| ERF vs. Eel River
Sawmills, Inc
Site: Mill A – Fortuna, CA.
Topics:
Mill A – Location & Hydrogeology
The City of Rio Dell Water Wells
Historical Use of Chlorophenolic Fungicides
ERF’s Legal Action to Clean Up Mill A
Ongoing Investigation of Mill A Contamination
Mill A – Location & Hydrogeology
The Fortuna Mill A facility is solely owned and operated by
Eel River Sawmills. The 60-acre facility is located on the
east side of U.S. Highway 101, just north of the city of Rio
Dell, in Humboldt County, Northern California. Mill A is
located in the flood plain of the Eel River, and the site’s
hydrogeology is presumed to be predominantly influenced by the
river. Based on the stratigraphy of the site, it is likely
that at one time the Eel River channel passed through it,
probably around 10,000 years ago. The groundwater below the
site likely flows to and from the river.
Storm water runoff from Mill A flows mostly through a network
of drainage ditches. Storm water generally flows north and
west through the mill, then leaves the site in a culvert where
it flows south across Highway 101. The water then flows across
a flood plain to the Eel River.
The City of Rio Dell Water Wells
Across the Eel River from Mill A is the city of Rio Dell,
encompassing 2.25 square miles and serving as home for
approximately 3,000 residents. Many of those residents are
employees of Eel River Sawmills, or of Pacific Lumber Company
in the neighboring town of Scotia. Rio Dell’s primary
municipal water wells are located at the Mill A site. They are
within one hundred feet of the planer building, and
approximately six hundred feet from the green chain, where
wood-preserving operations were conducted, and where soil and
groundwater contamination has been documented.
Historical Use of Chlorophenolic Fungicides
Chlorophenolic wood treatment chemicals
were used at Mill A from 1965 until 1987. Wood treatment
operations were conducted in two areas at the mill, the planer
mill and the green chain. At the planer mill, “Noxtane”
(the brand name of a liquid fungicide containing
pentachlorophenol and tetrachlorophenol) was sprayed onto
lumber as it left the planer. At the green chain, Noxtane was
applied to “rough-sawn” lumber as it left the sawmill, by
using both a spray operation and a dip tank.
These wood
treatment operations have resulted in contaminated soils,
groundwater, and storm water at the site. This contamination
has been documented since the 1980s. For example, in 1988,
shallow soil samples taken from near the green chain indicate
the presence of pentachlorophenol in concentrations up to
15,000 mg/kg. Storm water sampling from 1984 through 1988
revealed concentrations of pentachlorophenol and
tetrachlorophenol on the order of 780 micrograms per liter
near the