creek Station Numbers
Parameter
No. of Taxa
Diversity
Equitability
No. of Taxa
Diversity
Equitability
SC-1 SC-2
16 23
3.25 2.98
0.88 0.48

Hunter
Creek
9
1.18
0.31
SC-4A
20
3.39
0.75
Nearby
Roaring
Creek
13
1.93
0.38
SC-4B SC-6
17 21
3.25 2.80
0.82 0.48
SC-7
16
2.66
0.55
SC-9 Average
9 18.7
1.88 2.99
0.53 0.64
Streams Station Numbers
Rocky
Creek
12
2.95
0.92
Suwannee
River
18
2.42
0.42
Suwannee
River Av.
19 14.2
3.01 2.30
0.58 0.52
                                84

-------
Table 2.7-2
Results of Sediment Sampling for Macroinvertebrates in
Study Area Streams
Station
SC-1
SC-2
SCT-3
SC-4A
SC-4B
SCT-5
SC-6
SC-7
ABC-8
SC-9
SC-9.5
CB-1
CB-2
CB-3
RC-2
HC-1
RO-2
SR-7
SR-8
CB-x
SC-x
Natural_
Stream x
Number of
Taxa
7
6
14
15
18
24
18
12
3
16
15
8
13
12
20
16
19
12
11
11
12

17
Number of
Individuals
73
88
90
521
465
432
145
1892
1633
163
378 \
\
27
118
62
74
90
139
71
69
69
595

94
Mean
Diversity
1.90
0.56
3.07
2.89
2.93
3. .16
3.26
1.21
0.73
2.60
2.69
2.38
3.02
2.16
3.06
3.22
3.28
2.47
2.64
2.52
2.09

2.95
Mean
Equitibility
0.75
0.36
0.88
0.70
0.62
0.53
0.80
0.27
0.70
0.59
0.66
0.91
0.89
0.54
0.66
0.82
0.86
0.75
0.80
0.74
0.61

0.75
I
1
1
3
5
5
6
3
2
_
2
2
.
1
3
6
2
4
2
4
1
2

4
II
3
2
5
5
6
9
5
2

4
5
2
4
3
7
5
7
5
3
3
4

6
III
2
3
3
3
5
5
7
6
3
7
4
3
4
3
3
5
4
2
2
3
4

3
Beck's
Biotic
IV V Index
1
_ _
3
2
2
1 3
3
2

3
4
3
4
3
4
1 3
4
3
2
4
2

4
5
4
11

16
21
11
6
0
8
9
2
6
9
19
9
15
9
11
5
8

14
Table 2,7-3
Results of Hester Dendy Sampling for Macroinvertebrates
in Study Area Streams
Station
SC-2
SC-4A
SC-4B
SC-6
SC-7
ABC-8
SC-9
CB-1
CB-2
CB-3
RC-2
HC-1
RO-2
SR-7
SR-8
CB-x
SC-x"
Natural
Stream x
Number of
Taxa
8
8
10
11
8
5
7
6
6
5
5
9
10
7
8
6
8

7
Number of
Individuals
63
264
111
103
76
303
27
15
17
9
12
42
68
74
77
14
135

31
Mean
Diversity
2.04
1.84
2.36 .
2.60
1.92
1.19
1.84
2.34
2.25
2.23
1.70
2.44
2.50
2.14
2.00
2.27
1.94

2.16
Mean
Equitibility I
0.77
0.58
0.71
0.78
0.61
0.57
0.72
1.17
1.14
1.18
0.93
0.88
0.73
0.72
0.74
1.16
0.71

0.96
3
2
2
3
2
.
2
2
3
3
3
4
3
4
4
2
2

3
II
3
4
4
4
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
3
4
3
2
2
3

3
III
1
1
2
3
3
3
1
_
1
-
_
-
1
-
1
-
2

-
Beck's
Biotic
IV V Index
1
1
2
2
1
_
2
1 1
_
1
_ _
2
2
_
1
1
1

1
9
8
8
10
6
2
6
6
8
6
7
11
10
11
10
6
7

9
                                  85

-------
To compare the aquatic community well  being several indices of water
quality in the streams and community structure were calculated.  Beck's
Biotic Index ranged from a low of 3.7 at SC-2 to a high of 15.7 at SC-4B
for natural substrate collections (Tables 2.7-2 and 2.7-3).  The mean
of both sampling periods, 7.5, is well above the level  generally thought
indicative of pollution (Beck, 1954, 1955).  Artificial substrate values
ranged from 4.0 to 10.3 with a mean of 7.3 for both sampling periods.
No clear trends are evident except for a possible increase in the index
downstream.  This would be expected since the samplers  have a better
chance of collecting colonizer organisms downstream due to a greater volume
of water flow past them.

Means of Beck's Biotic Index for control streams were compared to means
of the Swift Creek stations and no significant differences were detected
(P<0.05) (Table 2.7-4) which indicates that the aquatic communities in
SwTft Creek are unstressed.

Diversity ranged from 1.02 to 2.60 for artificial samplers in Swift
Creek over the fall and winter sampling periods.  The mean, 1.80 during
these periods, indicates that Swift Creek could be under moderate stress
(Figure 2.7-2).  However, indices calculated from natural substrate
collections averaged 2.05 which indicates light to moderate stress (Figure
2.7-3).  The average Swift Creek values were compared with the means of
control (i.e. nonphosphate influenced) streams and no significant differences
(P<0.05) could be detected (Table 2.7-4).  This tends to suggest that
the lower diversity values could be due to natural conditions in the study
area and not from Occidental mining and processing influences.  Streams
in the area are typically brown water streams which are characteristically
heterotrophic and relatively less productive than streams which are auto-
trophic and do not have darkly stained, humic, swamp waters which limits
light penetration and subsequently production.

Average equitability values from sediment collections along Swift Creek
were 0.59 in the fall and 0.69 in the winter.  Station e values from
the artifical substrates averaged 0.72 in the fall and 1.06 in the winter.

All artificial substrate collections from Swift Creek had equitability
values above 0.58 for both sampling sessions.  Station equitability
values from natural substrate collections were below 0.5 at SC-2
(e=0.36) and SC-7  (e=0.27) during the fall and at SC-4 (e=0.48) and
SC-9 (e=0.42) during the winter.  These lower values probably indicate
substrate limitations rather than water quality limitations since
artificial substrate samplers at the same stations showed equitability
values well above the 0.5 break point value for unstressed conditions
(Figure 2.7-2).

Only one significant difference  (P<0.05) was detected between Swift
Creek and the natural streams used as controls  (Table 2.7-4).  The
difference occurred between artificial substrate collections during  the
fall sampling.  Even though a difference was detected, both means were
well above the breakpoint value between stressed and unstressed communities.
In fact, all means indicated a relatively unstressed condition  (Figures
2.7-2, 2.7-3).
                                   86

-------
A one way analysis of variance was used to compare the mean biomass from
Swift Creek main channel stations with the mean of the various control
stations.  Although the artificial substrate biomass estimates from the
Swift Creek stations (0.79 g/m2) averaged higher than the control  stations
(0.17 g/m2), the difference was not significant (a = .05).  Station
biomass averages from the natural sediment collections were about the
same for Swift Creek main channel stations (1.14 g/m2) and the control
stations (1.18 g/m2).

The fish community differences of Swift Creek compared to the nearby
streams is indicative of natural ecological differences and not
deleterious environmental changes (C. Gilbert, Florida State Museum,
written communication).  Differences were detected in mean diversity
values of Swift Creek versus nearby streams (Table 2.7-6).  However,
this included Swift Creek stations which were not representative of the
physical setting sampled at the nearby streams.  Comparison of a repre-
sentative Swift Creek Station (SC-4) with three of the four nearby
streams failed to show a significant difference (Table 2.7-6).  No
significant differences were detected in mean biomass of Swift Creek
stations and nearby streams nor the representative Swift Creek Station
(SC-4) and nearby streams (Table 2.7-7).


2.7.3  TERRESTRIAL COMMUNITIES OF SWIFT CREEK

Swift Creek Swamp lies north and east of the proposed SCCC.  It is a
disturbed hardwood swamp, dominated by broad-leaved deciduous tress
which include blackgrum, cypress, pop ash, red maple, and water oak.
Subdominate flora includes Florida elm, wax myrtle, button bush, and
swamp bay.  The ground cover is sparse and composed primarily of seed-
lings, ferns, lizards tail, and sphagnum.  Mixed hardwood swamps account
for approximately 7,036 acres in the five-mile radius study area of
which Swift Creek Swamp occupies approximately 50 percent of this
acreage.  The northwest half of the drainage for the Swift Creek water-
shed is dominated by this swamp. The natural outlet is at the north of
the swamp at the northwest corner of Section 10, T1S, R15E.  Recent
modifications include a low berm across the southern edge of the swamp
(Sections 3 and 4, T1S, R15E) which effectively separates Swift Creek
Swamp and Swift Creek and therefore modifies flood flows from the swamp.
Previous modifications to the swamp from the timber industry included
channelization for drainage and subsequent timber harvesting. These and
other changes have resulted in a disturbed swamp system.  However,
construction of the SCCC will not further disturb Swift Creek Swamp.

Vegetation of the upper portions of Swift Creek consists of pine flat-
woods and pine plantations interspersed with cypress domes, bayheads,
and mixed hardwoods swamps.  Strearnside communities of the upper
portions are characterized for the most part by species primarily
associated with prolonged seasonal flooding.  Mesic and hydric phases
of southern mixed hardwoods are the most prevalant vegetative compo-
nents of the mid-creek region.  Tree stress is prevalant in this
area.  The stress area is approximately 3 miles long and averages
100-150 yards in width.  It has been noted that mature individuals of
                                 87

-------
                                           DIVERSITY
                                           BIOMASS
                                           EOUITABIIITY
MS NATURAL STREAMS
   CB-CAMPBRANCH
   HO ROARING CREEK
   RC-ROCKY CREEK
SC SWIFT CHEEK
HC- HUNTER CREEK
X -MEAN
1WET V»T.) j/n.2
   BIOMASS  EOUITABILITV
   —  2«.0     r— t.2 •

   —  12.0
                                                                                   —  20.0
                                                                           HC I
                                                                          — STREAM RECEIVING
                                                                           MINED AREA DISCHARGE
     BENTHIC NATURAL SUBSTRATE MACROINVERTEBRATE SYSTEM QUALITY INDICES FROM THE
     FALL. 1977 SAMPLING PERIOD
                                                                                              E QUIT ABILITY
                                                                                               i—  1.2-
L
                                                                                       STREAM DECEIVING
                                                                                       MINED AREA DISCHARGE
        BENTHIC NATURAL SUBSTRAIE MACROtNVERTEBRATE SYSTEM QUALITY INDICES FROM THE
        WINTER, 1978 SAMPLING PERIOD
                                       FIGURE 2.7-2

-------
                               MS  MAIUBAL STREAMS
                                   C8  CAMP BRANCH
                                   RO  ROARING CREEK
                                   RC  ROCKV CHEEK
                               SC  SHIFT CREEK
                               HC  HUNTER CREEK
                               H  MEAN
BIOMASS   EQUITABIUTY
           — 1.1
 L
                                                                                 0.0
                                                                        MC
                                                                      - 1TRCAM RECEIVING
                                                                        MMIO AREA OISCKARCE
    ARTIFICIAL SUBSTRATE MACROINVEflTEBRATE SYSTEM QUALITY INDICES FROM THE FALL. 1977
    SAMPLING PERIOD
                                                                                         £ QUIT ABILITY
                                                                                           - 12
DIVERSITY
                          .NATURAL SYSTEMS
                                                                                  STREAM RECEIVING
                                                                                  MIMED AREA DISCHARGE
     ARTIFICIAL SUBSTRATE MACROINVERTEBRATE SYSTEM QUALITY  INDICES FROM THE WINTER. 1978
     SAMPLING PERIOD
                                      FIGURE 2.7-3
                                             89

-------
both water tolerant and intolerant species have been killed or stressed.
Chronic flooding is probably the primary cause for stress and/or kill  of
those species.  Mesic and xeric phases of southern mixed hardwoods
occupy the lower creek region with mature stands being quite common,
although some cutting has occurred.

Of the 51 species of mammals which could occur within the study areas,
28 (55 percent) were confirmed within the Swift Creek watershed, 14
(27 percent) on the Swift Creek Mine site, and 21 (41 percent) on the
Suwannee River Mine site.

Trapping of small mammals in natural communities along Swift Creek and
on the two mine areas revealed a greater trap success and number of
individuals (abundance) on mined lands than on natural communities
(Table 2.7-8).  For example, the Suwannee River complex mined lands had
a trap success approximately five times greater than the Swift Creek natural
communities.

The number of different species was the same among all three areas; however,
species composition was somewhat different.  The most obvious difference
of the mammalian fauna of the Swift Creek natural communities and mined
areas was the absence or limited presence of arboreal species and certain
aquatic, semi-aquatic, and fossorial-burrowing species on mined lands.
The basis of this difference lies in the differing physical characteris-
tics of the vegetative and substrate components present in the natural
communities and mined land phases.

Based on geographical distribution and habitat availability, 235
species of birds could occur in the Swift Creek natural and mined land
communities.  Based on IPA counts (Blonde! et a!., 1970), 163 species
(69 percent) were confirmed during fall/winter counts.  Total numbers
for expected and observed species were greater on mined lands than in
natural communities (Table 2.7-9) and it is expected that 70 species
(30 percent of the total) would not have been found in the area if not
for the mined lands.  The greater diversity of species in the mined
areas is a result of the increased occurrence of aquatic habitat offered
by settling areas.  The greater number of species observed in mined
lands was influenced somewhat by the increased visibility and range for
sighting in open mined areas versus the closed canopy of woods or an
area with thick vegetative cover.

Species composition of the natural communities along Swift Creek drainage
and the mined lands is somewhat different, with an increase in different
species of aquatic and semi-aquatic species in mined lands.  Use of
settling areas by aquatic and semi-aquatic species is demonstrated by the
presence of a substantial rookery in a settling area on the Suwannee
River Mine  (Table 2.7-10).

Due to winter conditions, the herpetile fauna could not be adequately and
quantitatively assessed.  A qualitative approach was used to determine
herpetile community components of both the Swift Creek drainage and the
Swift Creek and Suwannee River mined lands.
                                   90

-------
Table 2.7-4
One-way Analysis of Variance  for  Macroinvertebrate  Data
Collected  from Natural Substrates,  Comparing Pooled Swift
Creek Stations with the Pooled  Controls
      1.  DIVERSITY
Swift Creek
Control Stream
sc-2
0.56
2.38
CB-1
SC-4A
2.89
3.02
CB-2
SC-4B
2.93
2.16
CB-3
SC-6
3.26
3.06
RC-2
SC-7
1.21
3.22
HC-1
SC-9
2.60
3.28
RO-2
X
2.24
2.85
s
1.09
0.47
                           ANOVA
Source
Treatment
Error
Total
Ss,
1.12\
7.04 ^
8.17
df
1
10
11
MS
1.12
0.70

F
1.59


                                                   '.05.1.10
                                                            4.96
      2.  BIOMASS (g/m*)
Swift Creek
Control Stream
SC-2
0.313
0.467
CD-I
SC-4A
0.667
0.534
CB-2
SC-48
1.125
2.971
CB-3
SC-6
2.68
0.158
RC-2
SC-7
1.917
0.916
HC-1
SC-9
0.154
2.053
RO-2
1
1
X
.14
.18
s
0.99
1.10
                           ANOVA
Source
Treatment
Error
Total
Ss
0.0049
10.86
10.87
df
1
10
11
MS
0.0049
1.09

F
0.0045


                                                   ".05,1.10
                                                            4.96
  Table 2.7-5
  One-way Analysis of  Variance for Macroinvertebrate Data
  Collected from Artificial  Substrates, Comparing Pooled
  Swift Creek Station  with Pooled Controls
      1.  DIVERSITY
Swift Creek
Control Stream
SC-2
2.04
2.34
CB-1
SC-4A
1.84
2.25
CB-2
SC-4B
2.36
2.23
CB-3
SC-6
2.60
1.70
RC-2
SC-7
1.92
2.44
HC-1
SC-9
1.R4
2.50
RO-2
X
2.10
2.24
s
0.31
0.29
                            ANOVA
Source
Treatment
Error
Total
Ss
0.06
0.90
0.96
df
1
10
11
MS
* 0.06
0.09

F
0.69


                                                   F.05.1.10'4-96
      2.  BIOMASS (g/nr)
Swift Creek
Control Stream
SC-2
0.366
0.168
CB-1
SC-4A
2.109
0.100
CB-2
SC-4B
1.199
0.017
CB-3
SC-6
0.278
0.289
RC-2
SC-7
0.568
0.100
HC-1
SC-9
0.208
0.346
RO-2
X
0.79
0.17
S
0.74
0.13
                           ANOVA
Source
Treatment
Ss 1 df
1.15 1 1
Error ! 2.R2
Total I 3.96
10
11
MS
1.15
0.28

F
4.07


                                                    .05,1,10
                                                             4.96
                               91

-------
Table  2.7-6  One-way Analysis  of Variance  for Fish  Diversity  Indices
              Between Swift Creek and Local  Control  Streams
1.   All Swift Creek Stations vs. All  Control Stations:

                        Average Station Diversity
Swift Creek
Control
0.44
1.44
1.47
1.75
0.71
1.6
0.18
1.53
1.28
—
0.82
1.58
0.55
0.13
                              ANOVA
Source
Treatments
Error
Total
SS
1.30
1.25
2.55
df
1
7
8
MS
1.30
Q.18

F
7.25


                                                  "tab.,.05
                                                             5.59
    Representative Swift Creek Station vs.  Individual Control Stations:

                      Repli cate Pi vers i ty    7        S
SC-4
RO-2
CB-2
HC-1
1.92
2.43
1.58
1.3
1.39
1.58
1.92
00
1.09
0.31
—
1.9
1.47
1.44
1.75
1.60
0.42
1.07
0.24
0.42
                               ANOVA
Source
Treatments
Error
Total
SS
0.14
2.87
3.01
df
3
6
9
MS
0.05
0.48

F
0.10


                                                  "tab,.05
                                                            4.76
 Table 2.7-7  One-way Analysis  of Variance  for Fish  Biomass Estimates
               Between Swift Creek and Local  Control  Streams

 1.  All Swift Creek Stations  vs. All Control  Stations:
                      Mean Biomass (kg/ha) Per Station
Swift Creek
Control
1.83
3.25
4.04
2.5
26.37
2.07
57.10
0.12
16.52
—
x = 21.17, S = 22.4
x = 1.99, S 3 1 .34
                                       ANOVA
Source
Treatments
Error
Total
SS
818.09
2012.45
2830.54
df
1
7
8
MS
818.09
287.49

F
2.85


                                                     .05,1,7
                                                              5.59
 2.  Representative Swift Creek  Station vs. Each Control Station:
                   Replicate Biomass  (kg/ha)
SC-4
RO-2
CB-2
HC-1
RC-2
4.38
5.46
7.01
1.12
0.37
2.24
3.85
0.49
0
0
5.51
0.44
0
5.08
0
x = 4.04. S = 1.66
x = 3.25. S = 2.56
x = 2.5, S = 3.91
x = 2.07, S = 2.67
x = 0.12, S = 0.21
                                      ANOVA
Source
Treatments
Error
Total
SS
26.18
63.63
89.81
df
4
10
14
MS
6.55
6.36

F
1.03


                                                    '.05,1,7
                                                              3.48
                                92

-------
          Table  2.7-8   Comparison of Small Mammals as Assessed by Traplines in Natural and Mined Communities
CO
HABITAT/MINE PHASE COMMUNITY TOTAL
Community
Swift Creek
Watershed


Swift Creek Mine
Complex

Suwannee River
Mine Complex



Habitat/Mine Phase
High pinelands
Pine-palmetto flatwoods
Mixed hardwood systems
Swamp systems
Unreclaimed mine
Sand tailings
Inactive settling area
Reclaimed area
Active settling area
Inactive settling area
Unreclaimed mine
Sand tailings
Number of
Species
2
3
1
2
5
1
2
3
2
4
4
2
Trap* Number of Trap*
Success Species Success
1.7
2.8
1J 5 1-8
1.7
5.4
0.4 5 3.2
3.8
10.8
5.0
8.3 5 8.7
13.3
3.3
             Based upon an index of number of individuals captured/100 trap-nights.

-------
Table 2.7-9  Expected and confirmed bird species in Swift Creek natural
             communities and Swift Creek/Suwannee River mined lands

~~No. ExpectedNo. ConfirmedPercent Con-
     Site	Species	Species	firmed Species

Natural Communities

  Pine flatwoods              82              20               24.4
  Sandhills                   68              15               22.1
  Southern mixed hardwoods    90              18               20.0
  Cypressheads                27              10               37.0
  Bayheads                    44              16               36.4
  Mixed hardwood swamps       60              30               50.0
  Agricultural lands          68              32               47.1

Mined Lands
Active settling area
Inactive settling area
Reclaimed area
Unreclaimed mined area
128
137
147
132
49
44
58
26
38.3
32.1
39.5
19.7
 Table  2.7-10   Estimated  bird  pairs  of rookery in active settling area 8
               on  Suwannee  River Mine


      Species                                 No.  of Pairs


 Double-crested Cormorant                       250

 Anhinga                                        15°
 Great Egret                                    150
 Cattle Egret                                 4500-5000

 Snowy Egret                                     50

 Little Blue Heron                              200

 Black-crowned Night Heron                        75
 White Ibis                                    2500

 Green Heron                                     12
                                 94

-------
Table 2.7-11.   Potential  and Confirmed Terrestrial  Vertebrate Species
               in Swift Creek Natural Communities and Mined Lands
Vertebrate
Mammals
Birds
Reptiles
Amphibians
Total
Table 2.7-1
Taxon
Mammals
Birds
Reptiles
Amphibians
Fish
Total
Potential
Group Total Species
51
1235
63
38
387
Species Confirmed
on Swift Creek
. Natural Communities
28
64
33
16
141
Species Confirmed
on Mined Lands
21
84
10
11
126
2. Summary of Occurrence of Rare and Endangered Species
Number
Probable
10
24
6
3
4
47
Number Confirmed
Natural Communities
3
11
3
0
_2
19
Number Confirmed
on Mined Lands
1
16
1
0
_2
18
                               95

-------
Based on geographical distribution and habitat requirements, 101 species
could occur.  Of these 49 (48.5 percent) have been observed in the
natural communities along Swift Creek and 21 (20.8 percent) on the mined
lands.

Generally, the terrestrial vertebrate fauna of the Swift Creek natural
communities is typical of the region.  A total of 387 terrestrial  verte-
brate species potentially occur within the area (Table 2.7-11).  Of
these 141 (36.4 percent) were confirmed on the Swift Creek natural
communities and 126 (32.6 percent) were confirmed on mined lands.   The
fauna of the mined lands is somewhat different in species composition
than the natural community fauna.  Basic differences lie in omission of
certain specialist species from the mined lands, such as deep woods
species, many arboreal types, and some burrowing-fossorial types.  Other
specialists are somewhat more obvious and abundant on mined lands  than
in the natural communities.  This is particularly true for aquatic and
semiaquatic birds.  Settling areas on mined lands offer a functional
habitat as evidenced by the rookery established in the active settling
area on the Suwannee River Mine.
2.7.4  OTHER IMPORTANT BIOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS

2.7.4.1  Unique Natural Communities

The southern mixed hardwood community is considered the climatic upland
climax community in the area.  However, the vegetative community type is
restricted to small isolated woodlots and strands along the Suwannee
River and its tributaries.  These isolated areas provide diversity, as
well as additional "edge" within the pine flatwoods/ cypresshead/bayhead
system.  This edge is important to wildlife species in offering food
resources and nesting habitat.  No unique natural communities exist on
the proposed SCCC plant site.


2.7.4.2  Endangered, Threatened, or Rare Animals and Plants

Forty-seven endangered, threatened or rare vertebrate species have been
considered as potentially occurring within the Swift Creek drainage area
(Table 2.7-12).  Of these, 19 (40.4 percent) were confirmed along the
Swift Creek drainage and 18 (38.3 percent) were confirmed on the mined
lands.  The majority of this category are bird species which are aquatic
in nature (herons and egrets).  The availability of functional aquatic
habitat on mined lands (settling areas) is reflected in the number of
the rare and endangered avifauna present.  Twenty species of plants are
also considered in this category with two (10 percent) being confirmed
as on-site in natural communities.  No plants from this category are
expected to occur on the mined lands.


2.7.4.3  Migratory Wildlife and Habitat

Approximately 30 (13 percent) birds of the 235 suspected to occur are
nonmigratory.  The other 205 (87 percent) are either transients, winter
                                 96

-------
residents, summer residents, or local nonmigratory subspecies that share
the area with northern migratory subspecies during the winter.   Natural
communities along the Swift Creek drainage basin primarily provide
habitat for wintering or transient field and woodland birds.   Very
little open water habitat exists.  The mined areas provide large amounts
of aquatic habitat.  It is estimated that 70 species of birds would not
be found in the area if not for the man-made habitats provided by the
mine lands.  In addition, species that would normally occur would probably
occur in lower numbers if not for the manmade habitats.
2.7.4.4  Wildlife Benefits of the Area to Man

There is no public game management in the study area, although private
hunting is allowed on much of the commercially owned forests and
trapping was observed on Swift Creek.  Duck hunting is permitted by
Occidental on some clay settling areas.  These areas also attract non-
consumptive use by groups, such as the Audubon Society.  There exists a
good sport fishery on the Suwannee River but the use of this resource is
moderate and primarily confined to local residents. Some fishery use and
trapping was observed along Swift Creek.


2.7.4.5  Agricultural and Forestry Resources

Agriculture occupies a significant part of the Hamilton County economy.
Approximately 68,000 acres (21 percent of total land area) is in cultivation
Primary crops are corn, tobacco, soybean, rye, and millet.  Principal
livestock includes poultry, hogs, «nd cattle.  About 260,000 acres (79
percent of total land use) is in forest, of which 60 percent is in pine
forests intensely managed for fiber production (i.e., pulpwood).


2.7.4.6  Trends in the Area

Countywide, all agricultural lands suitable for this purpose have been
developed and no expansion of the agricultural base is expected.
Similarly, forest land in the county is also at a stable level, but the
volume of marketable timber has increased from 1 percent to 3 percent
annually since 1970.  The most significant land use trend in the area is
the growth of phosphate mining and related activities.  Phosphate mining
and reclamation will occur in the vicinity of the proposed plant site.
Portions of the area have been mined and the owners of the timber have
clearcut the area in anticipation of mining.  A limited reestablishment
of an upland successional series should recur in the cutover area prior
to initiation of mining.  The characteristics of mined/reclaimed systems
have been presented in Section 2.7 of the Resource Document.

2.7.5  PROPOSED SWIFT CREEK CHEMICAL COMPLEX SITE

The 650 acres which will comprise the SCCC are highly disturbed lands.
Portions of the area have been mined and the remainder has been cleared
with the expection of several highly modified cypress domes.  The area
                                  97

-------
presently supports several  invader species including the Hispid cotton
rat, Black racer, Mockingbird, Dogfennel and Baccharis.  These same
species would recolonize any disturbed area (e.g. farmlands, road edge,
etc.)  With the completion  of the facilities, the surrounding lands
(dike edge, building borders) will provide similar habitat.  The
disturbed nature of the area (i.e. mined lands, site prepared, drained
cypress domes) make it an unlikely place to find endangered or other listed
species.  These species for the most part are listed because of limited
habitat flexibility.  Generally, wildlife will not be affected by the
construction although air emissions may affect wildlife and wildlife
habitat.  These are discussed elsewhere.
2.7.6  SUMMARY:  ECOSYSTEM OVERVIEW

An ecosystem flow diagram has been developed showing principal
components and interrelationships of the native system to both the
existing cultural setting and adjacent or linked systems not in the
area (Figure 2.7-4).  It is a general representation of major material
or information exchange and is not intended as a complete system
model.

Topographic relief and rainfall patterns are dominant natural system
forcing functions.  They control pooling and flow of waters and
associated materials.  Vegetation and faunal patterns conform to
the physical system characteristics.

Phosphate mining and processing activities result in a major reordering
of topography, nutrient pools and materials movement characteristics
which result in species composition and utilization changes.  These
changes have been documented in the mined lands characterization.  As
the post mining/ reclamation system continues to mature, species compo-
sition and utilization shift will continue as adaptations to changes in
system forcing functions.

Given the relatively long period for adaptation provided by the Suwannee
River Chemical Complex and the fact that the Swift Creek Chemical Complex
discharge will be quite comparable to that from the Suwannee River Chemical
Complex, it is probable that no major changes in the aquatic and terrestrial
communities are likely to occur as a result of the proposed action.
                                   98

-------
                                                                „ MATERIAL « ENERGY
                                                                  EXCHANGE PATHWAYS


                                                                O CONTROL PATHWAYS


                                                                  ECOSYSTEM
                                                                  (OUNOAfllES
   LOCAL

  CULTURAL

DEVELOPMENTS
                                 ADJACENT OR
                               LINKED SYSTEMS
ECOSYSTEM DIAGRAM OF THE AREA OF CONCERN SHOWING PRINCIPAL SYSTEM
COMPONENTS , FLOWS AND CONTROLLING INFLUENCES

                                FIGURE 2.7-4

                                      99

-------
                          LIST OF REFERENCES
                             (Section 2.7)


Blonde!,  J., L.  Ferry and B.  Frochot (1970), "La methode des  indices
     pouctuels d'  avifauna par stations d1  encoute";   Alada  38:55-71,
                             100

-------
        2.8  SOCIOECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT OF THE AREA OF IMMEDIATE
                    IMPACT—HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE
The area in which Occidental Chemical Company operates in North Florida
is a predominantly rural area which is sparsely populated compared to
Florida as a whole.  There are three counties (Columbia, Hamilton, and
Suwannee) which will receive the bulk of the local  socioeconomic impacts
of the proposed expansion, although Duval County will  also be affected
moderately from expansion for shipping at the existing port facility.
However, the economic base of Duval County is large and the direct
economic impact, in terms of increased employment and  payrolls, are small.

Attention therefore is concentrated primarily upon Columbia, Hamilton,
and Suwannee counties.  Duval County, for the most part, is treated as a
part of Florida as a whole.

Historic baseline data and baseline projections for the state of Florida
and for the three-county area of immediate impact are  presented in the
Resource Document.  Key data are, however, presented in Table 2.8-1 which
gives a summary view of the socioeconomic character of the impact area
relative to Florida as a whole.

It is essentially a low density rural area which had relatively little
unemployment in 1970 and a low labor force participation rate.  By 1975,
however, the unemployment rate in the area had increased sharply although
it was still below that for Florida as a whole.  Hamilton County, in
particular, has experienced employment and income growth which was related
at least in part to Occidental.

Section 2.8.2 of the Resource Document contains detailed projections of
socioeconomic variables for Florida and the impact area to the year 2000.
Section 3.4.5 of this report presents a summary of these baseline projections
along with those which include the impacts of Occidental's expansions.  The
table below shows the three-county relationship to the statewide picture.
                                   101

-------
Table 2.8-1  Key Historic Socioeconomic Data for Florida and Columbia,
             Hamilton, and Suwannee Counties
Population (1975)
Growth Rate: 1960-1970
1970-1975
Net Migration Rate: 1960-1970
1970-1975
Columbia
County
28,793
26%
14%
+11%
+ 9%
Hami 1 ton
County
8,641
1%
11%
-12%
+ 7%
Suwannee
County
18,866
4%
21%
-6%
+18%
State
8,485,230
37%
25%
+27%
+23%
 Rural  Population (1970)               40%      100%         56%          20%

 Percent Economy Based on
   Agriculture (1970)                  10%       30%         18%           5%

 Median Family Income  (MFI)
   1970:                         $7,354     $5,733      $5,903       $8,267

 Percent Below State MFI              11%        31%          9%           0
                                102

-------
                 2.9  EXISTING RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT


 The following subsection will  attempt to describe  the  background  condition
 of the natural  radiation environment in the absence  of the  proposed  facil-
 ity.   The chemical  plant must receive mined and  processed feed material
 and mining this feed  cannot be considered as unassociated with the proposed
 chemical  plant.  It must, at least,  be addressed as  a  potential secondary
 impact.   The  only radionuclides having potential significant  impact  are
 those of  the  uranium-238 decay series.  The discussion will center upon
 the natural and disturbed condition  of these radionuclides.


 2.9.1   RADIONUCLIDES  IN  PHOSPHATE DEPOSITS

 Phosphate deposits  are found all over the globe  in rocks ranging  in
 age from  very-young (less than 10,000 years old) to  over 600 million
 years  old.  For perspective, U-238 has a half life of  4,500 million
 years.  Apatite is  by far the  most common mineral of the phosphate group.

 In  order  to understand the concentration of uranium, it is important to
 first  understand  the  formation of the apatites.  Many  theories for the
 formation of  apatites in  Florida have been presented in the literature.
 Although  they vary  considerably in detail,  most  hypotheses generally
 agree  that apatite  was deposited during  the middle Miocene when the
 oceanic environment of the area was  geochemically conducive to the
 precipitation of  phosphate from the  sea  water.  Once deposited, the
 apatite underwent extreme reworking  due  to  the repeated rise and fall
 of  sea level  that occurred  during later  ages.

 Primary apatite contains  only  trace  amounts  of uranium, but when submit-
 ted to extensive  marine reworking the  uranium content of these apatites
may be increased  to as much as  0.1 percent.  Therefore, the association of
 uranium with  Florida phosphate deposits  is  to be expected.  Once emplaced
 in the apatite mineral structure, the  uranium may be redistributed
 throughout the formation.  There are distinct differences in weathering
and leach  zone formation  between the north and west central  Florida
deposits.  It is  generally known that  the Hawthorn Formation in
northern  Florida  contains, on  the average,  less uranium than phosphatic
sediments  in west central Florida.

The physical characteristics of the apatite  particles are different in
that the  Bone Valley apatites of west central Florida tend to be of
pebble size and thus larger than the sand-sized ore contained in the
Hawthorn  Formation deposits of Hamilton County.  The upper portion of
the Bone Valley Formation has been leached, altered to aluminum phosphates,
and enriched in uranium through ground water processes.  This zone is
widespread, though discontinuous, throughout the west central  Florida
phosphate district.  A geologically similar zone does appear in northern
Florida deposits; however, it seems to be more generally limited  and
thinner than that of the Bone Valley Formation.
                                 103

-------
2.9.1.1  The Uranium Series

In order to understand the hazard posed by disturbing the location and
both the physical and chemical state of the natural radioactivity present
in the phosphate matrix, a clear understanding of the complexities of
the uranium decay series is required.

Uranium has two naturally occurring isotopes, uranium-238 and uranium-
235.  The uranium-238 series has a longer half-life and at present
accounts for 99.3 percent of the naturally occurring uranium.  Thorium-
232 represents the parent radionuclide of another naturally occurring
series, however, the concentration of thorium in north Florida forma-
tions is small compared to uranium and does not present a significant
enough hazard potential to warrant consideration.


2.9.1.1.1  Uranium Equilibrium

In the uranium-238 series, decay proceeds usually through 13 inter-
mediate radionuclides, called daughters, to a stable endpoint of the
element lead with a mass number of 206.  The radionuclides in the
series are diagrammed in Figure 2.9-1.

The nature of the series is such that a condition of equilibrium is
achieved if the entire series is contained in a "sealed" location
over a long period of time.  In other words, a geological sample
containing 100 pCi of U-238 may also contain 100 pCi of Th-234, 100
pCi of Pa-234, 100 pCi of U-234, and so on, through 100 pCi of Po-210.

Equilibrium is maintained only if the materials are undisturbed.
Natural phenomena may produce a disturbance.  A notable possibility
is the potential transport of the noble gas radon-222 away from the
location of its radium-226 parent.

Differential dissolution of specific materials by ground waters would
also disturb the equilibrium; however, since uranium and radium are
normally present in rocks and soil at equilibrium activity levels, the
solubility of each and the intermediates must all be extremely low.

The manufacture of phosphoric acid and other fertilizer products is of
prime interest, however the disturbance of mining and the subsequent
separation of feed materials from waste fractions is of secondary interest.

As they occur naturally, the radionuclides present in the phosphate
matrix and leached zone have presented virtually no problem.   The soil
overlying the layers is normally sufficient to reduce gamma radiation
exposure at the ground surface to background levels.

Radon-222 transport out of the matrix to the surface is also minimal.
Radium-226 has evidently remained within the matrix for geologic ages
in equilibrium with uranium-238 and has not contaminated the shallow
and deep aquifers with any chemically significant amounts.
                                104

-------
238
92'

J
4.5 K 109 yr




234
9Ql

a



•h
24cte.































234
92U
2.5 K 10s yr
X
234
91**
/
* 8,6
\
'A«






AIUMIU mil.
ELEMENT
a j ATOMIC NO.
HALF-LIFE


230
90th
8 x 104 yr
\
1




-



o,5

226
88R»
1620 yr







a,6
I
222
3.8 da


...
841*0
3 min.






a

2U 210
84™ 84™
1.6 x 10-*«c 138da.
/ /
214 /to *.6 21° |/
27 min.
/ P, 6 210 • / P 6 206
82'*'* r ' 82'*''
19.4 yr. Stable
URAIMIUM-238 DECAY SERIES
     FIGURE 2.9-1



          105

-------
 Mining,  however,  produces  a  considerable  disturbance  of  this  natural
 condition  leading to many  new  transport pathways  that must  be addressed
 Mining may cause  the higher  activity  leached  zone material  and small
 quantities of  the matrix to  be redeposited  near the ground  surface
 upon  reclamation.  The physical  character of  the  material containing
 the activity is changed as a new geohydrology is  established.   The
 by-product materials from  the  processing  of the phosphate matrix con-
 tain  various amounts of uranium  and its decay series.

 In some  cases, mined land  is reclaimed with by-product materials from
 the processing of the phosphate  matrix.   These materials contain
 approximately one-third of the uranium originally present in  the
 matrix.  Physical  processing does not appreciably alter  the equilibrium
 from  uranium-238  through radium-226.

 In phosphoric acid production, the radioactive equilibrium  is  severely
 disrupted  with uranium-238 appearing primarily in the phosphoric acid
 and radium-226 precipitated  with the gypsum.   The fertilizer  concen-
 trations of each  radionuclide  materials reflect the mix  and processing
 of the ingredients.  The impact  of this redistribution of radioactive
 materials  is addressed in Section 3.5.
2.9.1.1.2  Radon Progeny

The uranium-238 decay scheme equilibrium is highly dependent upon the
mobility of the radon-222, an inert gas.  In the neutral state, most
of the radon-222 produced in a phosphate matrix would not escape the
media.  Mining, beneficiation and chemical processing not only alters
the location and chemical condition of the radium-226 but may increase
the probability that radon-222 will be able to diffuse from the site
at which it was created.  The rate of movement through the soil-air
interface will be in units of pCi/m2 sec and is termed "radon flux."
Very few radon flux measurements have been made in north Florida.
Roessler et al. (1976) report one flux measurement in Hamilton County
on unaltered lands at 0.1 pCi/m2 sec.

The airborne radon-222, whether in the open air, near industrial
sources, or inside homes, will decay and an approach to equilibrium
between the next four daughters (polonium-218, lead-214, and polonium-
214) will start.  These four radionuclides are known as the radon
progeny.  Airborne radon progeny concentrations are customarily
expressed in "Working Level" units.

There is one other way to view the uranium decay series.  The
radionuclides uranium-238, uranium-234, thorium-230, radium-226 and
polonium-210 are all long lived radionuclides that could become air-
borne in dusty operations or other mechanisms.  The most critical industry
operations with regard to these radionuclides are elemental  phosphorus
production and rock dryers.   Neither operation is associated with the
proposed facility.   No data  on these emissions are available from present
operations at the SRCC.

                                  106

-------
2.9.1.2  Background Radioactivity

This section will review the various background radiation sources
with particular emphasis on comparing the proposed site to USA
averages and west central Florida levels.  Table 2.9-1 summarizes
the estimated average background dose to United States citizens from
natural radiations and compares it to estimates from other man-made
sources.

In the continental United States the external terrestrial radiation
arises primarily from gamma ray emissions of the thorium series, the
uranium series and potassium-40.  However, in Florida the contribu-
tion to the external terrestrial radiation component by the uranium
series probably accounts for a higher percentage in virgin areas and
all of the man-enhanceq increases.  The overall average level in
Florida is lower than the national average given in Table 2.9-1.  The
total average external background radiation level (cosmic'+ terrestrial)
in Florida is expected to be between 6.3 and 4.7 pR/hr (55 and 41
mrem/yr), (see Resource Document, Section 2.9.1).

In early 1976, a field survey for external gamma radiation levels
existing on the Occidental Chemical Company property was conducted
(Sholtes & Koogler Environmental Consultants, 1976).  Virgin land
(including lands to be mined in the next three years), lands being
mined, and reclaimed lands were included in the survey.

The average value found in this survey for virgin land, lands being
mined and reclaimed lands were 5 uR/hr, 5 yR/hr, and 7.9 uR/hr,
respectively. Typical background gamma radiations for north Florida are
compared to west central Florida in Table 2.9-2 (after Roessler, 1977).
2.9.1.3  Subsurface Radioactivity

Since the origin of the uranium in the deposits is similar to the
phosphate, it should be evident that the concentration of uranium
should follow the concentrations of phosphate:  a low concentration
in the overburden and a high concentration in the matrix.  The actual
distribution is slightly different.  In both north Florida and west
central Florida mining regions, the radioactivity is low at the
surface, increases gradually and then more rapidly with depth and is
most concentrated in or just above the matrix.  Uranium and radium are
in general equilibrium.  If present, the leached zone is usually
marked by high radioactivity.

Since a major fraction of the gamma radiation level in Florida is
related to the uranium series, gamma logs of wells should also reflect
this general profile.  A gamma well log from west central Florida is
shown in Figure 2.9-2 (Ardaman & Associates, 1977).

The activity (also relative radium concentration) increases nearly
linearly with depth to approximately 35 feet where the rate sharply
increases as does the phosphate level and then falls gradually to
around the 100-foot mark.  The activity begins to increase again below


                                107

-------
Table  2.9-1    Average Doses From Radiation in the United
               States in 1970
Source                                 Average Dose, mrem/year*
Environmental
     Natural
          Cosmic Rays                       44
          Terrestrial Radiation
               External                     40
               Internal                     18.
                    Total                   102  -» 102
     Global  Fallout                                  4
     Nuclear Power                                   Q.003
                    Total                          106  -*•  106
Medical
     Diagnostic                                      72
     Radiopharmaceuticals                            __1
                    Total                            73   -*-  73
Miscellaneous                                                _J1

                    Grand  Total                             182
 *Field  measurements  are usually made in units of vR/hr.   For X-
  and  gamma  radiation 1  yR/hr = 1 mrem/hr = 8.8 mrem/yr.
                          108

-------
            SURFACE


         OVERBURDEN
            MATRIX
               z
               cc
               o
                cc
                Ul
                u.
                5
                O
        0'
                                                        8.1 (8.1)
                                                                100'
                                                        14.0 (22.1)
                                                                200*
                                                        18.7 (40.8)
                                                                300'
                                                        14.0 (54.8)



                                                       	  400'
                                                        10.2 (65.0)
                                                                500'
                                                        9.4 (74.4)
                                                                600'
6.9  (81.3)
                                                                700'
                                                        6.2 (87.5)
                                                                800'
                                                        6.2 (93.7)
                                                                900'
                                                        6.3 (100.0)
                                                                1000'
GAMMA-RAY LOG OF A DEEP WELL IN WEST CENTRAL FLORIDA
                UJ
                u
                
-------
Table  2.9-2
Mean Gamma Field Averages and Ranges by Land Type in the North and
Central Florida Mining Regions
OCCIOEMTAL CHEMICAL COMPANY
Land Type
Virgin
Overburden
Tailings
Debris
Capped Clays
Average
Mean Gamma
N Level (nR/hr)
1 4.0
1 7.9
1 9.8
—
—
Range of Means
Levels (nR/hr) N
8
3
6
4
2
WEST CENTRAL FLORIDA
Average
Mean Gamma
Level (pR/hr)
4.7
8.3
10.3
18.4
23.0
Range of Mean
Levels (yR/hr)
4.3-5.0
7.1-10.3
7.4-12.8
16.1-21.0
21.7-24.3
Source:   After Roessler 1977

-------
the matrix and reaches a peak at about the 200-foot level.  It then
decreases beyond the 350- to 400-foot level and falls off slowly with
depth.

This distribution of activity with depth is also reflected in the radium
profiles obtained for the site.

An examination of Figure 2.9-2 indicates the overburden and mineable
matrix represents only 8.1 percent of the total activity in the 100-foot
column.  Note that the primary aquifer lies below the Hawthorn formation.

The Osceola National Forest study (Miller, 1977) incorporated data
from a large number of wells, most of which were gamma logged and a
general pattern emerges from a review of the numerous gamma logs.
Many indicate:        \

     1.  A rapid rise in activity to the near-matrix depth.

     2.  The high activity of the matrix.

     3.  A brief decrease in activity.

     4.  Sporadic high levels of activity throughout the Hawthorn
         formation.

     5.  A precipitous drop in activity as the aquifer is traversed.

In order to relate the findings concerning the gamma logs in west
central Florida and the Osceola area to the present study, gamma
logs were obtained for three wells on the Occidental property.  The
logging of well SC-3-E is shown in Figure 2.4-2.

Although this topic will be discussed in more detail in section 3.5,
it should be noted here that the monitor well sets described in Section
2.6.3 draw water from locations indicating high gamma log activities.
Because of existence of higher radium contents in strata from which
water is drawn for monitoring purposes, it may be exceedingly difficult
to determine the existence of radium seepage from other locations.
Concentrations of radium-226 found in water samples from these wells may
be a direct function of the local environment and completely mask radium
transported from nearby ponds or gypsum stacks.

The distribution of activity from core data appears to follow the
pattern of the gamma log response.  Table 2.9-3 compares the sub-
surface radioactivity data of Groome (1977) for north Florida against
west central Florida by sample type.

Groome's data on the matrix at the two sites reinforce the known
difference between the two locations.   The averages indicate a matrix
concentration of radium-226 in north Florida that is about 20% of the
west central Florida values.
                                  Ill

-------
Table 2.9-3
 Comparison of Radium-226 Concentrations
 Occidental Property versus West Central
 Florida
Sample
Type
  Occidental Property
No. of     Radium-226
Samples      pCi/g
West Central Florida
No. of    Radium-226
Samples     pCi/g
Topsoil

  Average

Overburden

  Average at
  weighted
  Overburden

Matrix

  Average of
  Composite
  Samples
              0.5
              3.6
              8.6
             1.3
   3*
4.0
            37.6
*  Number given is number of profiles used in the weighted average.

Source:  After Groome 1977 as updated by Roessler et al., 1977
                               112

-------
2.9.1.4  Surface Water Quality

Radium-226 in surface waters of the USA is generally low (between 0.01
and 0.1 pCi/1) except for certain locations such as mineral  springs,
waters with high solids content, and waters that drain fertilized
fanning areas.  This distribution can be seen in Table 2.9-4.   The
latter entries are specific to Florida and are taken from the  impact
statement on the potential mining in the Osceola National Forest and
the Resource Document for this EIS.
2.9.1.5  Ground Water Duality
            -   -  —   «  \

The potential  of groundwater contamination with radium-226 or other
contaminants due to phosphate mining operations is a concern.  The
most extensive review of the literature and data analysis for west
central Florida has been undertaken by Kaufmann and Bliss (1977).
They statistically analyzed available radium data from 1966 and from
1973-1976 in three strata:  upper water table, Upper Floridan
aquifer, and Lower Floridan aquifer.  Each water resource was con-
sidered in three geographic areas of west central Florida:  mined
(mineralized)  areas, unmined mineralized areas, and nonmineralized
areas.  The basic data summary is shown in Table 2.9-5.

The geometric mean radium-226 in the water table aquifer was 0.17
pCi/1 in the unmined mineralized areas and 0.55 pCi/1 in the mined
areas.  The statistical tests indicate no significant difference
between the 0.17 and 0.55 pCi/1 of radium-226 in the water table
aquifers of the unmined and mined areas.

When the Upper and Lower Floridan aquifer data were considered, mined
areas and nonmined areas were all approximately equal.  The Floridan
aquifer had higher concentrations of radium-226 in the nonmineralized
areas.

Kaufmann and Bliss did not consider gamma logs of deep wells.  As
discussed previously, gamma logs to 1,000 feet show considerable
radioactivity in the Hawthorn formation overlaying the Floridan aquifer.
The gamma logs strongly suggest that the Lower Hawthorn itself may be
a source of radium-226 in the Floridan aquifer.

Studies of radioactivity in the qroundwaters of unmined sections of
northern Florida are limited.  Two will be reviewed here—a study  of
radium-226 in qroundwaters in Alachua County (Palmer, 1977) and the
Osceola Mining Impact Study (Miller, 1977).  Studies of radioactivity in
groundwaters on the site are discussed in Section  3.5.

Palmer's data indicated an average gross alpha level for 20 wells  of 8.1
pCi/1.  The average radium-226 concentration in the wells showing  results
greater than the lower limit of detection was 2.6 pCi/1.  The gross
alpha to radium-226 ratio was about three.

                                  113

-------
Table 2.9-4.  Radium-226 in Surface Waters in the U.S.A. and Florida
Type
River Waters
Mississippi River
Great Salt Lake
Curie Spring
Ohio River
Surface Water
Supply
Lithia Springs
Alafia River
Peace River
Proposed Four
Corners Mine
(7 stations,
18 samples)
Middle Prong
St. Mary's River
Deep Creek
Robinson Creek
Swift Creek
Suwannee River
Roaring Creek
Hunter Creek
Rocky Creek
Camp Branch
1
Location
Average North America
St. Louis, MO
Utah
Boulder, CO
Pennsylvania
Chicago, IL
Lithia, FL
Lithia, FL
Ft. Meade, FL
Hillsborough and
Manatee Counties, FL
Osceola National
Forest
Osceola National Forest
Osceola National Forest
Occidental
Occidental
Occidental
Occidental
Occidental
Occidental
Radium-226
pCi/1
0.03
1.2-2.9
5
267,000
0.6
0.03
0.68
0.06
0.12
•
0.18
0.08
0.06
0.07
<0.3
0.8
<0.2
0.3
<0.3
<0.4
Reference
Lowder
Lowder
Lowder
Lowder
Lowder
Holtzman
Irwin
Irwin
Irwin
Morton
Miller
Miller
Miller
Resource
Document
Resource
Document
Resource
Document
Resource
Document
Resource
Document
Resource
Document
                             114

-------
Table 2.9-5  Summary of Radium-226 Data in Central Florida Aquifers
Area
Description
Unmined
Mineralized
Mined
Mineralized
Nonmineralized
(Control
Water Table
No.
23
12
NO
pCi/1*
0.17
\0.55
DATA

Upper
No.
5
10
3
Aquifer
Floridan
pCi/1
2.30
1.61
5.1

Lower
No.
24
6
14

Floridan
PCi/1
2.0
1.96
1.4
Source:  After Kaufmann and Bliss, 1977.
* All data are geometric means of author's preferred data.
Note:  Drinking water standard for total radium is 5 pCi/1.
                               115

-------
The Osceola study (Miller, 1977) grouped wells by the geological  strata
from which water was drawn (see Table 2.9-6).  Note that the highest
average for either measure of radioactivity was located in the last
unit of the Hawthorn formation.  The data for the first four units
appear to follow the pattern observed in the gamma logs.
2.9.1.6  Summary

Baseline conditions at the proposed site are as follows:
     Gamma Radiation
-  Approximately 5 yR/hr over unaltered
   lands:  typical Florida background
   ranges from 4.7 to 6.3 yR/hr.
     Subsurface Radioactivity -
     Matrix radioactivity   . -
     Radon Flux at Soil
        Surface
     Radon Progeny in
        Structures
     Surface Water
        Radioactivity
     Groundwater
        Radioactivity
   Gamma logs show highest levels at the
   top of the matrix, some continued
   activity through the Hawthorn with
   secondary high spikes.

   Uranium and radium measurements
   confirm highest activities either
   just above or in top of matrix.

   Radium approximately 8 pCi/g or 20
   percent of that observed in west
   central Florida.
   Extremely limited data indicating
   0.1 pCi/m2 sec.  Data on unaltered land
   in Polk County averages 0.3 pCi/m2 sec.
   No measurements available, however, the
   lower subsurface radioactivity at Occidental
   should yield lower WL than observed
   in west central Florida.
   Radium-226 between <0.2 to 2.9 and
   normally less than 1 pCi/1.
   Radium-226 between <0.1 to 5 and
   normally less than 2 pCi/l>
   concentration appears to be related
   to depth and therefore radium in the
   immediate media.  Poor water quality
   especially high Na+ (or C1-) may
   enhance radium content.
                                116

-------
Table 2.9-6  Summary of Gross Alpha and Radlum-226 Data from the Groundwater
             Study in the Osceola National Forest
Description
               Radioactivity,  pCi/1
      Gross Alpha              Radium-226
   Avg.* (Range) No.         Avg.* (Range) No,
Superficial Aquifer

     Hawthorn Member "A"
Hawthorn Continuing Unit
     Member "C"
     Member "E"
Floridan Aquifer
 1.3 (<0.8 - 2.3 ) 3
 4.4 (<0.3 - 6.4 ) 3

 9.0 (<3.5 -23.0 ) 6
26.0 {     -     ) 1
13.0 (<3.5 -43.0 )10
    (<0.1 -<0.01) 2
    (<0.1 - 0.7 ) 2

0.9 ( 0.5 - 1.1 ) 4
2.2 (     -     ) 1
1.8 ( 0.6 - 5.2 ) 7
*  "Less than" values averaged as "equal to" values
Source:  After Miller, 1971.
                                     117

-------
                          LIST OF REFERENCES
                             (Section 2.9)


Altshuler, Z.S., E.B. Jaffee and Frank Cuttitta (1955), "The Aluminum
     Phosphate Zone of the Bone Valley Formation, Florida, and its
     Uranium Deposits"; In_:  Page, L.R., H.E. Stocking and H.B. Smith,
     Compilers.  Contributions to the Geology of Uranium and Thorium
     by the United States Geological Survey and Atomic Energy Commission
     for the United Nations  International Conference on Peaceful  Uses
     of Atomic Energy, Geneva, Switzerland.  U.S. Geological Survey
     Prof. Paper 200, p. 489-294 (1956).

Altshuler, Z.S., E.J. Dwornik, and Henry Dramer (1963), "The Transforma-
     tion of Montmorillonite to Kaolinite During Weathering"; Science
     Vol. 141, p. 148-152.

Battelle Memorial Institute (1971), "Inorganic Fertilizer and Phosphate
     Mining Industries - Water Pollution Control"; Final Report to
     U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. Under Grant
     12020FPD.

Cathcart, James B. (1955), "Distribution and Occurrence of Uranium in the
     Calcium Phosphate Zone of the Land-Pebble Phosphate District of
     Florida"; In: Page, L.R., H.E. Stocking and H.B. Smith, Compilers;
     Contributions to the Geology of Uranium and Thorium by the United
     Stites Geological Survey and Atomic Energy Commission for the United
     National International  Conference on Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy,
     Geneva, Switzerland; U.S. Geological Survey Prof. Paper 200,
     p. 489-494.

Datagraphics, Inc. (1971), "Inorganic Chemicals Industry Profile  (Updated):
     Final Report to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington,
     D.C."; Prepared under Grant 12020EJI.

Eisenbud, M. (1973), Environmental Radioactivity; Academic Press.

EPA (1975), "Standards of Basis and Purpose for Proposed National
     Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations"; Radioactivity, August 1975.

EPA (1975), "Preliminary Findings: Random Daughter Levels in Structures
     Constructed on  Reclaimed Florida Phosphate Land", ORP/CDS-73-5.
     U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

EPA (1976), "Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations - Promulgation
     at Regulations  on Radionuclides";  Federal Register 41:133, July 1976.

Golden, J., Jr.  (1968), "Natural Background Radiation Levels  in Florida";
     U.S. ACE Report SC-RR-68-196, Sandia Laboratory, May 1968.

Groome, C.D. (1977), "Naturally Occurring Terrestrial Radioactivity in
     Selected Areas  of Florida"; M.S. Thesis,  University of Florida,
     August 1977.


                          118

-------
Guimond, R.J. and S.T. Windham (1975),  "Radioactivity Distribution  in
     Phosphate Products, By-products, Effluents and Wastes";  U.S.
     Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Radiological  Programs,
     Washington, D.C.   ORP/COS-75-307.   August 1975.

Gunning, Susan (1976), "The Chemistry,  Mineralogy and Uranium and Thorium
     Content of Two Sections from the Phosphate Unit of the Hawthorn
     Formation in Hamilton County, Florida"; Senior Thesis, Department
     of Geology, University of Florida, August 1976.

Guyton, W.F. and Associates (1976), "Test Hole Geology"; Swift Agricul-
     tural Chemicals Corporation, Manatee Mine Site.  February 1976.

Habaski, F. (1966), "Radioactivity in Phosphate Rock"; In:  Economic
     Geology, Science Communications, Vol. 61.

Holtzman, R. (1963), "Lead-210 and Polonium-210 in Potable  Waters in
     Illinois"; In: The Natural Radiation Environment; J. Adams and
     W. Lowder, Eds., p. 231-232.

Irwin, G. and C. Hitchinson (1976), "Reconnaissance Water Sampling  for
     Radium-226 in Central and Northern Florida"; December  1974 to
     March 1976; WRI 76-103.  U.S. Geological Survey, October 1976.

Kaufman, Robert F. and James D. Bliss (1977), "Effects of Phosphate
     Mineralization and the Phosphate Industry on Radium-226 in the
     Ground Water in Central Florida";  U.S. Environmental Protection
     Agency, EPA/520-6-77-010.  October 1977.

Levin, S. et al. (1968), "Summary of Natural Environmental  Gamma Radia-
     tion Using a Calibrated Portable Scintillation Counter"; Rad.  Health
     Data and Reports, 9:679-695.

Lowder, W. and L. Solon (1956), "Background Radiation"; NYO-4712, p.  21,
     U.S. ACE Health and Safety Laboratory, July 1956.

Mahdavi, Azizeh (1963), "The Thorium, Uranium, and Potassium Contents of
     Atlantic and Gulf Coast Beach Sands"; In: Adams, John, A.S. and
     Wayne Lower, M., Eds., The Natural Radiation Environment,   University
     of Chicago Press.

Miller, James A, Gilbert H. Hughes, Robert W. Hull, John Vecchioli, and
     Paul R. Seaber (1977), "Impact of Potential Phosphate  Mining on  the
     Osceola National Forest"; Florida Department of the Interior,
     Geological Survey, December 1977.

Morton, Henry W. (1977), "Radiological  Impact Assessment of the Four
     Corner's Mine"; Prepared for W.R.  Grace & Company, Bartow, Florida,
     August 26, 1977.

National Academy of Sciences (1972), "The Effects on Populations of
     Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation"; National  Research
     Council, Washington, D.C., November 1972.
                              119

-------
NCRP (1975), "Natural Background Radiation in the United States";
     National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements,
     NCRP Report No. 34, p.  15.   November 1975.

Oakley, D. (1972), "Natural  Radiation Exposure in the United States";
     U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency ORP/SID 72-1.   June 1972.

Oakley, D. and A. Goldin (1975), "Cosmic Population Exposure";  In_:
     The Natural Radiation Environment II, J. Adams, et  al., Eds.

Palmer, James (1977), "Ambient Levels of Radium-226 in Selected  Ground
     Water of Alachua County", M.S. Thesis, University of Florida.
     May 1977.

Roessler, C.E., J.A. Wethington, Jr., W.E. Bolch, Randy  Kautz and
     Robert Prince (1976), "First Semiannual  Technical Report -  Natural
     Radiation Exposure Assessment"; Submitted to the Florida Phosphate
     Council.  University of Florida, August 1976.

Roessler, C.E., J.A. Wethington, Jr., and W.E. Bolch (1978), "Fourth
     Semiannual Technical Report - Natural Radiation Exposure Assessment";
     Submitted to the Florida Phosphate Council.   University of  Florida,
     February 1978.

Roessler, C.E., J.A. Wethington, Jr., W.E. Bolch  and Randy Kautz (1977),
     "Second Semiannual  Technical Report - Natural Radiation Exposure
     Assessment"; Submitted  to the Florida Phosphate Council. University
     of Florida, February 1977.

Roessler, C.E., Z.H. Smith,  W.E. Bolch and R.J.  Prince (1977),  "Uranium
     and Radium-226 in Florida Phosphate Materials"; Report to the
     Florida Phosphate Council.   University of Florida,  December 1977.

Sholtes & Koogler Environmental  Consultants (1976), "A Radiological  Survey
     of the North Florida Phosphate Deposits for  the Occidental  Chemical
     Company, Hamilton County, Florida"; Gainesville, Florida.   October  1976.

State of Florida, Department of Health & Rehabilitative  Services (1977),
     "Study of Radon Daughter Concentrations in Structure in Polk and
     Hillsborough Counties"; Interim Report.   February 1977.

United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation
     (UNSCEAR) (1972),"Ionizing  Radiation: Levels and Effects"; Vol.  1,
     p. 70.  United Nations.
                                120

-------
                2.10  CULTURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT
In accordance with federal mandates implemented by 36 C.F.R. 800,
"Procedures for the Protection of Historic and Cultural Properties,"
an archaeological and historical study was undertaken to assess impact
of the proposed project upon cultural resources.  Based upon a deter-
mination by EPA, the project area was limited to land to be occupied
by the proposed chemical plant and associated ponds.  The archae-
ological field survey covered  approximately 1000 acres as shown of
Figure 2.10-1.  The historical documentary study concerned 3 square
miles specifically, as, well as the Suwannee River and regional
phosphate industry in general.  Details of both project components
are presented in the Resource Document.

Five archaeological sites were recorded in the Florida Master Site
File as being within 6 miles of the survey tract.  A field survey of
the highly disturbed tract revealed no evidence of aboriginal occu-
pation.  Historical research utilizing published historical sources,
travelers' accounts, federal, state, and local property records and
early maps revealed no sites of significance.  Lumber and turpentine
have been the primary resources in the project area, and deed records
provide ample evidence of their exploitation.  Camp's Still, a
turpentine still and community occupied between 1900 and 1930, is
situated just outside the southern property boundary.  Several shacks
remain standing but the property is not considered eligible for
inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places.

By letter of January 26, 1978, the Florida Deputy State Historic
Preservation Officer has concurred in a determination of no effect.
                            121

-------
o
c
33
m

M
                     PROPOSED SWIFT CREEK

                                CHEMICAL COMPLEX
                                                            SUWANNEE RIVER

                                                            CHEMICAL COMPLEX
              SURVEY AREA
              APPROXIMATE SITE LOCATION
                                                                                             0   5000  10000
                                                                                             I	 . I     I
                                                                                                FEET
        CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY- OCCIDENTAL CHEMICAL COMPANY

-------
                 2.11  ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS
In 1974 the Suwannee River was considered for, but not designated, a wild
and scenic river (USDI, 1974).  The Suwannee River is being considered
for designation as an outstanding Florida water in rulemaking procedures
before the Florida Environmental Regulation Commission.

Within the five-mile study area, marshlands associated with mining (clay
settling areas) are not considered environmentally sensitive due to the
vegetation succession characteristics which limit the life span of their
availability to support substantial wildlife populations.  The small
forested wetland communities, of the five-mile study area, which develop
in seasonally flooded degressions within the pine flatwoods system are
also not considered as environmentally sensitive.  These areas are usually
in young stands due to past logging and are usually isolated from signifi-
cant surface water drainage systems.  However, they provide food, nesting
and escape habitat for many species.

Swift Creek Swamp and Beehaven Bay, which drain to Swift Creek and Rocky
Creek respectively, may be potentially considered environmentally sensitive
areas.  The use and potential use by rare and endangered species has
been demonstrated.

Black bear are hunted through the area and Beehaven Bay may be used by
Sandhill cranes.  Both of these areas are outside of the proposed chemical
plant site.  There are no estuaries in the study area.

The southern mixed hardwoods community along the border of Swift Creek and
Camps Branch is the only upland vegetative community considered as
potentially environmentally sensitive.  The vegetative community is a
small part of the area acreage and represents the successional climax for
the area.  Forestry operations, past farming practices and other uses have
limited the development of the community.  No environmentally sensitive
areas occur on the proposed SCCC plant site.

In the five-mile study area, only the Arredondo, var. Alaga-Kenney and
the Chipley-Albany-Plummer associations are suitable for productive
croplands or pasture. Within the project area these soil types are found
exclusively in the lower better drained portions of the Swift Creek
basin and along the Suwannee River.  No productive soil types are found
within the proposed SCCC plant site.

The range of habitat requirements for rare and endangered species spans
every habitat type in the five-mile study area.  It includes artificial
or man-made habitats that are present as a result of mining activities,
particularly settling areas.  The most important habitat types for the
support of rare and endangered animal species are the semi-aquatic and
aquatic communities which include settling areas.  Other habitat types,
in order of importance for rare and endangered species are:  the southern
                               123

-------
mixed hardwoods and hardwood swamps, high pinelands, and pine-palmetto
flatwoods.  The highest priority habitats for rare and endangered plant
species are the ecotone or edges of bayheads, cypressheads and mixed
hardwood swamps within the pine flatwoods system.

Two species which were considered as potentially occurring on the proposed
SCCC site are associated with the cypress dome community; the striped
newt jNotpphthalmus perstriatus) and Carpenter frog (Rana virgatipes).
However, both of these species have only been recently discovered in
Florida and their present range terminates east of this area in neighboring
Columbia County.

Populations of species at their range terminus are known to undergo
sometimes dramatic fluctuations and even extirpation from even slight
changes in the nature and/or quality of their habitat or some other
ecological requirements.  This fluctuation and the degraded nature of
the habitat at the proposed SCCC plant site would seem to indicate the
unlikelihood of these two species being present.
                              124

-------
                          LIST OF REFERENCES
                            (Section 2.11)
U.S.D.I. (1974), "Recommending the Designation of the Lower Suwannee
     River to the National  Wild and Scenic Rivers System".   House
     Document No. 93-246.   March 21, 1974.
                             125

-------
         SECTION 3.0



ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE



     PROPOSED NEW SOURCE
          126

-------
         3.1 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY WITH THE PROPOSED SOURCES


The impact of sulfur dioxide (SC^) and particulate matter emissions
from existing and proposed sources was determined by air quality
modeling as described in Section 2.2.1.  The period of time represented
by this evaluation is 1979, the year in which the proposed project is to
be completed.  The impact of fluoride emissions from the proposed
facility was determined by qualitatively projecting fluoride effects
measured and observed under existing conditions.  Occidental is the only
source of these pollutants impacting on the study area and Occidental
has no current plans for further expansion.  For this reason, the air
quality projected for 1979 has been assumed to be representative of air
quality that will exist over the next 10 years.

The impact of the proposed sources was evaluated by EPA in January,
1978.  Prevention of Significant Deterioration and New Source Review
approval was granted in February, 1978 (EPA, 1978).  This signifies that
EPA has reviewed the proposed action and found that it will not cause
air quality standards to be violated, that it will not cause air quality
to be significantly degraded, and that S02 and particulate matter
emissions from the proposed sources will satisfy New Source Performance
Standards or Best Available Control Technology.

The county-wide emission burdens of CO, NOX and hydrocarbons were
projected through 1990.


3.1.1  AIR EMISSIONS FROM PROPOSED SOURCES

The air pollutants emitted from the proposed sources in significant
quantities are S02, particulate matter and fluorides.  The SO? and
particulate matter will be emitted from point sources in quantities
readily estimated.  Fluorides will be emitted from the phosphoric acid
plant and superphosphoric acid plants in readily estimated quantities
and from cooling water and gypsum ponds at rates estimated between 0.1
and 10 pounds per acre per day (EPA, undated).


3.1.1.1  Sulfur Dioxide Emissions from Proposed Sources

Sulfur dioxide from the proposed sources will be emitted from the two
sulfuric acid plants, the auxiliary boiler associated with the sulfuric
acid plants and from the heaters associated with the four superphosphoric
acid plants.  These emission rates will be limited by New Source Performance
Standards and Best Available Control Technology (BACT).

The annual average and short term emission rates of SO? from these
sources are listed in Table 3.1-1.  The design height for the sulfuric
                               127

-------
       Table 3.1-1.   Sulfur Dioxide Emission Data for Proposed Sources for Occidental Chemical Company,
                     White Springs, Florida
ro
oo

Source
SPA Heaters (SRCC)
SPA Heaters (SCCC)
Sulfuric Acid E
Sulfuric Acid F
Emission
Annual
(Tons/Day)
1.33
1.33
3.60
3.60
Rate
Maximum
(gr/sec)
15.5
15.5
42.0
42.0

Height
(m)
30.5
15.3
61.0
61.0
Stack
Temp.
(°K)
468.0
468.0
356.0
356.0
Data
Velocity
(m/sec)
11.8
11.8
30.6
30.6
Source Location
Dia.
(m)
2.29
2.29
1.83
1.83
X Cord.
(km)
28.90
21.10
20.95
20.90
Y Cord.
(km)
68.90
69.85
69.82
69.70
       Aux Boiler
         (Sulfuric Acid)
1.23
12.9
15.3
468.0
9.5
2.32
20.90
69.75

-------
acid plant stacks is 200 feet.  "Good Engineering Practice" for these
stack heights, in accordance with the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977,
is 125 feet.  The stack height of 125 feet (38 meters) was used for all
air quality modeling.
3.1.1.2  Particulate Matter Emissions from Proposed Sources

Participate matter from the proposed sources will result from acid
mist emissions from the sulfuric acid plants and particulate matter
emissions from fuel fired boilers and the phosphoric acid plant complex.
These emissions are summarized in Table 3.1-2.
                    lissi
3.1.1.3  Fluoride Emission from Proposed Sources

Fluorides from the proposed sources will result from fluoride emissions
from the phosphoric acid plant, the superphosphoric acid plants and
associated acid clarification facilities.  The fluoride emissions from
these sources will be limited by New Source Performance Standards
or best available control technology.  These emissions will total 0.08
pounds of fluoride per ton to ?2®5 plant capacity or 112 pounds of
fluoride per day.   The emissions from the cooling water and gypsum
ponds will be proportional to the surface area of the ponds.


3.1.2  CALCULATED SULFUR DIOXIDE LEVELS WITH PROPOSED SOURCES

Ambient SO^ levels were calculated for the annual average, 24-hour and
3-hour periods using procedures described in Section 2.2.1.

Isopleths of the annual average S02 concentrations for the 1979 period
are presented in Figure 3.1-1.  The data in this figure are summarized
in Table 3.1-3.  The calculated S0£ levels for the 24-hour and 3-hour
periods are also presented in Figure 3.1-1 and are summarized in Table
3.1-3.

In reviewing these data and comparing them with the 1977-78 period, it
will be noted that there are only slight increases in the calculated S02
levels caused by the proposed Phase II sources.  The reason for this is
that these Phase II sources are to be located 7.5 kilometers west of the
existing chemical complex at the Suwannee River Chemical Complex.

The maximum calculated annual S02 levels for 1979 is 21 micrograms
per cubic meter.  This compares with a maximum annual S02 level of
20 micrograms per cubic meter for the 1977-78 period.  These levels
compare with a federal standard, established to protect human health,
of 80  yg/m^, and a state standard of 60  yg/m3.  The state standard,
equivalent to the national secondary standard, was set to protect human
welfare, i.e. materials and vegetation.
                                    129

-------
       3.1-2.  Particulate Matter Emission Data for Proposed Sources for Occidental Chemical Company,
               White Springs, Florida
co
c
Emission Rate
Source
SPA Heaters (SRCC)
SPA Heaters (SCCC)
Sulfuric Acid E
Sulfuric Acid F
Annual
(Tons/Day)
0.005
0.005
0.135
0.135
Maximum
(gr/sec)
0.06
0.06
1.58
1.58
Height
(m)
30.5
15.3
61.0
61.0
Stack
Temp.
(°K)
468.0
468.0
356.0
356.0
Data
Velocity
(m/sec)
11.8
11.8
30.6
30.6
Source Location
Dia.
(m)
2.29
2.29
1.83
1.83
X Cord.
(km)
28.90
21.10
20.95
20.90
Y Cord.
(km)
68.90
69.85
69.82
69.70
       Aux Boiler

         (Sulfuric Acid)
0.013
0.53
15.3
468.0
9.5
2.32
20.90
69.75

-------
   POINT OF MAXIMUM 24 HOUR SO2 IMPACT , SRCC
2 - POINT OF MAXIMUM 24 HOUR SO2 IMPACT, SCCC
3 - POINT OF MAXIMUM 3 HOUR SO2 IMPACT. SRCC
4 - POINT OF MAXIMUM 3 HOUR SO2 IMPACT, SCCC
           SWIFT CREEK CHEMICAL COMPLEX
                        PROPOSED
                        CHEMICAL
                        PLANT
                       \
 SUWANNEE RIVER
CHEMICAL COMPLEX
                                                                         EXISTING
                                                                         CHEMICAL
                                                                         PLANT
                       BENEFICATION
                CALCULATED SO2  LEVELS (ug/m3) WITH PROPOSED
      SOURCES-1979

-------
 Table 3.1-3.
Summary of Maximum Calculated Ambient S02 Levels from
Proposed and Existing Sources for Occidental  Chemical
Company, Hamilton County, Florida
Averaging
Time
Annual
24-Hour
3-Hour
Sulfur Dioxide
Air Quality
Standard
State Federal
60^) 80^
260W 365<2'
1300^ 1300^
Site
Suwannee
Chemical
1977-78
1 20
1 254
1 1212
River
Complex
1979
21
259
1224
Swift Creek
Chemical Complex
1977-78 1979
7 8
98 147
35 281
(1)   Equivalent to the National  Secondary Air Quality Standard

(2)   National  Primary Air Quality Standard


Note:  All values in micrograms per cubic meter.
                                132

-------
 The maximum calculated  24-hour S02  concentration  in the area for the
 1979 period is  259 micrograms per cubic meter compared with a level
 of 254 micrograms  per cubic meter in  1977-78.  This occurs northwest
 of the existing chemical  complex on Occidental property.  The maximum
 24-hour S02 concentration predicted at the  Swift  Creek site is 147 micro-
 grams per cubic meter,  an increase  of 49 micrograms per cubic meter over
 the 1977-78 level.  These levels are  below  tbe primary and secondary air
 quality standards  of 365  ymg/m3 and 260 yg/nr, respectively.

 The highest 3-hour SO?  level calculated for the Swift Creek site is
 281 micrograms  per cubic  meter.  This compares with a level of 35
 micrograms per  cubic meter in 1977-78.  At  the existing chemical
 complex the highest 3-hour S02 level  was calculated to be 1224
 micrograms per  cubic\meter.  In 1977-78 the level was 1212 micro-
 grams per cubic meter;  These calculated levels compare with 1300 yg/nr3;
 the national primary air  quality standard.   There is no 3-hour standard
 for S02.
3.1.3  CALCULATED TOTAL SUSPENDED PARTICULATE MATTER LEVELS WITH
       PROPOSED SOURCES

Ambient TSP levels were calculated for the 1979 period using air
quality modeling techniques described in section 2.2.1.  For the 1979
period, the annual average and 24-hour TSP levels were calculated,
the latter being calculated for several receptors.

The annual average and 24-hour average TSP levels for 1979 are presented
in Figure 3.1-2. These data are summarized in Table 3.1-4.

These data show that in 1979 the highest average annual TSP level
predicted for the area is only 3 micrograms per cubic meter above
the background level of 31 micrograms per cubic meter.  This is the
same level that was predicted for the site during the 1977-78 period.
The highest annual TSP level predicted for the Swift Creek site in
1979 is 32 micrograms per cubic meter.

It will be noted that, as in 1979, the highest calculated 24-hour average
TSP level occurs just west of the existing chemical complex.  This  level
is calculated to be 116 micrograms per cubic meter including 61 micrograms
per cubic meter of background particulate matter level. The same level
was calculated for the 1977-78 period.

At the Swift Creek site, the calculated 24-hour TSP level for the 1979
period is 78 micrograms per cubic meter.  This includes 61 micrograms
per cubic meter of background particulate matter level and is only  1
microgram per cubic meter greater than the level calculated for the
1977-78 period.

The air quality standards that these calculated levels compare with are the
National primary annual and 24-hour standards of 75 yg/m3 and 260 yg/m3,
respectively; and the national secondary annual and 24-hour standards of
60 yg/m3 and 150 yg/m3, respectively.  The calculated TSP levels around
the Occidental site are well below these standards.

                                133

-------
                                             1  - POINT OF MAXIMUM 24 HOUR TSP IMPACT, SRCC
                                             2 - POINT OF MAXIMUM 24 HOUR TSP IMPACT. SCCC
PROPOSED SWIFT CREEK CHEMICAL COMPLEX
                     PROPOSED
                     CHEMICAL
                     PLANT
                                                             SUWANNEE RIVER
                                                            CHEMICAL COMPLEX
                                                                             EXISTING
                                                                             BENEFICIATION
                                                LEVELS (ug/m3) WITH PROPOSED SOURCES- 1979
CALCULATED
TOTAL SUSPENDED PARTICULATE

-------
Table 3.1-4.  Summary of Maximum Calculated Ambient TSP Levels from
              Proposed and Existing Sources for Occidental Chemical
              Company, Hamilton County, Florida
Averaging
Time
Annual2
24-Hourfc
Part icul ate Matter
Air Quality
Standard
\
State \ Federal
600) 75^)
1500) 260(2)
Site
Suwannee
Chemical
1977-78
34
116
Ri ver
Complex
1979
34
116
Swift
Chemical
1977-78
32
77
Creek
Complex
1979
32
78
Includes 31 micrograms per cubic meter background.
 Includes micrograms per cubic meter background.
(1)  Equivalent to the National Secondary Air Quality Standards
(2)  National Primary Air Quality Standard.
                             135

-------
3.1.4  THE ENVIRONMENT WITH PROPOSED FLUORIDE EMISSIONS

Fluoride emissions from phosphate fertilizer plants have been determined
to be welfare related; i.e. there is no impact on human health (EPA,
1976).

Fluorides from the proposed facility will  result from emissions from  the
phosphoric acid plant, the four superphosphoric acid plants,  the
associated acid clarification facility, and the cooling water and gypsum
ponds.  The emissions from the proposed sources will be 112 pounds of
fluoride per day.   Emissions from existing sources will be approximately
379 pounds of fluoride per day.  Pond emissions are proportional to area
and range from 0.1 to 10.0 Ib/acre-day (Section 3.2.2.3 of Resource
Document).

Existing levels of fluoride in the ambient air over a four-month period
range from 0.7 to 1.0 micrograms per cubic meter with 24-hour concen-
trations ranging to 5.1 micrograms per cubic meter. Fluoride levels in
grass during the most critical four months of the year ranged from 16 to
41 ppm total fluoride with the exception of samples collected near
cooling water ponds.  There is no evidence of fluoride damage to vege-
tation and no significant effects have been noted in cattle.

Because of the magnitude of fluoride emissions from the proposed sources
and the fact that new sources will be located 7.5 kilometers west of  the
existing sources, it is expected that fluoride levels and fluoride
effects from the proposed sources will be less than the observed effects
resulting from existing activities.
3.1.5  PROJECTED EMISSION BURDENS OF CO, NOx, AND HYDROCARBONS

The emission burdens of CO, NOX, and hydrocarbons were calculated for
1979.  Since these pollutants result principally from mobile sources,
sources which will increase in time, the emission burdens were also
projected to 1990.  These data are summarized in Table 3.1-5.

The Occidental contribution to the CO burden is 1.0 percent in 1978.  It
increases to 1.8 percent in 1979 and decreases to 1.5 percent in 1990.

The proposed sources will contribute NOX as a result of fuel combustion.
These will increase the 1978 Occidental contribution to the NOX burden
(42 percent) to 56 percent in 1979.  This contribution will then decrease
to 51 percent in 1990.

Hydrocarbon emissions result primarily from automotive sources.  In
1978, Occidental contributed only 1.7 percent of the hydrocarbons emitted
in Hamilton County.  This will increase to 3.0 percent in 1979 and
decrease to 2.5 percent in 1990.

The county-wide emission of these pollutants is currently at a low
level.  The increase resulting from the proposed expansion will be
small and the incremental impact will be insignificant.
                                     136

-------
Table 3.1-5.   Projected Emission Burdens  of  CO, NOX, and Hydrocarbons
              for Hamilton County,  Florida
Period
1977-78



1979



1990



Source
Highways
Dwellings
Point Sources
Total
Highways
Dwellings
Point Sources
Total
Highways
Dwellings
Point Sources
Total

CO
5001
1
53
5055
5151
1
96
5248
6201
1
96
6298
Pollutant
NOX
873
6
640
1519
899
6
1154
2059
1082
9
1154
2245
(tons/year)
Hydrocarbons
635
0
11
646
654
0
20
674
787
1
20
808
                              137

-------
3.1.6  NOISE LEVEL IMPACT/CONSTRUCTION

Fifteen months are anticipated for completion of construction of the
proposed complex.  Construction activities and required equipment
were identified to provide a basis for prediction of construction
noise level impact.  Locally high noise levels were predicted near
the construction site, with values up to 85 dBA at 100 feet from the
noise source.  Since construction will be restricted to daytime hours,
the average day-night noise levels due to construction will have
zero noise level impact at the nearest off-site residence.  Based on
U.S. EPA Report 550/9-74-004 (1974), an Ldn of 55 dBA is considered
a maximum requisite noise level to protect public health and welfare
with an adequate margin of safety.  The maximum distance from the
proposed site to the contour of Ldn 55 dBA was 5000 feet, an impact
on-site of 15 dB/\.  However, the distance from the L^n of 55 dBA contour
to the nearest off-site residence was 7000 feet and the L
-------
                          LIST OF REFERENCES
                             (Section 3.1)


EPA (Undated), "Evaluation of Emissions and Control  Techniques  for
     Reducing Fluoride Emissions from Gypsum Ponds  in the Phosphoric
     Acid Industry"; U.S.  Environmental Protection  Agency, U.S.  Chemical
     Processes Section, IERL, Contract 68-02-1330,  Task No.  3,  Research
     Triangle Park, North  Carolina.

EPA (1974), "Information on Levels of Environmental  Noise Requisite to
     Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin  of
     Safety"; OfficeW Noise Abatement and Control, U.S. Environmental
     Protection Agency, EPA Report No. 550/9-74-004, Arlington,  Virginia,
     March, 1974.

EPA (1976), "Final Guideline Document:  Control of  Fluoride Emissions from
     Existing Phosphate Fertilizer Plants", Office  of Air Quality Planning
     and Standards, U.S. EPA, Research Triangle Park, N.C., November, 1976.

EPA (1978), "Letter from John C. White, Regional Administrator,  to
     Mr. W.W. Atwood, Occidental Chemical Company,  Granting PSD Approval
     - Dated February 27,  1978".
                                  139

-------
                     3.2  LAND AND WATER RESOURCES
3.2.1  TOPOGRAPHY AND DRAINAGE BASINS

The proposed Swift Creek Chemical Complex is located wholly in the Swift
Creek drainage basin.  Therefore, alterations to the original  topography
within the proposed boundaries of the chemical complex will not result
in an alteration of the drainage basin divides.

The proposed gypsum stack-cooling pond complex will, however,  occlude
certain areas from natural drainage to Swift Creek.  This will amount
to approximately 550 to 600 acres or two percent of the 42 square mile
drainage basin of Swift Creek at its point of confluence with  the
Suwannee River.

Significant alterations to the original relatively flat topography will
occur as the gypsum stack reaches maturity.  The gypsum stack  is expected
to reach a height from 60 feet to 100 feet above natural grade.  This
would impact an area of about 350 acres.  In addition, surface water
bodies would increase as a result of the cooling pond which would cover
approximately 200-240 acres.

As described in Section 5.2.3.3, reclamation of the gypsum stack prior to
abandonment could consist of flattening its slopes and incorporating a
clayey soil cover that will be grassed.


3.2.2  GEOLOGY

Mining operations at the site of the proposed cooling pond - gypsum stack
chemical complex will alter the natural stratigraphy of the surficial
sediments to a maximum depth of about 55 feet, by displacement of the
overburden and removal of the ore matrix.  The impact of the chemical
plant is to dispose of gypsum in mined-out pits created within the
proposed area of the stack, an area of up to 350 acres.  Neither activity
will adversely affect the integrity of the primary Hawthorn confining
bed and the underlying Floridan Aquifer limestone.


3.2.3  SOILS

3.2.3.1  Erosion Control
During construction of the plant site and the gypsum stack-cooling
pond complex, several areas, not yet disturbed by mining activities,
will be cleared of natural vegetation.  The building, pavement, and
storage areas will be grubbed only as necessary prior to construction.
Erosion will be minor (less than 2 tons per acre) and all sediment will
be collected in ditches surrounding the plant site.
                                  140

-------
The base of the embankment and the borrow areas will be grubbed only as
required for the section under construction.  The borrow areas are not a
source of erosion because they will be excavated immediately after grubbing.
Some erosion of the earth embankments is expected during construction.
Runoff from the embankments will be collected and clarified before it is
permitted to enter surface water courses, with further clarification
occurring at Eagle Lake prior to discharge into Swift Creek.

Runoff from exposed areas will be collected in perimeter ditches and in
adjacent mine pits and will be clarified before it is released from the
property.  Soil eroded from spoil piles and from the unprotected slopes
of the embankments prior to the establishment of a good grass cover will
also be collected in ditches and mining pits to meet state water quality
standards.
3.2.3.2  Dust Potential
Although embedded dust particles are not directly erodible by the wind,
they can be set into motion by the bombarding effect of moving sand
particles and by moving vehicles or animals.  In their natural state,
the surficial soils have no real dust potential and, because the wind
velocity is seldom strong enough to put the sand grains in motion, the
surficial soils in grubbed areas have a low dust potential except when
subjected to heavy construction traffic.  Even then, the dust potential
is only moderate because of the small percentage of dust-sized particles
and the limited acreage uncovered at any one time.  Nevertheless, when
dusting becomes noticeable, the heavily trafficked areas are generally
wetted down with water trucks to minimize maintenance expense of the
construction equipment.

The roads within the chemical plant complex will be paved to prevent
dusting.  Other areas disturbed during construction will be grassed.
Thus, the dust potential will be practically eliminated and will revert
to natural conditions.
3.2.3.3  Land Use and Gypsum Stack Retirement

Existing soils at the site of the proposed chemical complex are nearly
level and poorly drained.  The proposed gypsum stack - cooling pond complex
is totally located within the Leon-Mascotte-Rutlege Association which,
overall, has a low potential for crop production, but a high potential
for improved pasture with proper water management.  Its capability for pine
woodlands ranges from low to moderate.  On-site, these soils have tradi-
tionally been used for pine timber or pulpwood production. Since the
area affected by the chemical complex is limited to approximately 600
acres, removal of this land from potential agricultural or siIvicultural
usage should not have a major impact because the existing soils require
special conservation practices and careful management due to poor
drainage and high water table levels.
                                  141

-------
Potential impacts from the gypsum stack after retirement would  include
some dusting from climatologic drying and wetting cycles, and leaching  as
rain water percolates through the stack.  Mitigative measures to reduce
and/or eliminate the potential impacts of a retired gypsum stack are
discussed in Section 5.2.3.3.
3.2.4  SURFACE WATER QUANTITY

3.2.4.1  Average Flow of Swift Creek

The proposed gypsum stack-cooling pond complex would occlude approxi-
mately 550 to 600 acres from natural drainage.  This results in a reduc-
tion of the Swift Creek flows by about 0.5 cfs over a long-term period,
which amounts to less than one percent of the flow in Swift Creek at its
point-of confluence with the Suwannee River.

Nonprocess water discharged to Swift Creek from full development of the
Swift Creek Chemical Complex will average approximately 2.2 cfs. The
effect of occlusion of the gypsum stack and cooling pond from natural drainage
(0.5 cfs decrease) and discharge of nonprocess water (2.2 cfs increase)
will yield an average net increase in flow of about 1.7 cfs during the
active life of the plant.  The additional flow will increase the current
flow of Swift Creek at its point of confluence with the Suwannee River
by about 3 percent resulting in no measurable increase in scour.


3.2.4.2  Low Flows of Swift Creek

Base flow to Swift Creek during periods of low flow will not be reduced
by the proposed facility.  The storage provided by various existing
ponded areas, such as Eagle Lake, in the mining development, and nonprocess
water discharges from the proposed plant could be used to augment low
flows.  On the average, based on a mass balance of stream loading at
White Springs and Suwannee Springs, the existing record shows that
during periods of low flow, discharges from the Occidental property have
been approximately 40 percent and 27 percent  of the long-term average
discharge for the M(7,2)* and M(7,10)* flows, respectively.  It is
likely that the proposed plant will have similar reduced discharges at
low flow, increasing these low flows on the average by about 0.6 to 0.9
cfs, respectively.  However, the lowest stream flows will be associated
with the simultaneous occurrence of a drought and a shutdown of opera-
tions.  In this event, there will be no impact from the proposed facility
on  low flow in Swift Creek.
   M(7,2)  — median annual 7-day  low flow, 7-day  low to which flows will
   recede  once  every  two years.
   M(7,10)  ~ 7-day low flow  to which flows will  recede once in 10
   years.
                                  142

-------
3.2.4.3  Flood Flows of Swift Creek

The gypsum stack-cooling pond complex would somewhat attenuate peak
flows in Swift Creek because storm precipitation within the system is
stored, at least temporarily, prior to being treated and discharged,
if needed.  This reduction in peak flows should not, however, be appre-
ciable and will probably be offset by nonprocess discharges.


3.2.4.4  Suwannee River Flows

Changes in the rate of flow caused by the development of Swift Creek
Chemical Complex will not be perceptible on measured flows in the
Suwannee River because of the relative size of the Suwannee River.  The
average increase in flow in Swift Creek amounts to less than  0.1 percent
of the average Suwannee River flow at its point of confluence with Swift
Creek.
3.2.5  GROUNDWATER QUANTITY

3.2.5.1  Surficial Aquifer

The groundwater level in the surficial aquifer will not be significantly
affected by the proposed facilities since the water level  in the below-
ground cooling pond surrounding the gypsum stack would be maintained
within a few feet of the ground surface.  Seepage from the gypsum stack and
above-ground cooling pond will flow to the adjacent below-ground
cooling pond because it acts as a sump in the surrounding flat topography.
Any potential effect on the groundwater levels in the surficial aquifer
would be very localized and confined to the immediate vicinity of the
facility.  Hence, water availability within the surficial  aquifer will
not change as a result of the proposed chemical complex.


3.2.5.2  Floridan Aquifer

It is anticipated that 2611 gpm (3.76 MGD) of groundwater will be
required during the operation of the proposed chemical plant.   This
water will be supplied from a single well of 7000 gpm design capacity
located at the plant site and tapping the Floridan Aquifer to a depth of
about 800 feet.

The drawdown of the potentiometric surface which would result from
pumping the well at 2611 gpm under steady-state conditions was computed
to be about 7 feet at a distance of 500 feet away from the well and less
than 3.5 feet at 10,000 feet from the well.
                                  143

-------
The actual decline of the potentiometric surface resulting from the
proposed withdrawals would be even lower than estimated above
because the natural leakage to the Floridan Aquifer at the outer edge of
the zone of influence (e.g., in the Coastal Lowlands along the channel
of the Suwannee River) is expected to be larger than that used in the
analysis.

The decrease in the potentiometric surface of the Floridan Aquifer would
increase the recharge rate (and decrease stream flow).  However, the
amount of increased recharge (and decreased stream flow) is very small.
For example, the existing recharge rate of 1 inch per year would be
increased to 1.11 inches per year and 1.04 inches per year at distances
of 100 and 10,000 feet from the well, respectively.

The maximum recharge would occur under the gypsum stack when it reaches
maturity because of the additional hydraulic head difference created by
ponding water on top of the stack.  This applied head could reach 100
feet when the stack is mature, at which time the natural recharge rate
of 1.0 in/yr would increase to a maximum of 2.3 in/yr.  This increased
recharge will be supplied from water currently in storage in the Hawthorn
confining unit.  The impact on groundwater quality is addressed in Section
3.2.7.
3.2.6  SURFACE WATER QUALITY

3.2.6.1  Composition of Discharge from the Proposed Swift Creek
         Chemical Complex

The SCCC will regularly discharge nonprocess water and rainfall run-off.
It will infrequently discharge treated process water.

The recirculating process cooling water system has a negative water
balance.  However, the seasonal imbalance in rainfall over evaporation
may require the treatment and release of process water.  The existing
Suwannee River Chemical Complex has discharged process water intermittently
and for less than 4 to 5 months during the 10-year history of the plant.

Nonprocess water will discharge at approximately 2.2 cfs as an annual
average.  A stormwater run-off component from the plant site will add
0.2 cfs as an annual average.  Thus, the discharge of nonprocess water
from the SCCC will be approximately 2.4 cfs as an annual average.

Waters from the proposed complex will be similar in quality to those
discharged from the existing Suwannee River Chemical Complex.  However,
nitrogen levels will be lower since diammonium phosphate will not be
                                  144

-------
produced.  Although there will  be no source of ammonium at the proposed
Swift Creek Chemical Complex other than natural sources such as rainfall
and run-off, a conservative value of 1.0 mg N/l has been used to estimate
the ammonium content of its nonprocess water.   Facility sources of
nonprocess water, groundwater and rainfall  have much lower concentra-
tions (<0.2 mg N/l).


3.2.6.2  Impact of Nonprocess Water Discharges

Impacts of the proposed complex upon Swift Creek and the Suwannee River
are estimated for phosphate, nitrogen, total organic carbon, fluoride
and sulfate.  Phosohate. nitrogen and carbon were selected for the
calculations because they are major nutrients  which are normally limiting
to aquatic organisms and are most likely to cause problems when present
in excess.  Fluoride and sulfate were chosen because they are closely
related to phosphate processing.

Two impact scenarios were examined.  Scenario A considers the average
estimated composition of nonprocess water (Table 3.2-1).  Scenario B
considers that the discharge would have the maximum concentrations of P
and F allowable under federal Fertilizer Effluent Guidelines.

Predicted loadings (kg/day) and concentrations (mg/1) were based on a
constant 2.4 cfs discharge.  Both scenarios considered annual average
flow, low flow (M7,2) and very low flow (M7,10) conditions in Swift
Creek and the Suwannee River (Tables 3.2-2, 3.2-3 and 3.2-4).


3.2.6.2.1  Phosphates

Swift Creek:  For Scenario A, the phosphate concentration will be reduced
under all flow conditions except during peak flow when the concentration
remains essentially the same (Table 3.2-2).  Thus, nonprocess water from
the Swift Creek plant could slightly decrease the present phosphate
concentration in Swift Creek.

For Scenario B, the largest increase in concentration occurs during
very low flow when it increases from 17.7 to 19.3 mg/1, or 9%.  With
average flow, the concentration increases from 15.9 mg/1 to 16.7 mg/1,
or  5 percent.


Suwannee River:  The impact of increased loading due to the proposed
plant is minimal under average flow.  For Scenario A, levels will
increase from 0.58 to 0.59 mg/1 at Suwannee Springs, or approximately 2 per-
cent.   Similar  increases will  occur  at  Branford  and  Wilcox  (Table  3.2-4).

The  largest impact will occur under Scenario B and very low flow in the
Suwannee River  (Table 3.2-4).  Under these conditions, the phosphate
levels will increase 1.1 mg/1 P over the present levels at Suwannee
Springs.  At Wilcox, the increase is 0.02 mg/1 P.  These very small
increases (i.e. 0.02 mg/1 P) are probably not detectable given the present
sampling procedures and analytical methods.


                                 145

-------
Table 3.2-1   Estimated Concentrations and Mass Loads from Nonprocess
             Discharges of Proposed Swift Creek Phosphate Plant
Parameter
pH
Total P
Ammonium-N
Nitrate-N
Orgam'c-N
Total N
TOC
Sulfate
Fluoride
Calcium
Sodium
NPDES Permit Limitations:
Total P
Fluoride
Estimated
Average
Concentration
(mg/1)
6.0
11.0
1.0
0.9
0.5
2.4
9.3
250
7.2
58
65
35
25
Estimated Mass
Loading (kg/day)
in 2.4 cfs
of Discharge
—
64.6
5.9
5.3
2.9
14.1
54.6
1470
42.3
341
382
206
147
                               14fa

-------
                             Table 3.2-2
Mass  Loading  and  Concentrations at Mouth  of  Swift Creek
Under Present Conditions and with  Added Discharge from
Swift Creek Chemical  Plant  Nonprocess  Water

PARAMETER


Total t (Predicted)
(ttPOCS Limit)
Total N
Fluoride (Predicted)
(IIPOES l.trolt)
Sulfate
TOC
Calcium
Sodium
MASS

Present
Loadlmi*
2303
2300
1160
766
76f.
21700
27CO
6640
4100
LOADINGS AT AVERAGE FLOW

Predicted Loading
mh Hen Source
2365
2506
1174
808
913
23170
2815
6931
4502
IN kg/day

Percent
Change
2.8
9.0
1.2
5.5
19.2
6.7
2.0
S.I
9.1
CONCENTRATIONS FOR VARYING FLOW CONDITIONS IN mg/1
PARAMETER
Total P (Predicted)
(NPDES Limit)
Total N
Fluoride (Predicted)
(NPDLS Limit)
Sulfate
TOC
Calcium**
So-ifum**
Average Flow
With
Present New Source
15.9 15.7
15.9 16.7
8.0 7.8
5.3 5.1
5.3 6.1
157 161
19.1 18.7
46 -16.5
?9 30.4
M(7.2) Low Flow
With •**
Present Hew Source
17.4 17.0
17.4 10.5
8,9 8.5
5.8 5.9
5.8 7.0
179 113.
16.1 15.2
M(7.10) Low Flow
With **•
present New Source
17.7 17.2
17.7 18.9
9.2 8.7
5.9 6.0
5.9 7.3
186 191
15.5 15.0
5- Year Peak Flow
With
Present New Source
10.8 10.8
10.8 10.8
5.2 5.2
3.7 3.7
3.7 3.7
69 69.3
41.4 41.4
 •Rased on averaqe flow and corresponding reorcsslon value for concentration.
••ileqression relation between flow end concentrations of these parameters arc unavailable at this  time.
'"Assumes all  the non-process discharge will be discharged during periods of low flow.
  Long-term record indicates discharge during M(7.2) and M(7,10) are 401 and 27t
  of iveraye discharge, respectively.

-------
           Table 3.2-3
Mass  Loadings and Concentrations Along the  Suwannee River Below  Swift Creek Under Present

Conditions and  with Added Discharge from Swift Creek  Chemical  Plant Nonprocess Water
                                                    MASS LOADINGS IN kg/day AT AVERAGE ROW
Parameter


Total P (Predicted)
(EPA Guidelines)
Total N
fluoride (Predicted)
(EPA Guidelines)
Sill fate
TOO
Suwannee Springs

Present
2350
2850
4720
1900
1900
50300
139000
With
New Source
2915
3056
4734
1942
2047
51770
139055
Percent
Change
2.3
7.2
0,3
2.2
7.7
2.9
0.04

Present
3340
3340
10000
3920
3920
147000
212000 |
Branford
With
New Source
3405
3546
10014
3962
4067
148470
212055

Percent
Change
1.9
6.2
0.1
1.1
3.8
1.0
0.03


Present
3825
3825
12460
5760
5760
294000
267000
Ullcox
With
New Source
3690
4031
12474
5802
5907
295470
267055

Percent
Change
1.7
5.4
0.1
0.7
2.6
0.5
0.02
                                                    MASS LOADINGS IN kg/day AT H(7,2) LOW FLOW
-
oc
Parameter


Total P

Total N
Fluoride

Sulfate
TOC


(Predicted)
(EPA GuidMncs)

(Predicted)
(EPA Guidelines)


Suwannee Springs

Present
880
880
728
194
194
7320
5990
With
New Source
945
1086
742
236
341
8790
6045
Percent
Change
7.4
23.4
1.9
21.6
76.0
20.0
0.9

Present
1450
1450
5342
1230
1230
104000
39400
Branford
With
New Source
1515
1656
5356
1272
1377
105470
39455

Percent
Change
4.5
14.2
0.3
3.4
12.0
1.4
0.1


Present
1870
1870
12430
2910
2910
279000
85200
VHlcox
With
New Source
1935
2076
12440
2952
3057
280470
85255

Percent
Change
3.5
11.0
0.1
1.4
5.1
0.5
0.1
                                                     MASS LOADINGS IN kg/day AT M(7,10) LOW FLOW
Parameter

Total P
Total N
Fluoride
Sulfate
TOC

(Predicted)
(EPA Guidelines)
(Predicted)
(EPA Guidelines)
Suwannee Springs
Present
618
618
503
98
98
40KO
2330
With
New Source
683
824
517
140
245
5550
2385
Percent
Change
9.5
25.0
2.7
30.0
60.0
26.5
2.3
Present
1110
1110
5489
848
848
93100
22100
Branford
With
New Source
1175
1316
5503
890
995
94570
22155

Percent
Change
5.5
15.7
0.25
4.7
14.8
1.6
0.3

Present
1370
1370
13500
2170
2170
273000
52500
Wllcox
With
New Source
1435
1576
13514
2212
2317
274470
52555

Percent
Change
4.5
13.1
0.10
1.9
6.3
0.53
0.10

-------
Table  3.2-4
Concentrations Along the Suwannee River Below Swift Creek Under
Present  Conditions  and with  Added Discharge from  Swift
Creek  Chemical Nonprocess Water

                        CONCENTRATIONS IN ng/1 FOR VARYING FLOW CONDITIONS FOR SUWANNEE SPRINGS STATION

Parameter


Total P (Predicted)
(NPDES Limit)
Total N
Fluoride (Predicted)
(NPDES Limit)
Sulfate
TOC


Parameter


Total P (Predicted)
(NPDES Limit)
Total N
Fluoride (Predicted)
(NPOES Limit)
Sulfate
TOC

Average


Present
.576
.576
.956
.386
.386
10.3
28.1

Average


Present
0.196
0.196
0.587
0.231
0.231
8.64
12.5

Flow

With
New Source
.588
.620
.958
.394
.41$
10.6
28.1
CONCENTRATIONS IN
Flow

HI Hi
New Source
.199
.209
.589
.232
.239
8.72
12.5
CONCENTRATIONS
Average Flow



Total P (Predicted)
(NPDES Linit)
Total N
Fluoride (Predicted)
(NPOES Limit)
Sulfate
TOC


Present
.157
.157
.610
.236
.236
12.0
10.9

With
New Source
.159
.166
.512
.238
.242
12.1
10.9
H(7.2)


Present
2.50
2.50
2.06
0.55
0.55
20.8
17.0
Flow

With
New Source
2.60
3.03
2.06
O.J66-
0.96
24.60
16.90
ng/1 FOR VARYING FLOW CONDITIONS AT
Ml


Present
.251
.251
.923
.212
.212
18.0
6.81
7.2)

With
New Source
.261
.286
.925
.219
.238
18.2
6.81
IN ng/1 FOR VARYING FLOW CONDITIONS
H(7.2)


Present
.154
.154
1.02
.239
.239
23.0
7.01


With
New Source
.159
.171
1.02
.243
.251
23.1
7.01



Present
3.89
3.89
3.36
.615
.615
25.7
14.6
BRANFORD

(

K(7,10) Flow

With
New Source
4.14
4.99
3.32
.849
1.48
33.7
14.4

M(7,10)

With
Present New Source
.271
.271
1.28
.208
.208
22.8
5.40
AT UILCOX



Present
.152
.152
1.55
.241
.241
30.3
5.83
.286
.321
1.28
.217
.243
23.1
5.41

M(7.10)

With
ttett Source
.159
.176
1.55
.246
.258
30.5
5- S3

-------
Phosphates are often related to eutrophication of waters since they
can be the limiting constituent in such waters.  Hutchinson (1957)
reported that most natural waters contain from 0.01  to 0.03 mg/1  P.
At these levels, phosphate are usually limiting to aquatic plants.

If other factors, such as nitrogen, carbon or physical parameters,  such
as light penetration or mixing, are not limiting and the phosphate  level
rises above these values, excessive growth of nuisance algae or aquatic
plants can occur.

When phosphate concentrations are appreciably above 0.02 to 0.1 mg/1, it
probably is seldom limiting.  The Suwannee River background concen-
tration is about 0.3 mg/1.  Given these conditions, it is quite probable
that additional phosphate will not cause eutrophication.  Protection is
usually warranted for waters with naturally low phosphate concentrations.
FDER states in its proposed F.A.C. Ch. 17-3 water quality regulations
that "consideration shall be given to the protection from nutrient
enrichment of those waters presently containing very low nutrient
concentrations; less than 0.3 mg/1 total nitrogen or less than 0.04
mg/1 total phosphorus."  EPA (1976) states a similar opinion in their
Quality Criteria for Water in which they only suggest criteria for
streams flowing into lakes or reservoirs which may accumulate phosphates.


While phosphate levels in Swift Creek and the Suwannee River are high,
it is expected that no environmental effect on the aquatic system will
result from increased phosphate levels since all concentrations in the
streams are well above levels limiting to aquatic plants.  No reported
problems attributable to high phosphate levels in the Suwannee River have
been located for review.
3.2.6.2.2  Total Nitrogen

Swift Creek:  A 2 to 5 percent reduction in total nitrogen concentration
will occur in Swift Creek under all flow conditions because no ammonia
is planned to be used at the Swift Creek Chemical Complex.  At peak
flow, the concentration will remain essentially the same  (Table 3.2-2).


Suwannee River;  Based on background concentrations in deep well and
rainwaters, the predicted increase in mass loading of N in Swift Creek
is 14 kg/day.  This is negligible compared to present loadings:  Swift
Creek - 1160 kg/day; Suwannee Springs - 4720 kg/day; Branford - 10000
kg/day; and Wilcox - 12460 kg/day.

As with phosphate, increased nitrogen concentrations (Table 3,2-4) should
not  cause eutrophication problems because they are already above the
range of concentrations thought to be limiting to aquatic plants. Other
factors, such as light penetration of the highly colored waters, mixing,
and  stream velocity are probably limiting.
                                  150

-------
FDER does not regulate the concentration of total  nitrogen in water.
3.2.6.2.3  Fluoride

Swift Creek:  Under Scenario A, mean fluoride concentrations will
increase less than 2 percent under all flow conditions, except during
peak flow where the concentration remains essentially the same (Table
3.2-2).

With Scenario B, fluoride concentrations will increase 15 percent for
average flow conditions and up to 29 percent for the very low flow case
(Table 3.2-2).  However, the concentrations will remain below the FDER
10 mg/1 limit for fluoride in Class III waters.


Suwannee River;  The proposed source will have some impact upon the
Suwannee River in either scenario.  However, the predicted levels in
all cases remain below the FDER limit of 10 mg/1 and also below the
Class I (drinking water) limit of 1.6 mg/1 and should cause no problem.


3.2.6.2.4  Sulfate

The present concentration of sulfate in Swift Creek at average flow is
157 mg/1 (Table 3.2-2); the new discharge would  increase this to 161
mg/1 (2.5 percent).  Under very low flow conditions, the concentration
is estimated to increase from 186 to 192 mg/1 (3.2 percent).

For the Suwannee River at Suwannee Springs, the  sulfate concentration at
average flow would increase from 10.3 to 10.6 mg/1 (3 percent).

At concentration levels less than 250 mg/1, sulfate is not detrimental
for domestic use or stock and wildlife watering.  Sulfate concentrations
up to 200 mg/1 are not detrimental for irrigation (McKee and Wolf, 1971).
Currently, there are no standards for sulfate in Florida Class III waters;
potable waters have a limit of 250 mg/1.  The deep wells used by Occidental
have sulfate levels of 24 to 145 mg/1.


3.2.6.2.5  Total Organic Carbon

Total Organic Carbon (TOC) is a measure of the concentration of organic
matter in water.  Relatively high concentrations of TOC occur naturally
in the headwaters of Swift Creek and in the Suwannee River as a result
of run-off from wetlands and forests.  Data in Table 3.2-2 through 3.2-4
show that concentrations of TOC will decrease slightly as a result of the
new discharge, although the mass loadings slightly increase.  There
will be no detectable impact on the TOC level in the receiving waters.
There are no state of federal regulations concerning TOC.
                                   151

-------
3.2.6.3  Impact of Treated Process Water Discharge

Process water will be treated and discharged when pond water levels
infringe upon the surge capacity of the cooling pond (see Section
1.4.2.1.7).

To present the maximum impact from treated process water, it was
assumed that both the Suwannee River and the proposed Swift Creek
plants will be discharging at the same time. The Suwannee River has a
treating facility designed to treat at a maximum rate of 3000 GPM,
or 6.7 cfs.  The proposed Swift Creek plant facility can treat at a
maximum rate of 2000 GPM or 4.5 cfs.   At worst, the treated water will
meet the EPA guidelines of 25 mg/1 F and 35 mg/1 P as a maximum daily
average.  Based on a discharge rate of 6.7 cfs and guideline limitations
the present SRCC could discharge 575 kg/day of phosphate and 410 kg/day
of fluoride during periods of treatment.  The SCCC could add 385 kg/day
phosphate and 275 kg/day of fluoride in addition to this if it were
treating water concurrently at 4.5 cfs and just meeting the EPA guideline
limitations.

These predicted concentrations represent the maximum impact anticipated
from the discharge of treated process waters (Table 3.2-5).  The actual
concentrations of phosphate and fluoride discharged have been and should
continue to be lower than the permit limitations (Table 1.4-6).  The
process water impact will be short-term because of the infrequent nature
of these discharges.  During the 10-year history of the present Suwannee
River plant, treated process waters have been discharged for an aggregate
of only 4 to 5 months at 1000 GPM.
3.2.6.4  Summary

Minimal changes in concentrations of the chemical parameters of interest
are expected in Swift Creek or the Suwannee River as a result of the
new discharge.  For one parameter, nitrogen, a decrease is predicted.

In all cases, the concentrations are below guideline and/or legal
limitations.
                                152

-------
Table 3.2-5  Predicted Increases in Phosphate and Fluoride Concentrations
             in Swift Creek and the Suwannee River due to the Discharge
             of Treated Process Water from SCCC
Parameter
    Baseline
Concentration*
   (mg/1)
Concentration after
Addition of Treated           Percent
  Process Water      Increase  Change
      (mg/1)          (rag/1)    (%)

Phosphate as P
Fluoride

Phosphate as P
Fluoride

V-6
7.3
Suwannee
0.71
0.47
Swift Creek
18.7
8.4
River at Suwannee Springs
0.79
0.52

1.1
1.1

0.08
0.05

6.1
15.0

11.3
10.6
Suwannee River at Wilcox
Phosphate as P
Fluoride
0.18
0.26
0.20
0.27
0.02
0.01
8.7
4.0
*Assumes the following flows - Swift Creek base flow plus SRCC nonprocess
 water 59 cfs; SRCC treated process water 6.7 cfs; SCCC nonprocess waters
 2.4 cfs.
                                    153

-------
3.2.7  GROUNDWATER QUALITY

3.2.7.1  Characteristics of Process Water

Seepage of process water from the gypsum stack and cooling pond of the
proposed plant represents the only significant source of concern re-
garding possible contamination of groundwater aquifers.  Process waters
are highly acidic and have very high concentrations of phosphate, fluo-
ride, and sulfate.  Other ions such as calcium, sodium, iron, manganese,
ammonium, arsenic, and chromium, also have high concentrations compared
to ambient levels in ground or surface waters of the region (see Re-
source Document).

3.2.7.2  Seepage from Proposed Gypsum Stack-Cooling Pond Complex

The proposed gypsum stack and cooling pond will be constructed in
stages.  At start-up the gypsum stack will be constructed partially
within a mined-out area and partially on natural ground (see Figure
3.2-1).  Most of the cooling pond will be constructed on natural ground.
The remainder of the cooling area will be provided within a deep ditch
excavated around the periphery of the gypsum stack to intercept seepage
from the stack.

The normal operating level of the belowground cooling area will be
maintained within a few feet of the groundwater table.  The level will
be maintained by controlling the spillway discharge from the aboveground
pond and/or by adding water to the system; e.g., non-process water.
Although it is anticipated that there will be periods when groundwater
seeps  into the belowground pond, the system will be designed and ope-
rated  so that, on the average, the level in the belowground cooling area
will be slightly above the groundwater table; i.e., seepage will be from
the cooling pond into the surficial aquifer.  The reason for operating
the cooling pond as described is to prevent groundwater seepage from the
surficial aquifer from entering the process water system, where it
eventually would have to be treated and discharged to surface waters.
(Net seepage from the cooling pond was not included in the water balance
calculations discussed in Section 1.4.2.)  The impact of seepage from
the cooling pond into the surficial aquifer is discussed in Section
3.2.7.4.

Occidental plans to mine the area adjacent to the Stage I gypsum stack
and use the mined-out area for a belowground cooling pond and for future
expansion of the gypsum stack (see Alternate I, Figure 3.2-1).  The
                                154

-------
 PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY

-------
belowground cooling pond during this later stage in the development of
the stack will also be designed and operated to maintain the normal pond
level slightly above the groundwater table.  The water level will  be
maintained by controlling the amount of water stored on the gypsum stack
and/or by adding water to the system.

If the area is not mined, the remainder of the gypsum stack will  be
constructed on natural ground as shown in Alternate 2 on Figure 3.2-1.
If this alternate is used, an interceptor ditch will be constructed
around the outer periphery of the aboveground cooling pond as well as
around the above ground portions of the gypsum stack.

3.2.7.3  Observation Well Network at the Suwannee River Plant

To examine the possible impacts of process water seepage from the new
plant on groundwater quality, a network of 22 monitoring wells was in-
stalled at varying depths and distances from two existing gypsum stacks
and cooling ponds at the Suwannee River Chemical Plant, which is located
in the same hydrogeologic setting as the proposed Swift Creek Chemical
Plant.

Four sets of monitoring wells were located on a line running west,
downgradient of the Dorr Oliver Gypsum Stack.  This stack has been in
operation for over 10 years thus providing ample time for seepage  to
occur.  In addition, two sets of monitoring wells were placed down-
gradient of the CTC gypsum stack which has been in operation for about
two years.  Figure 3.2-2 shows the location of the well sets.  Three  to
four wells with collection zones at  various depths were installed  in
each well set.  These were labeled  "A," "B,"  "C," and  "D" in order of
increasing depth.  "A" wells were installed in the  surficial sands and
"D" wells were located deep in the Hawthorn confining unit  near the top
of the Floridan Aquifer.  Boring logs and  individual well characteris-
tics are presented in the Resource Document.

Because of the existing  hydraulic gradients,  Well Set 6  (Figure 3.2-2)
should represent the  "worst case" scenario of seepage from  the gypsum
stack and acid surge  pond.  This stack  is  located in a mined-out  area
and  is not surrounded by a belowground  cooling pond.  Consequently, the
pressure head acting  against the edge of the  mined-out pit  can be  as
high as the elevation of the gypsum  stack  at  that location.  With  a
belowground cooling pond, the  corresponding pressure head cannot  be
higher than the pond  elevation.  Hence, the quantity of seepage and the
potential for contamination of the  surficial  aquifer at the Dorr  Oliver
Stack would be greater  than for the  proposed  stack.
                                  156

-------
                                                                                     M02
                                              SCTTLHe ME*
                                                so sa
 eis  STREAM  OAIME
 LCCATKM
 OBSERVATION  WELLS EACH
 WITH  3 TO 4 PIEZOMETERS
 AT VAITMMO  DEPTHS ( SEE
       3.2-1 )
WATOI  QUALITY  SAMTLtN*
LOCATION
EXIST IH« WELLS  SAMPLCO
POM  WATER auALrnr
OCCIDENTAL  FLUME WI1
WCQMOIN«  9AU9E
                 LAYOUT  OF  MONITORING  AND  SAMPLING  STATIONS  ( SRCC)
                                 OCCIDENTAL  CHEMICAL COMPANY
                              SUWANNEE RIVER CHEMICAL COMPLEX
                                         HAMILTON COUNTY, FLORIDA
                                               157
                                                                              FIGURE 3.2-2

-------
3.2.7.4  Impacts of Swift Creek Chemical Plant on Groundwater in
         the Surficial Aquifer and Hawthorn Formation

Results obtained from the observation wells at the existing plant indi-
cate that contamination of groundwater during the 10-year operating
period is limited in depth to the upper 50 feet of the soil profile;
i.e., to the surficial aquifer, and horizontally to a distance of less
than 1,000 feet from the gypsum stack for most parameters.  Figures
3.2-3 to 3.2-9 show concentration profiles in the various collection
zones as a function of horizontal distance from the gypsum stacks at  the
Suwannee River Plant.  Profiles are presented for the following impor-
tant indicators of water quality:* fluoride, sulfate, pH, orthoohos-
phate, specific conductivity, gross alpha radiation and radium-226.

These results represent an upper bound for the impacts from the proposed
facility because the existing facilities were not designed to minimize
seepage; i.e., the outer periphery of the Dorr Oliver Gypsum Stack (see
cross section in Figure 3.2-3) was constructed above the edge of a
mined-out pit with no design provisions to minimize the pressure head
acting against the surficial aquifer.  Consequently, the quantity of
groundwater seepage and, hence, the potential contamination leaving the
Dorr Oliver Gypsum Stack would be significantly higher than that leaving
the belowground pond surrounding the proposed stack.

There is no evidence in the concentration profiles or in any of the
other data collected (see Resource Document) which indicate long-range
transport of contaminants from the gypsum stacks and cooling ponds
within the surficial sands and the upper members of the Hawthorn For-
mation; i.e., the phosphate matrix and the underlying weathered lime-
stone.  Furthermore, there is no evidence that the lower water producing
zones of the Hawthorn Formation are contaminated anywhere as a result of
seepage of process water from the existing plant.

Based on the above measurements at the existing site and the fact that
the geology at the Swift Creek Plant site is essentially the same as
that at the Suwannee River Chemical Plant, the impact of the proposed
gypsum stack and cooling ponds on the upper groundwater aquifers is
predicted to be essentially negligible except in very localized areas
surrounding the pond.  Contamination will be limited to a relatively
small area and depth immediately around the proposed gypsum stack and
cooling ponds.  Within the zone of contamination, elevated levels of
*Section 3.5 discusses the radio-chemical data,


                                 158

-------
                     HORIZONTAL SOLE
                                            FEET
                                                       DOM-OLIVER
                                                       GYPSUM STACK
I
ISOr-
     CTC
   COOLING POND
     N0.2
120-
 80-
 40-
    SETISCT2   3ETS
  IOO-
    a
                               COOLING POHO     RRSTS««
              COLLECTION ZONE 'A1
              COLLECTION ZONE 'B1
              COLLECTION ZONE 'C1
               COLLECTION ZONE 'D1
                                                              BACKGROUND AT
                                                              SWIFT CREEK
                                                              CHEMICAL COMPLEX
         FLUOR DE CONCENTRATION PROFILES Al   UWANNEE  IIVER
                     GYPSUM STACK AND COOLING POND             F)GUR£ 3.2-3
                                   159

-------
                     HORIZONTAL SCALE
                                           FEET
I60r
     CTC
   COOLING POND
     NO. 2
DORR-OLIVER
GYPSUM STACK
    ^m   %
    Sf . Tsr-*r*'   ss
             COLLECTION ZONE 'A
             COLLECTION ZONE'S'
             COLLECTION ZONE C
             COLLECTION ZONE D
                                                            BACKGROUND AT
                                                            SWIFT CREEK
                                                            CHEMICAL COMPLEX
   SULFATE CONCENTRATION PROFILES AT SUWANNEE RIVER
               GYPSUM STACK AND COOLING POND
                              160
                                                                FIGURE 3.2-4

-------
                        HORIZONTAL SCALE
                                                   FEET
                                                               DORR-OLIVER
                                                               GYPSUM STACK
       CTC
   COOLING POND

I60r-    NCX2
    SET I SETZ
                          JJOX-'XCL'WEr ~Q SILTT C.HE SAND-1
  2
a
5 z
:

:OLLECTH

DN ZONE 'A*


"1


COLLECT!'

DN ZONE'S'
	 ' 	 ^

^


                     pH PROFILES AT SUWANNEE RIVER
                     GYPSUM STACK AND COOLING POND
                                      161
                                                                       SACKGROUNC AT
                                                                       SWIFT CREEK
                                                                       CHEMICAL COMPLEX

10-
8-
4-

10 -
8 -
6 -
4 -






^









COLLECTION ZONE 'C1



! 	 »_
	 .


r — —
































I
^-1
	 ' 	 	 	


:OLLECTI
— - — _
_ —


DN ZONE 'O1

^~~-J














-



FIGURE 3.2-5

-------
                    HORIZONTAL SCALE
                                           FEET
                                                     DORR-OLIVER
                                                     GYPSUM STACK
     CTC
   COOLING PONO
     NO. 2

              COL .ECT10N ZONE 'A1
 1000
  100-
i
^
§
—
0
              COLLECTION ZONE B
              COLLECTION ZONE 'C
              COLLECTION ZONE 'D
                                                             BACKGROUND AT
                                                             SWIFT CREEK
                                                             CHEMICAL COMPLEX

ORTHO-PHOSPHATE CONCENTRATION PROFILES AT SUWANNEE RIVER
                 GYPSUM STACK AND COOLING POND                F|GURE 3 2.6
                                 162

-------
                        HOHIZONTAL SCALE
                                                 FEET
                                                           DORR-OLIVER
                                                           GYPSUM STACK
       CTC
    COOLING POND
       NO. 2

     SET I S£T2
         i
              SET 3
 50OO


 5000-


1000


 eoc-


 600-


 
-------
                        HORIZONTAL SCALE
                                                            DORR-OLIVER
                                                            GYPSUM STACK
_i isOf-
irt
        CTC
     COOLING PONO
        NO. Z
2
—
U
-
      SET I SET 2   SETS
    20
   S




   I*"
   «
   o
   z
   a
    zo
             i—-^\   ..                    t    -   '' :fy/:•-'•<-^^>
               -"•       v  '  «~%*L<*t£M"°'''''''- '•'• '•••''••••-  •  ' ••} • --^"'• ':y''-'-'-
  W&.    ^        -V*   ''^,:       W^
L 111                       -            %M>im^,
      %^>      «
      ^-^--
COLLECTIC
^*"
<^
	 	 '
N ZONE 'A1
^^ ~ ««__
,J
.

V
X



                COLLECTION ZONE 'B1
                COLLECTION  ZONE'C
                                                                    BACKGKOUNO AT
                                                                    SWIFT CREEK
                                                                    CHEMICAL COMPLEX
4O-

to-
n










i
1
I
•»
1



^LLECTIC


N ZONE 'D1





jf ,•










            GROSS  ALPHA RADIATION PROFILES  AT SUWANNEE  RIVER
                        GYPSUM  STACK  AND  COOLING POND              F,GURE 3.2-8


                                     164

-------
I60i-
120-
40-
   CTC
COOLING PONO
   NO. 2

 SET I SET 2
                      HORIZONTAL SCALE
                                               FEET
                                                          DORR-OLIVER
                                                          GYPSUM STACK
             SET 3
               COLLECTION  ZONE 'A1
                                                                  BACKGROUND AT
                                                                  SWIFT CREEK
                                                                  CHEMICAL COMPLEX

   c
COLLECTIC
<^— H
>N ZONE'S1
» — i


> 	 ^


               COLLECTION  ZONE 'C1

(
COLLECTIC
1 i
»N ZONE'D1


^^

>
                RADIUM  226  PROFILES AT SUWANNEE  RIVER
                    GYPSUM STACK AND COOLING  POND
                                                                    FIGUPS 3.2-9
                                    165

-------
fluoride, phosphate, sulfate, calcium, and sodium, and lower levels of
pH will occur; but, except at very short distances from the stack, all
ions will have concentrations within the range found in the Floridan
Aquifer.

3.2.7.5  Impacts of the Proposed Facility on Water Quality in the
         Floridan Aquifer

Because of the head difference between the surficial aquifer and the
Floridan Aquifer, some contaminated water from the cooling pond-gypsum
stack complex will migrate downward at a very slow rate.  During this
very slow migration, some of the contaminants, such as phosphate, will
be precipitated and/or adsorbed by the clay minerals comprising the
confining units.  Others, such as fluoride, will be attenuated to a
large degree through adsorption by clay minerals and chemical reactions
with calcareous formations.  Still other contaminants, such as sulfate,
will be more or less unaffected during the downward migration of the
contaminated water.  Any process water which may reach the Floridan
Aquifer would further be greatly dispersed by the lateral movement of
the water in the aquifer, thus further decreasing the potential for a
change in the aquifer's water quality.

The semi-confining bed within the surficial aquifer is too pervious
(Section 2.6.3.2) compared to the Hawthorn confining unit to signifi-
cantly reduce the amount of downward seepage.  However, this layer,
because of its clay content, will provide attenuation of some contami-
nants seeping out of the gypsum stack and aboveground cooling ponds.

The proposed plant is not expected to have any effects on groundwater
quality in the Floridan Aquifer.  This conclusion is based on a com-
parison of water quality in deep production wells and potable water
supply wells at the existing plant with data from similar wells located
at the site of the proposed plant, as well as comparison of these data
to regional data.  Examination of 10 years of chemical data on two deep
production wells (collections zones of 180 to 1,265 feet) at the exist-
ing plant indicate no monotonic trends in concentrations of major ions
over the period of record (see Resource Document).

In summary, numerous analyses indicate that the quality of water in
wells at the Suwannee River Plant, at the Swift Creek Plant site, and
within the region is similar and within drinking water standards (except
in some cases for iron).  There is no evidence of any contamination of
the Floridan Aquifer at the existing plant site, and, therefore, it is
                                166

-------
expected that the proposed plant will result in no contamination and no
impact on the Floridan Aquifer.
3.2.8  IMPACTS FROM ACCIDENTS AND SPILLS

The probability of having a spill of the ponded water on top of the
stack (as a result of an unlikely high magnitude earthquake, for in-
stance) is very low. \Nevertheless, the cooling pond surrounding the
gypsum stack will have enough surge capacity to fully contain any acid
water that may be stored on top of the stack.  Hence, in the unlikely
event of a spill, acid water will be contained within the system.
                                   167

-------
                          LIST OF REFERENCES
                             (Section 3.2)
Division of State Planning (1973),  "Hamilton County Soils  Association
     Map", Florida Department of Administration,  Tallahassee,  Florida,
                                  168

-------
      3.3  ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED CHEMICAL COMPLEX
                        ON BIOLOGY AND ECOLOGY


3.3.1  SITE CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS

3.3.1.1  Vegetation Impacts

The proposed chemical plant site is a highly disturbed pine flatwoods/pine
plantation community.  Site construction and related activities will
remove most of the remaining previously harvested flatwoods and associated
cypresshead habitat.  The majority of the vegetation lost will be the
flatwoods habitat. The impact due to the loss of these vegetative communi-
ties is of minor importance when their degraded condition and abundance
in the study area is considered.  Impacts to Swift Creek Swamp are
considered minimal due to drainage controls and the fact that the swamp has
already received pit waters which probably have an impact exceeding any
anticipated from the plant construction.

There is no prime agricultural land nor development within the area of
the proposed plant site.  Wildlife habitat will not be substantially
affected, since present conditions provide, at best, minimal wildlife
habitat.
3.3.2  BIOLOGY AND ECOLOGY

3.3.2.1  Aquatic Communities

Macroinvertebrate, periphyton and fish data from Swift Creek have shown
that substrate conditions are apparently more important as stress factors
than is water quality.  Suwannee River natural system components will
not be significantly affected.  Only nonprocess water is expected to be
regularly discharged from the proposed complex due to an estimated
negative water balance and the quality of proposed discharge should be
similar to that of the present SRCC.  Presumably after 15 years of
operations, Swift Creek has fully responded to any impacts associated
with the present plant.  The aquatic communities will not be adversely
impacted by the small increase in flow in the estimated water quality
changes.

3.3.2.2  Terrestrial Communities of the Area
Impacts to terrestrial biota can be associated with air pollutant emissions
and contaminated water discharges.  Air pollutant emissions of significance
associated with a phosphate fertilizer complex include fluorides and
sulfur dioxide.

Moderate tip necrosis was noted on a few pine trees located on the
southern and southwest dikes of an existing cooling water pond at SRCC.
No other fluoride effects were noted (also see Section 2.2.2.3.2).
Similar very limited fluoride impacts can be reasonably expected at the
proposed Swift Creek Chemical Complex.
                                169

-------
No sulfur dioxide effects have been noted at SRCC; even with the existence
of two old sulfuric acid plants operating with an $03 emission rate of
29 pounds SO? per ton of acid.  The sulfuric acid plants proposed for
the SCCC will have an $63 emission rate of 4 pounds per ton of acid.

The general impact of the proposed new chemical plant on the faunal
components is anticipated to be minimal.  Some habitat loss is expected
but, due to the present disturbed nature of the site and the type of
vegetative communities' abundance within the region, this impact will be
minimal.  Areas adjacent to the proposed chemical plant may be detrim-
entally impacted due to an increase in human disturbance .in the area.
However, this also is considered minimal since there is already a human
disturbance factor associated with the existing beneficiation plant and
SRCC.                 x

Some loss of terrestrial habitat may occur with the increase in discharge
into Swift Creek.  This may be particularly detrimental to the already
stressed zone of the southern mixed hardwood community on Swift Creek
and its associated faunal components.


3.3.2.3  Environmentally Sensitive Areas

No recognized environmentally sensitive areas are located within the
study area.  Beehaven Bay, located north of the proposed plant site is
isolated from the Swift Creek Basin and air emissions from cooling ponds
and sulfuric acid plants.


3.3.2.4   Endangered, Threatened and Rare Plants and Animals

The proposed chemical plant will have little impact on listed species of
the area.  Of concern may be species associated with cypress domes on
the area; however, the presence of these species is highly speculative
and habitat is severely disturbed.


3.3.2.5  Migratory Wildlife and Habitat

Similarly, a limited amount of habitat for migratory wildlife is avail-
able.  Plant construction is anticipated to have minimal effect on
migrant populations.


3.3.2.6  Wildlife Benefits of the Area to Man

The acreage to be committed to the proposed site facilities is not a
significant source of wildlife related recreation.  Even if the facility
were not constructed, the recreational value would still be negligible
due to intensive timber management and expansion of ongoing mining.
                               170

-------
3.3.3  LONG-TERM VS. SHORT-TERM IMPACTS

3.3.3.1  Aquatic Impacts

Process water discharge from the proposed chemical plant will  occur at
very infrequent intervals during periods of high run-off with  ample
opportunity for dilution.  Nonprocess discharge will  result in a small
increase in the Swift Creek discharge and no additional  impacts are
anticipated to aquatic organisms.  Therefore, comparisons of long-term
and short-term impacts will be similar to existing conditions.


3.3.3.2  Terrestrial Impacts

Construction of the proposed facility and associated cooling ponds and
storage areas will permanently impact approximately 650 acres  of the
modified/disturbed pine!and/cypress system.   The existing but low quality
wildlife habitat will be permanently lost.  Short-term impacts will
occur from air emissions during the life of operation of the proposed
chemical facilities.  However, based on air impact studies and examination
of the area around the existing plant, impacts are considered  to be of
minor significance and limited area! extent.


3.3.4  REVERSIBILITY
3.3.4.1  Aquatic Impacts

Since there are no anticipated impacts to the aquatic biota, a discussion
of reversibility is unwarranted.
3,3.4.2  Terrestrial Impacts

Short-term impacts of air emissions are reversible at the end of the
life of the project when air emissions cease.  Long-term impacts of the
plant facilities construction and associated cooling pond and gypsum
storage are to a large extent irreversible.  This is due to deposition
of various chemicals into cooling ponds and gypsum storage areas which
are detrimental to the establishment of a plant community.
                                 171

-------
                       3.4  SOCIOECONOMIC IMPACT
3.4.1  INTRODUCTION
There are three geographic areas of impact:  (1)  local,  primarily
Hamilton, Columbia and Suwannee Counties in North Florida;  (2)  regional,
the state of Florida and, to some degree, South Georgia; and (3)  national
and international.

The effects at the state and local levels are felt mainly through increases
in employment and incomes, though there will be other effects as  well.
Increases in local ano^state incomes will be $15.3 million  and  $25.3
million, respectively, while $2.0 million will  be added  in  local  and state
tax revenues annually.  The national and international effects  will  be
felt primarily through changes in the national  import-export balance,
international payments, national resource balance, and the  national
energy situation.

These various forms and levels of impact will be discussed  looking at the
local impacts of the project in terms of incomes, employment, population,
households, school enrollment, demands for public services  and  local
government revenues.

Next, the impacts on a statewide, national and international basis will
be evaluated.

The impacts and methodology are discussed in detail in Section  3.4 of
the Resource Document.
3.4.2  LOCAL IMPACTS

Occidental's employment and payroll at their existing Hamilton County
facilities over the past several years have been:

             Year             Employees          Payroll

             1974               1,032          $ 9,972,485
             1975               1,363           18,303,495
             1976               1,246           17,822,593
             1977               1,031           17,747,966

Employment and payrolls for 1978, 1979 and 1980 are projected as follows:

             Year             Employees          Payrol1

             1978               1,200          $19,099,142
             1979               1,350           23,186,544
             1980               1,700           31,508,000

The projection for 1978 is based on Occidental's current budget.  The
projection for 1979 includes payroll for Phase I of Occidental's expansion
and for 1980, employment and payroll for the Phase II expansion (the new
plant at the Swift Creek site.

                                  172

-------
As of September 1977, 95 percent of Occidental's employees lived within
the three-county area of immediate impact.   Thirty-one percent lived  in
Columbia County, 37 percent in Hamilton County, and 19 percent in Suwannee
County.  It is assumed that after the planned plant expansions approxi-
mately 90 percent of all employees will live in these three counties.

While the income and employment impacts of Occidental and the new expan-
sions are significant in terms of Occidental's own employment and payrolls,
this represents less than 2/3 of the total  impact on the three-county
local area.  The rest is from indirect, and induced impacts as shown  in
Table 3.4-1.  The induced impact results from increased consumer expendi-
tures resulting from the direct and indirect impacts.

Thus, Occidental's Phase I expansion will generate $5.0 million direct
and $7.9 million total in annual earnings for residents of Columbia,
Hamilton and Suwannee counties.  Phase II will generate $10.0 million
direct and an additional $15.3 million total earnings.

Table 3.4-2 contains a summary of the effects of Occidental on employment
within the three counties.  The 624 increase in permanent employment in
the three counties from 1979 to 1980 is a result of the Phase II expansion.
In addition, it is estimated that there will be a short-term employment
impact during Phase I of 2,185 people and during Phase II of 4,560
people.  Of course many, but not all, of these will be temporary construction
workers.  Some will be local residents whose jobs will continue after
the plant goes into operation.

Table 3.4-3 summarizes Occidental's impacts on several important socio-
economic variables.  In Table 3.4-3 the impacts for 1980 are cumulative
and include both first and second stages of the expansion.  The impact
of the second stage only is shown in the last  column.

The relative importance of Occidental  to the economy of north Florida as
well as the effect of expansion can be seen in Figure 3.4-1.  For example,
in 1980 the income impacts of the overall facility will represent $53.0
million out of $349.0 million total earnings for the three-county area.
The totals  include $15.0 million for the Phase  II expansion.

Added education costs in 1980 in the three counties as a result of both
stages of  the expansion will be about  $1,741,000 in  1980 dollars. The
total  local government  costs of both phases of the planned expansion
will be $2,130,000. These costs will more than offset by taxes paid
Occidental  and by  individuals and businesses as direct and indirect
results of the expansion.

In 1976, Occidental  paid about  $600,000  in property  taxes.   It  is
estimated  at $960,000 for 1979  and  possibly $2 million in  1980. Thus,
local  property  taxes will increase  by  some $1.4 million as a  result of
both phases of  their  expansion.  Most  of this  will be paid in Hamilton
County.

It has  been estimated that  the  land use  effects of Phase  I could result
in some 35 acres  of  land  in  the  three  counties  being converted  to residential
uses—about 300 more  could  be  converted  as a  result  of Phase  II.  In
total,  some 350 acres within  the  three-county  area might be  converted to
residential uses—a  ratio of  only  three  in every  10,000 acres.

                                 173

-------
Table  3.4-1.   Summary of Occidental's Impacts  on  Income  in  the Area
                of Immediate Impact for 1978,  1979,  and  1980
Impact
Direct
Indirect
Induced
Total
Change from
Preceding Year
1978
$21,209,433
3,791,101
\ 5,039,938
$30,040,472
—
1979
$26,829,045
4,641,962
6,456,447
$37,927,454
7,886,982
1980
$37,471,691
6,692,666
9,080,228
$53,244,585
15,317,131*
*Second stage expansion impact.
 Table  3  4-2    Summary of Occidental's Impacts on Employment in the
                Area of Immediate Impact for 1978, 1979, 1980.
Impact
Direct
Indirect
Induced
Total
Change from
Preceding Year
1978
1,320
268
310
1,898
—
1979
1,527
330
372
2,229
331
1980
1,950
408
495
2,853
624*
 *Second stage expansion impact.

                              174

-------
Table  3.4-3.   Employment, Labor Force, Population  and  Other  Impacts
                of Occidental's Expansion Program
                                                           Second  Stage
                                 1979         1980            Impact
Empl oyment
Without Expansion
With Expansions
Expansion Impact
Labor Force
Without Expansion
With Expansion
Expansion Impact
Population
Without Expansion
With Expansion
Expansion Impact
Housing Unit Needs
Without Expansion
With Expansion
Expansion Impact
Public School Enrollment
Without Expansion
With Expansion
Expansion Impact

23,443
23,774
331

24,677
24,765
88

61,964
62,228
264

23,564
23,652
88

13,626
13,692
66

24,186
25,455
955

25,459
26,378
919

63,500
66,257
2,757

24,351
25,270
919

13,953
14,642
689

624

831

2,493

831

623
 Cost of Nonschool Local

   Public Services (In
   Thousand  of  1974 dollars)
     Without Expansion            NE         $8,805
     With Expansion               NE          9,063
     Expansion Impact             NE            258             NE
 Note:   NE  =  not  estimated.
                                175

-------
                                                 349
MILLIONS

 170 —


 160 —


 150 —


 140 —


 130 —


 120 —


 110 —


 100 —


  90 —


  80 —


  70 —


  60 —


  50 —


  40 —


  30 —


  20 —


  10 —

   0
                                                       174
       PHASE II —•
PHASE II —•
                  OXY     OXY    OXY
                PAYROLL  THREE FLORIDA
                  1980   COUNTY IMPACT
               	AREA    1980

                     PROJECTED 1980
                    TOTAL OXY IMPACT
                              THREE HAMILTON       COLUMBIA
                             COUNTIES       SUWANNEE
                              TOTAL
                                  PROJECTED 1980 BASELINE
                                       ALL INCOMES
  OCCIDENTAL'S TOTAL INCOME IMPACT AS COMPARED TO ESTIMATED LABOR AND
  PROPRIETORS INCOME IN THE IMMEDIATE IMPACT AREA, 1980
                                FIGURE 3.4-1

                                     176

-------
It is likely that most of this land will  be near the existing  urban
centers.  Since there are large areas of undeveloped land within  each  of
the existing cities within the three counties, projected growth will not
cause any significant reduction in the amount of land available for
other purposes.


3.4.3  STATEWIDE IMPACT—EMPLOYMENT, INCOME, TAX RECEIPTS

The direct, indirect and induced impacts of Occidental's expansions  on
income earned by residents of the state of Florida will  be $15 million
per year for Phase I starting in 1979 and $25 million per year for Phase
II starting in 1980 (Table 3.4-4).

About 60 percent of the income generated by Phase II of the project  will  be
concentrated within the three-county area.  The remainder will be distributed
in the State, although the major part of it will probably remain  in  North
Florida.

In addition, Phase I construction will result in about $74.0 million in
state income ($20.0 million in local area) from 1977-1979.  Phase II
construction will generate some $144.0 million in state income ($46.0
million in local area) from late 1978-1980.

The impact of Occidental's expansions on direct, indirect and  induced
permanent employment is shown in Table 3.4-5.  The effect of both phases
of expansion will be to increase total employment in Florida by  1637
permanent jobs, 1148 of which will result from Phase II.  As has  already
been shown, 624 of these 1148 jobs will be held by residents of  the
three-county impact area.

In addition, Phase I construction is expected to generate 4657 temporary
jobs statewide—Phase II, 8396.  Based on unemployment statistics, it is
likely that most of the new jobs can be filled from within Florida.
Therefore, it is likely that while the project will have little  or no
effect on statewide total population, housing needs, school enrollments,
or governmental expenditures, it will contribute to income, employment,
and the tax base.

Annual state sales tax receipts are expected to increase over 1976 by
$1.6 million direct from Occidental and $1.4 million indirectly  as a
result of spent income generated by both Phase I and II.  The $3  million
total includes $1.3 million resulting from the Phase II expansion.  In
addition to this will be increased corporate profit taxes, and motor
vehicle taxes.  While it may be necessary for the state to reallocate
some of its transfer payments to local governments within the three
counties to compensate for some increased costs, there is unlikely to  be
any increased state government costs as a result of the expansions.
More likely there will be a reduction in unemployment compensation and
other forms of public assistance.
                                    177

-------
Table  3.4-4. Summary of Occidental's Impacts  on  Income  in  the
              State of Florida,  1978, 1979,  1980
Impact
Direct
Indirect
Induced
Total
Change from
Preceding Year
1978
$34,232,141
9,118,597
16,140,595
$59,491,333
—
1979
42,479,463
11,427,945
20,857,126
74,764,534
15,273,201
1980
56,458,428
15,193,021
28,413,381
100,064,830
25,300,296*
*Second Stage Expansion Impact.
Table  3.4-5. Summary of Occidental's Impacts on Employment
              in the State of Florida, 1978,  1979,  and 1980
Impact
Direct
Indirect
Induced
Total
Change from
Preceding Year
1978
2,033
610
1 ,044
3,687
--
1979
2,264
703
1,209
4,176
489
1980
2,946
862
1,516
5,324
1,148*
*The impact of the Phase II expansion.


                                    178

-------
3.4.4  NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL IMPACTS—OCCIDENTAL-U.S.S.R.  TRADE
       AGREEMENT
These impacts will result from the shipment of SPA produced in the new
plant to the Soviet Union in return for anhydrous ammonia, urea and
potash.  There are a number of effects:

          short and long run balance of trade;
          energy trade;
          balance of payments;
          national resource depletion; and
          foreign exchange value of the U.S. dollar.

The agreement calls for Occidental to sell 1.0 million metric tons per
year of SPA to the U.S.S.R. for 20 years beginning in 1980 and for
Occidental to puchase from the U.S.S.R. 1.5 million metric tons per
year of anhydrous ammonia, 1.0 million metric tons per year of urea, and
1.0 million metric tons per year of potash for the same 20-year period.
The quantities shipped could vary somewhat depending upon each commodi-
ties' relative value in the world market.  The value on the world
market of the SPA shipped to Russia is to be equal in value to the
ammonia, urea and potash purchased from the Soviet Union.  That is, the
whole agreement is to result in an equal value in terms of world prices.

Occidental is also to purchase 0.6 million metric tons per year of
anhydrous ammonia from the U.S.S.R. at world market prices.  This will
provide the foreign exchange with which the U.S.S.R. can  pay the United
States companies  involved for construction of the SPA terminals, pipelines,
ammonia plants, and railcars which are required  for them  to produce, ship
and receive the commodities involved.


3.4.4.1  Effects  on U.S. Balance of Payments and Balance  of Trade

Several indirect  effects on the U.S.  trade and payments balance are
expected.  First, to the extent that  the U.S. requirements of  potash can
be supplied through the Occidental-U.S.S.R. trade agreements,  it will  not
be necessary  to import potash from Canada.  In 1976, the  U.S.  imported
3.7 million tons  of potash.  Second,  to the extent  that Occidental brings
in ammonia and urea it will not be necessary  to  import ammonia and urea.
In 1976, the  U.S. imported  some 1.2 million tons of nitrogen fertilizer
materials.  Third,  is assurance of a  long-term supply of  nitrogen fertilizer
materials to  American  farmers for  the production of grain crops.  These
have  been one of  our greatest foreign exchange earners.

Fertilizer for the  production of  food and  fiber  is  important because the
demand in the U.S.  is  projected to continue its  compound  annual average
growth rate  in the  period  1962-1976.   In  this period, consumption of
nitrogen products grew by  8.3 percent per  year;  phosphate 4.6  percent;
and  potash 6.1 percent.
                                     179

-------
A predominant source of nitrogen for fertilizer is anhydrous ammonia and
urea, both of which use natural gas as a feedstock.  Thus, for the fore-
seeable future the extent of the domestically available supply of ammonia
and urea for the fertilizer market will depend heavily upon the availability
of natural gas.

There is a sufficient reserve of known, and recoverable phosphate rock
within the United States to meet U.S. demands for many decades to come.
On the other hand, there appears to be a general agreement that the
known reserves of natural gas in the United States will be depleted in
about 15 years.  It is possible that ammonia will be made from coal
eventually but for the time being this is not feasible.

The conclusion is, then, that the Occidental-U.S.S.R. trade agreement
may assure that American agriculture will have a source of ammonia and
urea for fertilizer which might otherwise not be available.  This will
contribute to agricultural productivity and will perhaps make possible
the continued export of grain which has been one of our largest foreign
exchange earners.


3.4.4.2.  Depletion of a Valuable Natural Resource

The question is raised of whether a trade agreement between a private
firm and a foreign government could result in one of our country's
valuable natural resources being traded to a foreign nation at the
expense of future American generations.  Alternatively, the trade could
be viewed as an exchange of one valuable natural resource for others
which are less abundant within the country.

At current consumption rates (116 million tons per year), the United
States could provide phosphate for the entire world for 42 years, that
is assuming that no other country produces phosphate and that the
subeconomic resources become economic.

The U.S. phosphate industry could also continue the current production
rate (49 million tons per year) for domestic consumption and exports for
the next 66 years using only known reserves and for the next 100 years
using the reserves plus the identified subeconomic resources.  This does
not include vast quantities which cannot be mined and processed with
present technology, but could be with higher prices and new technological
developments (Stowasser, 1977; Douglas et al., 1977).

By contrast, the United States has only very limited potash resources
and already imports the great bulk of our needs (Wagner, 1977).

Similarly, natural gas, the primary raw material for anhydrous ammonia
and urea production is in short and dwindling supply in the United
States.  The United States now has sufficient natural gas reserves to
last perhaps 15 years at the current rate of consumption (Bankston, 1975;
Federal Energy Administration, 1976).

*  For more complete references, see Section 3.4.3.2 of Resource Document.


                                  180

-------
Shortages of natural gas have and will continue to affect ammonia
production.  The agreement will help to alleviate shortages which are
likely to result in the future.


3.4.4.3  Energy Implications of the Occidental-Soviet Union Trade

Given the current national concern with dependence on imported oil and
future energy sources the effects of this trade on domestic energy supply,
balance of payments and, in turn, on rate of inflation could be important.

There is a signficant energy advantage to the United States involved
in the trade agreement due to the nature of the products involved.
Estimates in Table 3.4-6 (based on modern new large ammonia and
urea plants in the U.S. and modern potash mines and plants in Canada) show
that the annual energy used to produce ammonia, urea, and potash to be
imported from Russia is equal to 97.5 trillion BTUs.  In comparison,
Superphosphoric Acid requires 11.29 trillion BTUs—an energy advantage
to the United States of 8.64 to 1.0.

The estimated energy advantage of 86.21 trillion BTUs per year over the
20 years of the trade agreement is comparable to 1.72 trillion SCF of
natural gas (1,000 BTU/SCF basis) or equivalent to the discovery of
several large natural gas fields.  It would also be enough to serve
for all uses in the state of Florida for about six years.

Another estimate (based on average energy usage in existing U.S. plants)
predicts a larger energy advantage of 14.8 to 1.0 (White, 1977).  The true
energy advantage to the U.S. is probably somewhere between the two
estimates.
3.4.5  SOCIOECONOMIC PROJECTIONS

Baseline projections of all socioeconomic variables, without the expansion,
were presented in Section 2.8 of the Resource Document.  This section
shows projections for selected variables for 1980, 1985, 1990 and 2000,
with the expansion.

Statewide—The value of earnings, employment and taxes are expected to
be substantial but will represent small percentages of the state totals.
For example, by the year 2000 the State annual earned income will run
$73 million more (1974 dollars) with the expansion. But this amounts to
0.1 percent of total earned income  in  the state that  year.

Local--The relative impact within the three-county area will be much
larger.  Employment, earned income and labor force will increase between
4 and 7 percent (Table 3.4-7).

With the expansion about 6 percent more occupied housing units are
expected.  However, residential land use in the three counties is not
likely to increase more than 3 percent because of an expected increase
in density.

Population and labor force are each expected to increase 4 percent;
employment 5 percent; and earned income 7 percent.

                                 181

-------
Table 3.4-6  Energy Requirements of Occidental-Soviet Union Trade
Product
IMPORTED
Anhydrous Ammonia^
Urea \
Potash
TOTAL IMPORTED:
EXPORTED
Superphosphoric Acid8
TOTAL EXPORTED:
ENERGY ADVANTAGE
Imported/Exported
Trade
Metric Tons
Per Year
1,500,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
700,000


Energy to
Produce
BTU/MT
43.50 x 106
30.72 x 106
1.53 x 106
16.13 x 106


BTUs/Year
In
Trillions
65.25
30.72
1.53
97.50
11.29
11.29
8.64
     20 Year Trade, BTU/s TrillionsC
1,724.20
   Does not include 0.6 million metric tons to be shipped over a 10-year period
   to provide U.S.S.R. with foreign exchange to pay for Russian port and
   plant facilities, equivalent to 26.1 trillions BTUs.

B  7000,000 MTPY P205 as 70% SPA shipped.  Equivalent to 1,000,000 metric
   tons of SPA per year.

c  Natural gas equivalent 1.72 trillion standard cubic feet;  Florida usage
   0.26 trillion standard cubic feet per year.
                                    182

-------
Table 3.4-7-
Projections of Population, Labor Force, Employment,  Earned
Income and Other Socioeconomic Variables For the Three-
County Area With and Without Occidental's Expansion
                                    1980
                                                   Year
                                1985
1990
2000
Population
  Without Expansion                63,500    69,600    74,200    82,000
  With Expansion                   66,257    72,513    77,288    85,506

Civilian Labor Force
  Without Expansion                25,459    27,912    29,768    32,912
  With Expansion                   26,387    28,886    30,800    34,088

Employment
  Without Expansion                24,186    26,517    28,280    31,267
  With Expansion                   25,455    27,837    29,650    32,714

Percent Unemployed
  Without Expansion                    5.0        5.0       5.0       5.0
  With Expansion                       3.5        3.6       3.7       4.0

Total Earned  Income
 (in millions  of  1974  dollars)
  Without Expansion                $239.0    $302.0    $372.8    $559.2
  With Expansion                     254.9      322.1      397.6      596.4

 Per Capita  Earned  Income
 (in 1974  dollars)
  Without Expansion                $3,764    $4,339     $5,024    $6,820
  With Expansion                     3,847      4,441      5,144      6,975

 Housing  Units
  Without Expansion                 24,351    25,707     26,431    29,211
  With Expansion                   25,270    26,637     28,072    31,001
                               183

-------
School enrollment (Table 3.4-8) and other local governmental costs in
2000 will probably increase 34 percent although per capita costs are
likely to be less.

The expansion will be self contained for the following services normally
provided by local government expenditures:

          Sewage Treatment;
          Fire Protection;
          Potable Water;
          Storm Drainage; and
          Garbage Disposal.
3.4.6  SUMMARY

3.4.6.1  State and Local
624 new jobs will be created with Columbia, Hamilton, and Suwannee
Counties.  1148 new jobs will be created within the State of Florida.
Income earned in the three-county area will be increased by $15.3 million.
Income earned by residents of Florida will be increased by $25.3 million.

State sales tax collections will be increased by approximately $1.6 million
in payments by Occidental.  Additional sales tax revenues will be realized
as a result of the statewide earned income mentioned above.

Occidental will pay some $1.4 million in additional local property taxes.
The growth in population and business in the three-county area which will
be stimulated by the expansion will result in other property improvements
and, therefore, additional increases in property tax collections.

Some 2493 additional people will live in the three-county area.  This
will result in approximately proportional increases in school enrollments
in the three counties, as well as similar increases in the demand for
other public services.

The expected increase in population will result in a shift of some 333
acres of land in the three-county area from other uses to residential
uses.
3.4.6.2  National and International
There will be both long-term and short-term improvements in the U.S.
balance of trade and payments.  This will contribute to some strength-
ening of the dollar in international finance.

The national balance of non-renewable resources will be improved.  While
the nation will give up some of its phosphate (which is in relatively
abundant supply in the United States by even the most conservative
accounts), it will gain access to Russian potash and natural gas.  The
                                    184

-------
U.S. presently has to import virtually all  of the potash it uses  and  its
natural gas reserves are rapidly nearing depletion.

The Occidental-Soviet trade agreement is in keeping  with and is a
contributing element in the U.S. policy of detente with Russia.
   Table 3.4-8    Projected School  Enrollments, Public Service Costs,  and
                  Revenues, With and Without Occidental's Expansion
                  (Within Local  Impact Area)
                                                       Year
                                      1980       1985       1990       2000
School Enrollment
Without Expansion
With Expansion

13,953
14,642

15,460
16,199

16,913
17,515

18,508
19,183
   School  Expenditures
   (Thousands of 1974 dollars)

     Without Expansion               $23,416    $24,640    $27,567     $30,167
     With  Expansion                   24,572     26,865     28,548      31,267

   Local Government  Expenditures
   (Thousands of 1974 dollars)

     Without Expansion               $8,805    $9,660     10,284     $11,322
     With  Expansion                    9,063      9,929     10,697      11,909
                                    185

-------
                              REFERENCES
                             (SECTION 3.4)


Bankston, G.C., April, 1975, "Estimating and Defining Underground
     Hydrocarbon Reserves", American Petroleum Institute's  Committee
     on Reserves and Productive Capacity.

Douglas, John R. and Charles H. Davis, July 18, 1977, "Fertilizer  Supply
     and Demand", Chemical  Engineering.
                    \
Federal Energy Administration, February 1976, "National  Energy Outlook,
     1976."

James Chemical Engineering, Nov.  22, 1977, Personal  Communication
     (as compiled by Gordon F. Palm & Associates,  Inc.,  May 2, 1978).

Jefferson Lake Sulphur, Jan. 23,  1978, Personal Communication, Al  Garcia
     (as compiled by Gordon F. Palm & Associates,  Inc.,  May 2, 1978).

Occidental Chemical  Company, May 1978, Personal Communication, "May 1978
     Estimated Production Costs-Dihydrate Plant-Swift Creek (as compiled
     by Gordon F. Palm & Associates, Inc., May 2,  1978).

Stowasser, William F., 1977, "Phosphate-1977", U.S.  Department of  the
     Interior, Bureau of Mines.

Unido Fertilizer Manual, 1965 (as compiled by Gordon F.  Palm & Associates
     May 2, 1978).

Wagner, Robert E., July 1977, "Outlook for Potash  Fertilizer", The
     Situation-77, TVA Fertilizer Conference.

White, William C., Dec. 1977, "Energy and Fertilizer Supplies", Paper
     presented at Michigan Seed,  Weed, Fertilizer  School.
                                 IRfi

-------
                         3.5 RADIOLOGICAL
The baseline conditions of the radiological environment of the site
have been summarized in Section 2.9.  The proposed plant and continued
mining may alter both of these conditions.  The purposes of this section
will be:  (1) to describe the redistribution of the radioactivity and
radiation, (2) to propose potential contamination and exposure pathways,
(3) to predict or estimate the effects on man or the environment,
(4) to provide comparative measures for proper perspective, and (5) to
substantiate the basis for mitigative measures.


3.5.1  RADIOACTIVITY BALANCE

The following discussion will attempt to follow the flow of radioactivity
through the mining, beneficiation, and superphosphoric acid production
for the proposed plant.

In the mining process, overburden must first be stripped away to gain
access to the phosphate matrix.  Core analyses have shown the radium-226
profile in north Florida overburden to range from less than 1 pCi/g near
the surface to over 10 pCi/g at the matrix interface.

The general end result of mining and reclamation would be to change this
radium-226 profile into a more uniform one with depth, and having some
average concentration of radioactivity higher than the original topsoil
but much lower than the highest fraction in the profile.

In the west central Florida operations, topsoil (= 0.2 pCi/g), over-
burden (* 3 pCi/g), leached zone material (=» 18 pCi/g), and inadvertently
discarded matrix (38 pCi/g) become reclaimed overburden with a rather
homogenous radium-226 profile having between 4 and 8 pCi/g.

For the north Florida site the resulting mixture in reclaimed overburden
should be lower than in west central Florida.  Two cores taken on reclaimed
land in an earlier study at Occidental (Sholtes & Koogler, 1976) demonstrate
this fact.  Composite radium-226 concentrations in the first 20 feet are
6.6 and 2.8 pCi/g for the respective cores.  The proposed EPA guidelines
for reclaimed lands are scheduled to be issued for comment in the latter
portion of 1978.

The washer/beneficiation step produces a coarse product known as pebble
(approximately 5 percent of product by weight), an intermediate sized
product known as flotation feed (approximately 95 percent of product by
weight), and a fine clay.  The clays are routed to a settling area and
the liquid recovered for reuse.  The west central Florida clays average
about 45 pCi/g for radium-226.  By comparison to matrix values, the
clays at the proposed plant in north Florida should be near 10 pCi/g.
                                  187

-------
The regulations to be promulgated under the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act of 1976 have considered a limit at 5 pCi/g radium-226 in
"waste" materials.  Whether or not the production of such wastes by
physical processing will be exempt from consideration as a hazardous
waste is currently an open question.

The coarse fraction from the washer plant, pebble, results in less
differences between north and west central Florida since the west
central Florida pebble averages about 57 pCi/g and the north Florida
level is near 26 pCi/g.  Thus the 1 to 2 difference in a major
product.

The flotation step produces concentrate and a sandy waste fraction
usually termed tailings.  The west central Florida tailings average
about 5 pCi/g.  Samples from two tailings piles at the Occidental mine
in 1976 both resulted in radium-226 concentrations of 3 pCi/g (Sholtes
& Koogler, 1976).  Thus, the 1 to 2 factor between regions was
repeated for this waste fraction and is duplicated in the concentrate
with west central Florida averaging 32 pCi/g, while north Florida
concentrate is about 18 pCi/g.

Table 3.5-1 summarizes the input-output balance in radioactivity for
the chemical processing phase.  The chemical plant fractionates the
radioactivity into two major portions.  The uranium is primarily extracted
into the phosphoric acid and the radium is precipitated with the calcium
into the waste gypsum.  It is immediately obvious from the table that
the north Florida site has the same distribution of activity as west
central Florida but that the levels are all less by about a factor
of two.  Relative to similar operations in west central Florida:

     1.  Occupational hazards of handling input materials should be
         less.

     2.  Uranium recovery from the phosphoric acid is less feasible.

     3.  Radioactivity shipped in products is less.

     4.  The chemical processes within the plant should present less
         occupational hazards.

     5.  Gypsum represents about one-half the source term for radio-
         activity than a similar quantity in west central Florida.
                                  188

-------
             Table 3.5-1
Radioactivity Balances for Phosphoric Acid Plants and Fertilizer Production:
Occidental Chemical Company Compared to West Central Florida
CO
Sample
Type
Input Materials
Pebble
Concentrate
Products
30% Phosphoric Acid
40% Phosphoric Acid
* Ammoniated Phosphates
* Triple Super Phosphates
Inplant Materials
Acid Reactor Scale
Filtrate Tank Scale
30% Tank Sediment
Waste Material
Gypsum
226
Occidental

26
18

0.2
0.5
12

22

14
Ra, pCi/g
W. Central Fla.

57
37

0.4
4
20

380
84

32
238
Occidental

23
13

21
25
26

11

<0.5
U, pCi/g
W. Central Fla.

46
32

30
70
56

28
<1

<0.5
             Source:  After Roessler 1977u

             *  Not a proposed product for the SCCC.

-------
3.5.2   IMPACT OF RECLAIMED LAND ON GAMMA RADIATION

A radiological survey of Occidental mines and plants in early 1976
included 28 gamma radiation measurements on areas which had been mined
and reclaimed.  The average gamma level was found to be 8 yR/hr.  The
screening level suggested by EPA (1975) for return of reclaimed lands to
unrestricted use is 10 yR/hr.  Updated guidelines to be published in the
near future are expected to be more restrictive because of a lower
design limit for WL in homes on reclaimed land.


3.5.3  SURFACE WATER\SURVEILLANCE

Eighteen surface water and companion sediment stations were sampled in
October, 1977.  Only half of the surface water samples had levels of
radium-226 above detection limits.  The mean of the positive stations
was only about 0.5 pCi/1 and the range was from 1.2 to 0.3.  The highest
value found was in the Suwannee River. There appears to be no serious
impact of present operations on the surface water from a radionuclide
point of view.  Radium-226 values  in sediment are highly variable and
range from 0.1 pCi/g to 6.0 pCi/g. The source of radium may be from both
the natural stream bed and sedimentation of transported solids.  There
is little way  to discern the source.

The Osceola study  (Miller, 1977) also monitored the potential radiological
contamination  from streams in and  adjacent to the Occidental mining
areas.  The Osceola report concluded that the average radium-226 concen-
trations in the Occidental effluents would probably not exceed  those  in
natural streamflow.
 3.5.4  SOURCE WATERS

 Table 3.5-2  summarizes  the  radioactivity monitored  in the various source
 ponds at the SRCC.  The gypsum stack  and two cooling ponds have compar-
 able radium-226  levels.  Sampling  of  the cooling  ponds  in early 1976
 also yielded similar  levels with an indication  that the new  pond  (No.  2)
 was still  building  up to an equilibrium level.  The levels seen are not
 unexpected as  they  are  less than one-half  the concentration  in similar
 holding areas  in west central  Florida.

 The radium activity in  the  two liming ponds was found to be  nearly two
 orders of magnitude lower than the cooling ponds  and gypsum  stack.  The
 levels were  comparable  to environmental levels.  The concentration in
 the second liming pond  was  not found  to be different from the Altman's
 Bay discharge.   The Osceola study  also took  samples from the Altman's
 Bay discharge  in October of 1976 and  those results  agree with the
 present study.

 The current limitations for effluent  from  the  phosphate industry  is
 9 pCi/1 radium-226.  The highest discharge point  surveyed was some  15
 times less than this limit.


                                    190

-------
Table 3.5-2  Radioactivity in Selected Source Waters at the Suwannee River Complex
Radioactivity, pCi/1
Description No.
Gypsum Stack, Dorr-Oliver #1
Cooling Pond in
Cooling Pond #2
Chem. Plant Retn. Pond
Liming Pond #1
Liming Pond #2
Altmans Bay Discharge
Return Water Ditch** RD-1
Previous Data^"':
Cooling Pond #1
Cooling Pond #2
(2)
Previous Datav :
Altmans Bay Discharge
Spillway #22
Spillway #27
* Solid Content too liiqh for accurate measurement
Date Gross
Sampled Alpha
1/17/78 *
1/17/78 *
1/16/78 *
2/28/78 *
2/28/78 *
2/28/78 *
2/28/78 1>8
1/18/78 7.2

1/27/76
1/27/76
10/18/76
10/18/76
10/18/76
** Swift Creek
Radium- Date
226 Sampled
26.2 2/24/78
24.8 2/28/78
23.8 2/24/78
4.9
0.3
< 0.2
< 0.2
0.3 2/23/78

30
12
<0.1
0.6
0.5

Gross
Alpha
*
*
*




3.8







   (1)  Sholtes & Koogler,  1976
   (2)  Miller, 1977

-------
3.5.5  GROUND WATER SURVEILLANCE

Six well sets at the SRCC were selected for monitoring of potential  seepage
from several ponds in the area of the complex.  In addition to other
parameters, such as phosphates and fluorides, the groundwater was
analyzed for radium-226 and gross alpha activity.  At the Swift Creek
Complex two well sets were designed to monitor the proposed gypsum stack
and two well sets for the proposed cooling pond.   The gross alpha
activity in pCi/1 is an accepted screening procedure for the more costly
radium-226 analysis.  The EPA drinking water regulations set a limit for
gross alpha activity at 15 pCi/1 with the requirement to confirm the
concentration of radium-226 at a gross alpha screening level of 5 pCi/1.
Gross alpha concentrations of 15 pCi/1 are usually indicative of less
than 5 pCi/1 radium-226.

The gross alpha activity for the first sampling of the six well sets at
the SRCC averaged 11 pCi/1 with a range from 2.3 to 29 pCi/1.  This
appears to not be significantly different than the average and range
observed in Alachua County (Palmer, 1977).

The weighted average of the five categories of wells in the Osceola
study was 10 pCi/1 gross alpha activity.  One must conclude that the
first series of surveillance samples did not indicate a higher than
expected gross alpha activity in the monitor wells.

The radium-226 analyses from the first series at SRCC taken near cooling
ponds containing 24 pCi/1 had an average of 1.7 pCi/1 with a range of
0.2 to 7.5 pCi/1.  This data is also comparable to that obtained by
Palmer for Alachua County where no phosphate mining occurs (Palmer,
1977).  The Osceola study yielded a range of radium-226 concentration in
various well types from < 0.01 to 5.2 pCi/1 for 16 samples.

The second series of sampling at SRCC nominally occurred one month after
the first round.  The data exhibit an interesting phenomena; in 88
percent of the samples the gross alpha activity was lower in the second
series.  The average level of activity went down by a factor of slightly
greater than two.

The data can neither dramatically support nor emphatically deny this
seepage because radium-226 is not a good tracer in this environment.
Other water quality parameters, especially those items that do not exist
in nature, nor have such an ambiguous source, may be better predictors
of water movement.  Whether the highly insoluble radium would follow
such movements is unknown.  Note that the analytical procedure for radium
involves a coprecipitation of Ra++ and Ba++ with ^$04.  This could  mean
that solubilizing radium-226 with acid pond waters is less likely than
the commonly accepted preface of acid leaching.  The production of
extremely find particles containing radium-226 by the dissolution of
other elements within the media, however, is a potential.  Transport
of such materials to any significant distance through the subsurface
strata would be limited.
                                   192

-------
The monitor wells at the undisturbed site of the proposed Swift Creek
Chemical Complex actually resulted in higher levels.  The average gross
alpha level on the initial sampling was approximately 16 pCi/1 and the
average radium-226 level was 2.2 pCi/1.  Also the pattern of the lower
gross alpha activity in the second sampling was repeated with a reduction
by better than a factor of 2 in the average.  The data sets from the two
areas may not be statistically different, however, this was not tested.
The observations at Swift Creek tend to discount any seepage of radium-
226 at either the Suwannee River Complex or the proposed Swift Creek
Complex.

3.5.6  OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURES

The proposed chemical plant will alter the distribution of natural
radionuclides present in the wet phosphate concentrate feed.  The
concern of this section will be the potential for radiation exposure to
the phosphate workers in the proposed SCCC.


3.5.6.1  External Gamma

Although it was early realized that gamma radiation exposures would
probably not present a  hazard problem to the industry, the ease and
accuracy of gamma radiation measurements made it a  prime candidate
for screening many areas for other potential hazards.

Table 3.5-3 summarizes  the gamma radiation measurements made  in
various areas of operation for both the existing Occidental Chemical Company
Complex and a data summary for other plants  surveyed  in Florida  (Prince,
1977).  The immediate conclusion one can draw from  this table  is  that,
in general, the Occidental Chemical Company  plant data is  in  the  lower
portion of the range of data in the total summary for all  Florida plants.
In almost all cases the average for the Occidental  Complex is  lower  than
the average of all Florida plants.

Occupancy factors applied to the higher gamma level locations  reduce the
annual  increase in exposure over background  to  a  factor of 3  lower than
the general public radiation protection standard  at 170 mrem/yr.   In
general, gamma radiation  exposures  in  the proposed  chemical plant will
be elevated no more than  one may find  in homes  and  offices made  of
brick,  concrete block and stone outside of  the  mining area.


3.5.6.2 Radon Progeny

The usual method for measuring  radon progeny is by  high volume air
samplers and  counting the alpha activity under  various  time and  filter
placement  restrictions.  The readings  are converted to  the unit  of
Working Levels as explained earlier in  the  Resource Document.

Table  3.5-4 summarizes  the  results  of  Prince (1977) for all Florida
mines  and  plants compared to the  data  taken at  the  SRCC.   The entire
spectrum of measurements  for other  Florida  mines  and  plants has  been

                                193

-------
Table 3.5-3
Results of  Gamma  Radiation Measurements  for Potential
Occupational   Hazards  in  Florida Phosphate Complexes
          Area  or Operation
          DRY  ROCK
            Near dryers
            Inside dryer control room
            Grinding area
            Dry rock unloading

          WET  PROCESS PHOSPHORIC ACID
            Inside control  room
            Reactor (inside)
            Reactor (outside)
            Filter level
            Around filtrate tanks
            Above pan filter
            Other in-plant  areas
            Gypsum pile
                                               Summary of Florida Mine  Occidental  Chemical Company
                                                 or Plant Weans
                                                              (a)
                                                                         Chemical Complex
                                                                       (b)
                           NP(cW(Range), uR/hr
                              Ave(Range), uR/hr
MINING AND WET ROCK
Dragline areas
Benefi elation
Wet rock storage piles
Inside storage tunnels
Outside Storage tunnels
Wet rock storage bins
Office/lab buildings

6
6
10
7
7
4
3

c
12
67
17
47
26
15

( 4-7 )
( 5-39)
C 24-37)
( 7-30)
( 9-73)
(17-58)
( 7-31)
                            6    23
                            4     3
                            7    15
                            1    34
       (10-54)
       ( 6-11)
       ( 6-60)
       (  34 )
                           10
                           10
                            5
                            9
                           10
                            4
                                34    ( 6-232)
 81
370
240
 33
 23
(  8-364)
(20-712)
(49-638)
(21-80)
(20-27)
                                                                          2
                                                                         20
                                                                          5
                                                                          5
                                                                          5
                                                                          5
                                                                         14
                                                              5
                                                              9
                                                              29
                                                              11
                                                              12
                                                              14
                                                              9
                        13
                         6
                         8
                        14
  6
125
  9
  7
 12
                                                              17
                                    (   5  )
                                    (  5-21)
                                    (15-41)
                                    (  6-24)
                                    (  8-18)
                                    (11-18)
                                    (  4-16)
      (11-15)
      (  -  )
      ( 6-11)
      (14-15)
(  5-6  )
(   -   )
(  8-10)
(  6-8  )
""'tLIZER PRODUCTION
-oduct production
Fertilizer storage areas
Fertilizer shippina areas
Office/lab buildings

13
3
4
7

10
14
13
12

( 6-7 )
( 6-28)
( 6-25)
( 6-34)

13
5
4
(e)

11
11
12


( 6-21)
.( 6-14)
( 6-21)

          (a)  Sunmary data from Prince ( 1977)  may include some data from Occidental Chemical Complex
              and Mines.
          (b)  Occidental data from internal report to Occidental Chemical Comoany from the University
              of Florida.
          (c)  Number of slants may include a number of measurements at each plant.  Some plants
              may have more than one facility.
          (d)  ••-nber of measurements at this facility.
          (e)  Included in office/lab buildino data under minina and wet rock cateqorv above.

          Source:  After Prince  1977
                                         194

-------
Table  3.5-4  Results of Airborne Radon Progeny Measurements for Potential
               Occupational Hazards


                                        Summary of Florida Mine  Occidental  Chemical  Company
                                                        (a)                           (b)
                                          or Plant Means             Chemical  Complex
Area or Operation
HP   Ave(Range), mWL
                                                                      N     Ave(Range), mWL
MINING AND WET ROCK
Dragline areas
Beneficiaticn
Wet rock storage piles
Inside storage tunnels
Outside Storage tunnels
Off ice/ lab buildings
DRY ROCK
Near dryers
Inside dryer control room
Near Raymond nills
Inside Raymond control room
Near Ball bills
Dry rock loading area
WET PROCESS PHOSPHORIC ACID
Inside control room-
Filter level
Around filtrate tanks
Gypsum pile
FERTILIZER PRODUCTION
Product production
DAP production
ROP-TS? production
Fertilizer storage areas
Fertilizer shipping areas
Office/lab buildings

7
4
3
11
4
4

3
2
4
4
1
1

8
7
2
4

1
3
2
7
3
8

0.4
0.7
1.3
96.2
4.9
0.3

0.6
0.4
0.8
2.0
0.3
0.6

2.4
0.8
0.7
0.6

4.2
3.0
1.3
4.3
2.1
0.9

(0.1-1.6) - -
(0.2-1.3) -
(0.1-2)
(0.7-960) 13 55 (1.7-2QO)(f
(0.4-16) 8 2 (0.4-5.3)
(0.1-0.5) 1 0.4 ( - )

(0.3-1.0) -
(0.3-0.6) - -
(0.6-1.1) -
(0.6-5.9) -

( - } -

(0.9-6.0) 1 0.9 ( - )
(0.4-1.0) 1 0.4 ( - )
(0.5-1.0) -
(0.2-1.3)

( - ) -
(0.8-6.6)
(0.1-2.9) -
(0.4-13)
M.1-2.6)
(0.3-2.6)
(a)  Summary data from Prince (1977)  may include seme data  from  Occidental Chemical Complex
     and Mines.
(b)  Occidental  data from internal  report to Occidental  Chemical  Company  from the University
     of Florida.
(c)  Number of plants n;ay include a number of measurements at  each  plant.  Some plants
     may have rrtoro than one facility.
(d)  For ease of presentation mKL are  used, i.e., 0.4 irilv'L =  0.0004  ML.
(e)  Number of measurements at this facility.
(f)   Measurement taken prior to addition of forced ventilation
Source:   After Prince 1977
                                      195

-------
reported in order to provide some estimation of what the hazard may be
at the north Florida site.  In general, most measurements in north
Florida were in the lower range of the summary of plant measurements.

In order to place these readings into proper perspective one must
compare them to generally accepted radiation standards.  The standard
for uranium is four working level months annual exposure.  The value of
four working level months per year converts to a 170 hour working
environment at 0.33 Working Levels.  The highest value in Table 3.5-5
for the Occidental Mine and Chemical Plant is 0.055 WL (55 mWL) inside a
storage tunnel.  The occupancy factor in storage tunnels would be
considerably less than, 170 hours per week.  All tunnels in the industry
have since been equipped with forced ventilation, thus markedly reducing
these observed levels.

Radon progeny levels in the proposed chemical complex are within statis-
tical variations of natural background in homes outside of this complex
area.
3.5.7  SUMMARY

The radiological impacts of the proposed SCCC are as follows:
     Gamma Radiation

     Occupational Within
       Plant
     Radon Progeny
       in Plant
     Surface Water
     Groundwater
       Radioactivity
Gamma levels will not require any controls.
Normal occupancy times at elevated locations
lower accumulated doses to within normal
background variations.

The only high Working Levels found were
in loading tunnel now lowered to insigni-
ficant levels with forced ventilation.

This and previous studies have not observed
surface water radium-226 concentrations in
excess of natural streams.  Current treat-
ment technology has proven to be adequate to
limit discharges to less than 5 percent of
allowable concentrations of 9 pCi/1
radium-226.

This and previous studies have not observed
groundwater radium-226 concentrations in
excess of background in non-mining areas.
Radium-226 in groundwaters appears to be
associated with local subsurface environ-
ment and other water quality factors.
                                  196

-------
       Product and  By-Product
         Radioactivity
       The chemical  processing will  factionate
       the wet phosphate  concentrate feed
       into SPA with expected radium-226
       and uranium-238  concentrations at
       0.2 and 21  pCi/g,  respectively, and
       gypsum with 14 pCi/g Ra-226  and little
       uranium (<0.5 pCi/g). The uramium
       in the acid converts to  about 60 ppm
       and recovery is  not economically sound.
       The gypsum matrix  of high sulfates  keep
       radium in an insoluble  state.  The
       gypsum stack should be  covered with
       low permeability soil at the time of
       retirement.
The radiological impacts of the associated mining and beneficiation are
as follows:
     Subsurface Radio-
       activity
     Matrix Radio-
       activity
     Gamma Radiation
       Reclaimed Lands
Pre-mining radium-226 profiles (1  pCi/g at
surface to 10 pCi/g near matrix)  will  be
altered to a mixed overburden of between
3 and 7 pCi/g.

Radium-226 (8 pCi/g) in the matrix will be
fractionated into clays (10 pCi/g), pebble
(26 pCi/g), sand tailings (3 pCi/g). and
concentrate (18 pCi/g).

Uranium in the matrix will follow the
radium-226 in physical separations.

The mean outdoor gamma radiation is expected
to be elevated from 5 uR/hr to somewhat
less than 8 yR/hr.
                                    197

-------
                          LIST OF REFERENCES
                             (Section 3.5)

EPA (1974). "Interim Radium-226 Effluent Guidance for Phosphate  Chemicals
     and Phosphate Fertilizer Manufacturing",  ORP, Washington, D.C.

EPA (1975), "Preliminary Findings: Radon Daughter Levels  in Structures
     Constructed on Reclaimed Florida Phosphate Land"; U.S. Environmental
     Protection Agency, ORP/CDS-73-5.

Miller, James A., Gilbert H.  Hughes, Robert W. Hull,  John Vecchioli  and
     Paul R. Seaber |1977), "Impact of Potential  Phosphate Mining  on the
     Osceola National Forest"; Florida Department of  the  Interior,
     Geological Survey.  December 1977.

Palmer, James (1977), "Ambient Levels of Radium-226 in Selected  Ground
     Water of Alachua County"; M.S. Thesis, University of Florida.
     May 1977.

Prince, Robert J. (1977), "Occupational Radiation Exposure in the
     Florida Phosphate Industry"; M.S. Thesis, University of Florida.
     December 1977.

Roessler, C.E., Z.H. Smith, W.E. Bolch and R.J. Prince (1977),  "Uranium
     and Radium-226 in Florida Phosphate Materials";  Report to the
     Florida Phosphate Council.  University of Florida, December 1977.

Sholtes & Koogler Environmental Consultants (1976), "A Radiological
     Survey of the North Florida Phosphate Deposits for the Occidental
     Chemical Company, Hamilton County, Florida"; Gainesville,  Florida.
     October 1976.
                                    198

-------
            SECTION 4.0



ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED SOURCE
                   199

-------
                          4.1  SITE LOCATION
Three alternate site locations were considered in addition to the present
proposed Swift Creek site.  The plant could be located at the existing
Suwannee River Chemical Complex, or it could be located at a site on the
Mississippi River which is presently unidentified, or it could be located
in the central Florida area.  Since significant environmental impacts are
not anticipated at the proposed SCCC, a detailed study of alternative
sites is not discussed at length.


4.1.1  SUWANNEE RIVER SITE

Environmental impacts of locating the proposed plant at the SRCC include
increased air emissions in a small area and a small additional amount of
fugitive dust.  Economic results would be increased electrical energy
consumption, increased potentials for occasional pipeline leaks and
spills of gypsum slurry and pipeline water, and a substantial capital
and operating cost increase.  The socioeconomic impacts of expansion
of the facilities at the site of the existing plant will be the same
as at the Swift Creek site.  Consideration of these environmental and
economic factors leads to the conclusion that this is not a realistic
alternative.
4.1.2  MISSISSIPPI RIVER SITE

This is not a practical plant site for Occidental because of:  (1) the
environmental effect of continuously discharging large volumes of treated
process water (higher rainfall - less evaporation),  (2) enlarging the
land area for gypsum stacks, (3) the increase in particulate and sulfur
dioxide emissions, (4) greatly increased fuel and electric power consumption,
(5) greatly increased railroad tonnages on already crowded and old rail
lines, (6) greatly increased cost for product due to rail freight charges.


4.1.3  CENTRAL FLORIDA LOCATION

Location of the chemical complex in the central Florida area would probably
be at an existing central Florida chemical plant site already in operation
and owned by another phosphate company.  There would be no advantage for
Occidental to ship their rock to a central Florida location for processing.

In order to continue to use their own raw materials and to keep production
costs as low as possible, Occidental would ship their own sulfur and
ammonia into the central Florida location, which would incur a higher
freight rate than shipping to the present proposed Swift Creek location,
thereby increasing production costs.  SPA would be shipped from the Port
of Tampa instead of the Port of Jacksonville.  This would require new
facilities at the port for storage and shipping of superphosphoric acid,
                                  200

-------
which should be an even trade-off on port costs.  Consideration of the
economic factors and environmental  permitting factors leads to the
conclusion that this is not a realistic alternative.
4.1.4  ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS

4.1.4.1  Comparison of the Two Local Sites with Respect to Aquatic
         Communities

No significant impact on the aquatic communities in the Suwannee River
and Swift Creek due to the proposed chemical plant is anticipated
because regardless of location, discharge waters will enter the Suwannee
River via Swift Creek.  However, the Swift Creek site requires
discharge waters to be channeled through Eagle Lake which has a longer
retention period which could result in improved turbidity control.


4.1.4.2  Vegetation: Comparison of the Two Local Sites

The vegetation impacts would be less if the SRCC were to be expanded rather
than proceed with construction at the Swift Creek site.  Total land area at
SRCC utilized would be approximately 40 percent less than that at the
Swift Creek site.

Operational impacts to vegetation would be identical for either plant
site alternative since discharge is via Swift Creek.  Air emission
impacts on vegetation would be greater for the SRCC expansion since
increase of discharge at a single point would result in higher concen-
trations of fluorides, sulfur dioxide, and acid mist.  This would
result in an increase in the probability of vegetation injury.


4.1.4.3  Fauna! Comparison of the Two Local Sites

Due to the disturbed nature of habitat in both areas, no significant
differences in impacts to the faunal components between the two sites
is anticipated.  The SRCC expansion would require 40 percent less land
than construction of the proposed facilities on the Swift Creek site.
However, the probability of vegetative damage from air pollutants from
the expansion of the SRCC alternative would increase due to the resulting
concentration of discharge sources to a proximate source point.
                                  201

-------
4.1.5  ALTERNATIVES FOR DISCHARGE OF NONPROCESS WATER, RAINFALL RUN-OFF
       AND TREATED PROCESS WATER

Three alternatives for routing of these waters were considered.   In all
three alternatives, associated impacts would occur above entry to Eagle
Lake and the discharge for each alternative enters Swift Creek near
Occidental.  Alternatives 1 and 2 offer the least impact to vegetation
since flow is routed through channels.  Alternative 3 might stress
vegetation in adjacent Swift Creek Swamp during high water levels due to
the high sulfate content of discharge water.  Further details are available
in the Resource Document.
                        4.2  PRODUCT
Consideration of the increased emissions of fluorides, particulates,
increased fuel and electrical power consumption, increased freight costs,
and the very remote possibility of renegotiating the Occidental-U.S.S.R.
contract, leads to the conclusion that shipping granular triplesuper-
phosphate (a high analysis solid product), to the U.S.S.R. is not a
desirable or practical alternate.
                   4.3  PROCESS ALTERNATIVES


4.3.1  CLARIFICATION PROCESS ALTERNATIVES

Basically, two alternatives exist for the clarification process leading to
SPA:  removal of precipitated solids by clarification or a solvent extraction
method currently in pilot plant evaluation.

Consideration of the continuous treatment and discharge of a large amount
of water similar in quality to treated nonprocess water, and the require-
ment for storage of large volumes of sludge in aboveground ponds, which
may cover valuable mining reserves, leads to the conclusion that at
the present stage of development the solvent extraction process is not
environmentally or economically attractive.  Development work will continue
on the solvent extraction process.
4.3.2  HEMIHYDRATE WET PROCESS PHOSPHORIC ACID PROCESS

The hemihydrate wet process for the production of phosphoric acid is an
alternative under active consideration by Occidental Chemical Company.
                                202

-------
In essence, the hemihydrate wet process phosphoric acid process differs
from the dihydrate process in the strength of phosphoric acid produced
and the type of by-product gypsum sent to the gypsum stack.  Acid strength
would be about 40 percent P?0c instead of the 28 percent P205 produced
in the dihydrate process and the gypsum produced is 1/2 water of crystal-
lization instead of 2.  Atmospheric fluoride emissions would remain the
same.  Sulfur dioxide emissions would be slightly reduced.  Process
water discharge quantity and quality would not change.  The deficit
water balance for the pond water system is reduced 70 percent and the
frequency of treating and discharging pond water would probably be
increased.  All other process and support facilities remain the same
except for a reduction in the number of phosphoric acid evaporators and
the elimination of the auxiliary boiler to supply the SPA plants.
                    4.4  POLLUTION CONTROL MEASURES
4.4.1  COOLING OF SPA

Two alternative pollution control measures are possible, such as the
use of totally enclosed heat exchangers to cool evaporated SPA versus the
use of cooling coils in vented tanks.  The use of totally enclosed
heat exchangers to preheat feed to the SPA units instead of cooling
coils, using pond water in vented tanks, would reduce a small amount of
fluoride emissions from the scrubber venting these tanks.  The amount of
steam required for evaporation of SPA would be slightly reduced, thereby
decreasing the amount of boiler feed water chemicals discharged. Water
evaporation from the process water cooling pond would also be slightly
reduced, using totally enclosed heat exchangers; however, this pond is
already designed for a negative water balance using these heat exchangers,

The main benefit with the totally enclosed heat exchangers is energy
conservation.  It is planned to design and install this system in the
proposed SPA plants, although it has not been proven on a commercial
scale.
4.4.2  RETROFIT OF EXISTING SRCC SULFURIC ACID PLANTS

Retrofit of the existing sulfuric acid plants versus construction of new
sulfuric acid plants to meet new source performance standards (NSPS)
at the Suwannee River Chemical Complex has been considered.
                                203

-------
Retrofit of the existing sulfuric acid plants would probably involve
double absorption which would require an external heat source using
sulfur containing fuel oil, because of the design of the existing
plants.  Resultant sulfur dioxide emissions to the air from the fuel
oil plus the retrofitted plants (to NSPS) would exceed NSPS by a factor
of 2 or more.

Replacement of the existing sulfuric acid plants with one large double
absorption plant would require a capital expenditure of about $20 million.

Ambient air levels around the existing SRCC complex site meet EPA and
Florida DER sulfur dioxide standards at the present time.

Considering the increased capital and fuel consumption for retrofitting
the existing sulfuric acid plants, the large capital investment for a
new double absorption sulfuric acid plant, and the fact that ambient
air S02 standards are now being met, leads to the conclusion that neither
of these alternatives would be viable.
      4.5  ALTERNATIVE OF NOT CONSTRUCTING A NEW SOURCE


4.5.1  THE ECONOMIC EFFECTS OF A NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE

The effects of a no-action alternative on the local area can basically
be seen in the baseline socioeconomic projections in Section 2.8.3 of the
Resource Document.  Those projections were made on the assumption that
the expansion would not occur.  Occidental has, of course, proceeded
with Phase I of their expansion and will meet their commitments to the
U.S.S.R insofar as possible.  Thus, some of the international trade
benefits of the agreement could be realized, unless the entire contract
fell into default.  However, if the Phase II expansion were not completed,
most of Occidental's existing capacity would have to be devoted to
satisfaction of the U.S.S.R. agreement.  Thus, Occidental's capacity
would be effectively removed from the available capacity to meet the
U.S. phosphate fertilizer needs.  As was shown in Section 1.3.3, this
capacity will be needed to meet the growing fertilizer requirements of
U.S. farmers in the future.

Thus, no action alternative would result in a lower level of employment
and incomes within the three-county area and Florida, higher unemployment,
lower tax collections by local and state governments, and lower expenditures
by local governments.  State government expenditures would be little
affected in either case.  The no-action alternative would also, of course,
result in a somewhat slower development of residential commercial and
industrial land than would be the case with the development. The precise
level of these effects can be seen in Section 3.2.1.  However, minor
effects would be seen on the pace of residential, commercial and industrial
land development.
                                     204

-------
    SECTION 5.0



MITIGATIVE MEASURES
            205

-------
                      5.1  AIR QUALITY AND NOISE


5.1.1  AMBIENT AIR QUALITY

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Environmental
Regulation of the State of Florida have established the following standards
and guidelines that define acceptable ambient concentrations of air
contaminants consistent with established air quality criteria. The
following pertinent standards are taken from Chapter 17-2 of the Department
of Environmental Regulation.

                     \
5.1.1.1  Particulate Hatter

     1.   60 micrograms per cubic meter - annual geometric mean.

     2.   150 micrograms per cubic meter - maximum 24-hour concentrations
          not to be exceeded more than once per year.


5.1.1.2  Sulfur Oxides (Sulfur Dioxide)

     1.   60 micrograms per cubic meter (0.02 ppm) - annual arithmetic
          mean.

     2.   260 micrograms per cubic meter (0.01 ppm) - maximum 24-hour
          concentration not to be exceeded more than once per year.

     3.   1,300 micrograms per cubic meter (0.50 ppm) - maximum 3-hour
          concentration not to be exceeded more than once per year.


5.1.1.3  Fluorides
A departmentally established guideline of 45 ppm F~ in grass has
been used as an indicator of fluoride pollution.  This criteria is
related primarily to potential harm to cattle.
5.1.2  EMISSION REGULATIONS

Industrial emissions are regulated by a series of stipulations
all contained in Chapter 17-2.04 of the Florida Administrative
Code (F.A.C.)  These regulations include general provisions dealing
with limits on visible emissions, process weight table, etc., but
in addition, has specific industry limitations, some being applicable
to the phosphate fertilizer industry.  By reference, when federal
New Source Performance Standards exist for a particular industry or
process (such as sulfuric acid plants), then these standards apply
                                  206

-------
rather than the limits of 17-2.04.   Emission limits of particular
interest in this EIS are as follows:
5.1.2.1  Sulfuric Acid Plants

     1.   New Plants

          a)   Four pounds S02 per ton 100%
          b)   Acid mist up to 0.15 pounds per ton of 100%
          c)   No visible emissions except during start-up
5.1.2.2  Phosphate Processing-limits expressed as pounds of fluoride
         (atomic weight 19) per ton of P20g equivalent of input
         material .

     1 .  New Plants

          a)  Wet process phosphoric acid product! on-0. 02
              pounds F per ton P20s fed to process;

          b)  Superphosphoric acid production 0.01 pounds F
              per ton ?2®5 fed to process;
          c)  Run of pile triple super phosphate mixing belt
              and den - 0.05 pounds of F per ton;

          d)  Run of pile triple super phosphate curing or
              storage process  -0.12 pounds  F per ton;

          e)  Granular triple  super phosphate  production-0.06
              pounds F per  ton  for granulating run-of-pile
              triple super  phosphate or 0.15 pounds  F  per ton
              for product made  from phosphoric acid  and phosphate
              rock  slurry;

          f)  Granular triple  super phosphate  storage-0.05
              pounds F per  ton;

          g)  Diammonium phosphate production-0.06 pounds F
              per ton;

          h)  Calcining except rock drying  and defluorinating
              -0.05 pounds  F per ton;
                                    207

-------
          i)   Defluorinating phosphate rock -0.37 pounds F
               per ton;

          j)   All other plants or processes will be subject
               to best technology.

The proposed facility will meet these emission limits and, in addition, will
operate continuous monitors to record emissions and ambient  levels of S02-


5.1.3  PREVENTION OF SIGNIFICANT DETERIORATION

With the issuance of proposed guidelines by EPA in November 1977, the
FDER became active and passed regulations compatible with those of EPA.
The new "PSD" regulations, as reflected in Chapter 17-2.02, established
three area classes and degradation limits in each.  Class I, II and III
areas are designated in descending order of air quality, i.e., a Class I
area is to be as free of air pollution as possible and at present is assigned
to federally designated seashore and national forest areas.  One such area
near the Occidental Chemical site is the Okefenokee National Wilderness
Area.
                     5.2  LAND AND WATER RESOURCES
5.2.1  TOPOGRAPHY
The proposed site is located outside the limits of stream courses and
flood-prone-areas in the Swift Creek drainage basin.

Retirement of the gypsum stack could consist of flattening its slopes
and incorporating a clayey soil cover that will be grassed.
5.2.2  GEOLOGY

The chemical plant will not have any effect on the main Hawthorn confining
unit.  There are no mitigating measures for the loss of mineral resources
that are mined.
5.2.3  SOILS

5.2.3.1  Erosion Control
Building, embankment, storage and borrow areas will be grubbed only as
necessary just prior to construction.  Borrow areas that will not be
used for mining purposes will be revegetated to reduce the incidence of
erosion.  Runoff from the earthen embankments and from the plant site
will be collected in ditches and clarified before it is permitted to
enter surface water courses, with further clarification occurring at
Eagle Lake prior to discharge to Swift Creek.  Runoff from exposed
mining areas and spoil piles will be collected in perimeter ditches and
in adjacent mine pits and will be clarified before being allowed to
enter surface water courses to meet State water quality regulations.
                                   208

-------
5.2.3.2  Dust Control
During construction, heavily trafficked areas will be wetted down to
control dusting.  Roads within the chemical complex will later be
paved to prevent dusting.  Other areas disturbed during construction
will be grassed.
5.2.3.3  Gypsum Stack Retirement

Mitigative measures to reduce and/or eliminate potential impacts from
the retired gypsum stack could include:  (1) digging out some of the
gypsum and selling it as a soil conditioner for farming (e.g., pea-
nuts); and (2) flattening the slopes of the gypsum stack and cover-
ing the gypsum surface with a 2- to 3-foot thick "impervious" clay
liner, as is customarily done for a sanitary landfill.  This should
prevent further percolation and leaching of the gypsum and would reduce
or eliminate the contamination of surface runoff requiring treatment.
The clay cover could be seeded with grass having a shallow root system,
such as that used for pasture.  This would-eliminate the potential for
dust and erosion.
5.2.4  SURFACE WATER QUANTITY

Mitigative measures to reduce nonprocess water discharges to Swift
Creek include:  (1) the recycling of equipment cooling water and
vacuum pump seal water from the phosphoric acid processes to the sulfuric
acid plants cooling tower for use as makeup water; and (2) the recycling
of evaporator condensate from the phosphoric acid processes to the sulfuric
acid plant boilers.

Measures to limit the discharge of treated process water to periods of
heavy rainfall include:  (1) the production of 98% sulfuric acid instead
of 93% acid which increases the heat of reaction in the wet process
phosphoric acid plant reactor, thereby increasing the process water pond
deficit; (2) the design of a water pond system with a negative water
balance; and (3) incorporating in the design of the gypsum stack-cooling
pond system a surge capacity for "zero" discharge; i.e., rainfall from
the 25-year/24-hour storm can be stored within the system.  The cooling
pond will be designed to maintain 1.5 times the volume of precipitation
from the 25-year/24-hour storm.  Thus, while still maintaining the
necessary freeboard, rainfall from the 25-year/24-hour storm will not
completely use up the available surge.

The negative water balance designed into the system will make it possible
to direct some of the nonprocess water to the process water pond during
dry periods, thus reducing the discharge of nonprocess water during
these periods.

Other mitigating measures include monitoring of Occidental discharges
and of Swift Creek flows (by the stream gauge recorders installed in
conjunction with this study) and reporting the data to EPA and the
Florida DER.
                                  209

-------
5.2.5  GROUNDWATER QUANTITY

5.2.5.1  Surficial Aquifer

A below-ground cooling pond will surround the gypsum stack.  The water
level in the cooling pond will be maintained within a few feet of the
water-table in the surficial aquifer.  These measures will eliminate
potential effects on the groundwater level in the surficial aquifer and
the impacts, if any, would be very localized.


5.2.5.2  Floridan Aquifer

Mitigative measures WIN be taken to limit the withdrawals from the
Floridan Aquifer.  These measures include: (i) the production of 98
percent sulfuric acid instead of 93 percent acid which eliminates the
need for 98-93 percent dilution coolers:  this measure decreases the free
water in the product (sulfuric acid) and reduces the heat load to and
the evaporation from the cooling tower, thereby reducing well water use;
(ii) the recycling of 1365 gpm of equipment cooling water and vacuum
pump seal water from the phosphoric acid processes to the sulfuric acid
plant cooling tower for use as makeup water; and (iii) the recycling of
about 637 gpm of evaporator condensate from the phosphoric acid pro-
cesses to the sulfuric acid plant boilers.  These measures significantly
reduce the well water consumption.

Monitoring of water levels in observation wells installed in conjunction
with this study and in existing Occidental supply wells will be under-
taken as a mitigating measure for assessing the impact of withdrawals
and leakage on groundwater quantity.


5.2.6  SURFACE WATER QUALITY

5.2.6.1  Construction Phase

Mitigative measures to prevent the contamination of surface waters by
suspended solids during the construction phase of the project have been
summarized in Section 5.2.3.  These measures consist of clarifying the
runoff in surface water bodies prior to discharge to Swift Creek.
Potential erosion from dikes will be mitigated by maintaining perimeter
ditches, thereby creating a closed system that will discharge to surface
waters after clarification occurs in various ponds and lakes.
5.2.6.2  Treated Process Water Discharge

If discharged, process water will be treated in a two-stage neutralization
system using limestone and lime.  The process water will be allowed to
settle in a settler or settling pond after each treatment stage to
                                 210

-------
remove suspended solids.  Provision for enough surge to collect the 25-
year/24-hour storm in the cooling pond prevents overloading the neutralization
system and allows good control of the neutralized water to meet discharge
standards.  Treatment of process water will be limited to periods of
heavy rainfall, i.e. whenever more than 50 percent of the available surqe
is used.                                                               3

Routine monitoring of the level of water in the process water pond
allows for the maintenance of the surge for the 25-year/24-hour storm.
Monitoring and control of the water level in relief ditches surrounding
the gypsum stack and any above-ground cooling pond allow for collection
of the seepage.

Monitoring will be done by sampling and by performing chemical analyses
on treated process water effluent when discharging, in order to be in
compliance with NPDES permit conditions.


5.2.6.3  Nonprocess Water Discharge

Nonprocess water will discharge to a freshwater ditch in the chemical
plant leading to a nonprocess surge pond.  Effluent from the surge
pond follows another freshwater ditch discharging into Eagle Lake (in
Section 10) which discharges, in turn, into Swift Creek.

Mitigative measures that will be taken by Occidental Chemical Company to
reduce the potential of nonprocess water contamination include:  (i) the
use of wet phosphate rock instead of dry rock, a measure which eliminates
the need for a dryer and dryer scrubber, thus eliminating the potential
pollution from weak sulfurous scrubber liquor containing suspended
solids; (ii) recycling of phosphoric acid evaporator condensate to the
sulfuric acid plant boilers, thus reducing the amount of water treatment
regeneration effluent; and (iii) the diversion of contaminated phosphoric
acid evaporator condensate to the process water circuit in order to
reduce the amount of contaminated nonprocess water requiring treatment.

Prevention and control of contamination of nonprocess water will be
accomplished by:  (i) the isolation of nonprocess water from the process
water and acid storage areas - the contaminated areas will be curbed and
separated from nonprocess waters and rainfall runoff ditches; (ii) any
point source nonprocess water discharge that could become contaminated
by leaks or spills from acid areas will be routinely pH monitored to
allow for diversion of the contaminated water to the process water
system for as long as the pH is not back to normal; (iii) nonprocess
water that is not contaminated and rain runoff from nonprocess areas
will  be diverted to the nonprocess surge pond which will  have a retention
time of about 100 days except during rainfall periods.   The influent to
and effluent from the surge pond will  have an automatic continuous pH
recording and alarm system to prevent discharges of contaminated water
to surface streams and to allow for prompt corrective action to be
taken.   The 100-day retention time will also dampen any contamination of
nonprocess water entering the pond;  (iv) if contamination occurs,  the
                                   211

-------
discharge will be diverted to the second stage process water treatment
system for neutralization with lime and settling in a pond so that the
contaminated nonprocess water meets discharge requirements; and (v) any
treated overflow from the settling pond and uncontaminated effluent from
the surge pond will be discharged to Eagle Lake for final clarification.
This lake has a retention time of 156 days except during rainfall
periods.  The extended retention time will allow for removal of suspended
solids and will further dampen out any pH and contaminants should  all
of the above control actions malfunction, a hypothesis that is highly
unlikely.

Some nonprocess water discharges will be diverted to the Swift Creek
Mine water circuits.  Tfr^se include:  (i) the discharge of water treatment
regeneration effluent (=13 gpm) diverted to the mine water circuits in
order to reduce the concentration of regeneration chemicals discharged
to surface waters; and (ii) the discharge of treated domestic water
(=16 gpm) after treatment to Florida DER Standards, diverted to the
mine water system to eliminate the discharge of treated domestic water
to surface waters.

Occidental Chemical Company will also reduce or possibly eliminate its
discharges during drought periods which will, in turn, reduce and/or
eliminate the potential impacts of discharges on surface waters during
critical low flow conditions.  The nonprocess surge pond with 100-day
detention time, and Eagle Lake with 156-day detention time, allow for
the control and management of discharge in dry periods to minimize the
effect of changes in surface water quality of Swift Creek and the
Suwannee River.  The temporary storage of effluents in retention ponds
and lakes will allow for future discharge to Swift Creek when flow
conditions in the Suwannee River are more suitable.

Monitoring in order to comply with NPDES permit conditions will be done
by sampling and performing chemical analyses on nonprocess water effluent,
and by recording the discharge rate and reporting the data to EPA and
the Florida DER.  Further, the stream gauge recorders installed in
conjunction with this study will be maintained and the records will be
analyzed as data is accumulated. Surface water sampling and complete
water chemical analyses at the location of the stream gauges will
continue on a regular bi-monthly basis during construction and operation
of the proposed facility.


5.2.6.4  Retirement Phase

After retirement, continued treatment of runoff from the qvosum stack-
cooling pond  complex will bejrequired until the runoff is of acceptable
quality that  satisfies discharge standards.
                                  212

-------
 5.2.7  GROUNDWATER QUALITY

 Mitigative measures have been incorporated in the two schemes that are
 being considered for the gypsum stack-cooling pond complex. In mined-out
 areas, a below ground cooling pond will surround the stack and will act
 as a relief for water seeping from the stack area.  Where an aboveground
 cooling pond surrounds the stack, its outer periphery will be excavated
 to provide a relief for water seeping from the stack.  Seepage from the
 stack and aboveground cooling pond would, therefore, tend to flow to the
 below ground cooling pond which acts as a sump.

 The impacts of the proposed facilities will be directly measured by
 monitoring water quality in the observation wells installed in con-
 junction with this study.  This sampling will be done at least twice a
 year on a regular basis during construction and operation of the proposed
 facility.

 Occidental Chemical Company proposes to operate with the level of water
 in its below ground cooling ponds slightly above the water table in the
 surficial aquifer.  In the unlikely event that the monitoring program
 indicates significant contamination of the surficial aquifer^, Occidental
 will lower the operating level of its below ground cooling ponds to
 provide additional relief for water seepage.  This measure would,
 however, reduce the process water pond deficit, thereby requiring more
 treatment and discharge of process water to surface streams.

 Occidental will not extend its mining at the site of the gypsum stack-
 cooling pond complex to the confining unit and, hence, the confining bed
 would not be affected by mining operations.  No measurable impacts
 are projected on water quality in the Floridan Aquifer.  The water
 quality in the aquifer will, however,  be monitored through Occidental
 supply wells and the deep observation wells installed in conjunction
 with this study.
5.2.8  ACCIDENTS AND SPILLS

The gypsum stack-cooling pond complex will be designed in accordance
with state-of-the-art practices.  Although the site is not susceptible
to damaging earthquakes, the design will also comply with requirements
of Earthquake Zone 1.  There are no state or federal rules that apply to
the design of the gypsum stack.

The rules of the Department of Environmental Regulation for the design,
construction, inspection and maintenance of earthen dams promulgated
under Chapter 17-9, Florida Administrative Code, will be strictly
                                    213

-------
adhered to.  Earthen retaining dikes will also comply with all  other
state and/or local ordinances.

The construction of retaining dikes will be inspected daily by a
qualified representative of the design engineer to determine that
the embankments, spillways and control structures meet the design
specifications.  Prior to the introduction of process water into the
area, the entire earthen structure will be thoroughly inspected by
the design engineer.   \

The earthen dikes-of the cooling pond-gypsum stack complex will be in-
spected on a routine basis by operations personnel, who will be in-
structed by the design engineer regarding items to be checked.   The
inspection will consist of checking the general condition of the
crest and toe inspection roads, the condition of soil surfaces on the
outside slopes and downstream from the toe, the elevation of the
impounded fluid, the piezometric level within and adjacent to the
embankments, and nonprocess water ditches and surge ponds.  Evidence
of concentrated seepage, cracking or subsidence of the crest,
sloughing of the downstream toe, or the appearance of significant
erosion gullies will be immediately brought to the attention of the
design engineer.  Remedial measures will be taken as soon as an
unexpected condition is detected in order to prevent leaks and/or
dike failure.

A thorough and detailed annual inspection will also be undertaken by
a qualified geotechnical engineer until the gypsum stack is ulti-
mately reclaimed.

The probability of having a spill of the ponded water from on top of the
stack is very low.  Nevertheless, the cooling pond surrounding the
stack is designed with enough surge capacity to contain acid water
that may be stored on top of the stack.  Such a spill will cause a
rise in the water level of the cooling pond that will not exceed one
foot (and more than likely, will be on the order of 0.5 feet).   This
is well within the available surge capacity.

The isolation of acid process areas and acid storage areas from nonprocess
water and rainfall runoff ditches reduces the potential of contamination
of nonprocess waters.  Mitigative measures outlined in Section 5.2.6.3
allow for the recovery of process water from leaks and spills (by
diversion to the process water system) and/or for treatment of the
contaminated waters prior to discharge.
                                  214

-------
                  5.3  BIOLOGY AND ECOLOGY
5.3.1   AQUATIC COMPONENTS

Retention ponds will  impound construction runoff and allow suspended
sediments to settle prior to discharge to mitigate potential  impacts
of increased turbidity on aquatic organisms.  Impacts of chemicals
in discharge waters on aquatic organisms will be minimal because
treated process water will  be infrequently discharged.  The proposed
facility incorporates the latest features for minimizing the contact of
process water with natural  aquatic systems.


5.3.2  TERRESTRIAL COMPONENTS

Incorporation of storm runoff retention ponds during construction of the
proposed chemical plant will minimize potential sedimentation impacts on
the Swift Creek Swamp vegetation.  Establishing natural plant species on
areas that are cleared, but not used, will provide some food and cover
for wildlife.  Meeting federal and state air emission standards will
mitigate the impact of chronic injury to vegetation.
        5.4  HITIGATIVE MEASURES FOR SOCIOECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT


The socioeconomic impacts of the Occidental expansion plan are almost
entirely beneficial so that no mitigation is necessary. There are,
however, at least temporary problems that may occur.  These are detailed
in section 5.4 of the Resource Document.  For the most part, the possible
problems that may occur stem from the likely lag in time of receipt of
additional public revenues relative to the time that increased public
costs are incurred as a result of increased demand for public services.

These problems, however, can be mitigated by advanced planning on the
part of local governments with the aid of state and regional planning
agencies.  No major or permanent problems are anticipated however.
                                215

-------
                           5.5  RADIOLOGICAL
5.5.1  SURFACE WATERS

Off-site impact of radioactivity in surface waters will  be mitigated
by compliance with a NPDES permit limiting effluents to  less than
9 pCi/1 radium-226.  The surface water surveillance data indicate that
off-site surface waters will remain near the radioactivity levels of
natural surface waters in the area.
5.5.2  GROUND WATERS  v

Ground water contamination by other pollutants of a more soluble nature
is likely to be the critical factor in identifying seepage.  Radium-226
is extremely insoluble and seepage water traveling downward through the
strata must pass through areas containing high quantities of radium-226.
If mitigative measures for other contaminants are instigated, it appears
that this will be sufficient to insure that ground water contamination by
radium-226 is not a problem.

Ground water monitoring at the SRCC site neither substantiated nor
negated the hypothesis of radium-226 seepage from source water into
the superficial aquifer.


5.5.3  GYPSUM STACK

An important waste product to be considered is that of the gypsum.  In the
chemical processing radium-226 is concentrated in this calcium sulfate
matrix.  The gypsum stack presents a considerable reservoir of radio-
activity for the future.  However, preliminary data from the west central
Florida area has not indicated any appreciable problem due to this waste
material.

The EPA area-wide EIS (EPA, 1978) listed under "Proposed Actions" that
lining of gypsum ponds with an impervious material as a mitigative
measure to protect ground water from radiological contamination unless
site specific data indicate otherwise.  The north Florida site results
in gypsum having a concentration of radium-226 approximately one half
that of west central Florida.  Proposed designs for the gypsum stack
mitigates gradients for seepage of any dissolved radium-226.  Lateral
transport of fine suspended particulates is not expected.  The mitigative
measure proposed for retiring the gypsum stack (Section 5.2.3.3) is
considered adequate for long-term control of the radiological aspect of
this approximately 14 pCi/g radium-226 material.
                                  216

-------
5.5.4  AIR QUALITY

The most significant radiological impact on the environmental air quality
at phosphate complex results from rock-drying processes at beneficiation.
The EPA areawide EIS has proposed the elimination of rock-drying and
suggested the transport of wet rock to chemical plants.  The proposed
chemical plant will process wet rock.  Drying rates at the SRCC will
either be reduced or remain the same as a result of the construction
of the proposed plant.


5.5.5  OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURES

Levels of radiation and radioactivity in and around the various processes
are not of sufficient magnitude to consider the application of radiation
control area guidance and consideration of workers to be occupationally
exposed to radiation.  A very specific but short-term problem exists in
cleaning some of the reaction vessels when scale accumulates.

Limiting exposure times for any individuals to less than five days per
year and providing respiratory control equipment when cleaning such vessels
will adequately mitigate this problem.
                        5.6  CULTURAL RESOURCES
The historical and archaeological survey has failed to reveal sites of
National Register significance on the Occidental SPA tract. A nearby
settlement of mill shanties associated with the Camp lumber operation
was found to date to the turn of the century.  Camp's Still is neither
within the survey area nor considered eligible for inclusion in the
National Register.

 No evidence of prehistoric occupation could be found despite exam-
ination of large areas of cleared ground.  Generally, the tract has been
severely disturbed by mining, clearcutting, pine cultivation, industrial
development, and utilities and transportation construction.  No mitigation
is required.
                                  217

-------
                          LIST OF REFERENCES
                             (Section 5.5)


EPA (1975), "Preliminary Findings: Radon Daughter Levels in Structures
     Constructed on Reclaimed Florida Phosphate Land";  U.S. Environmental
     Protection Agency, ORP/CDS-73-5.
                                   218

-------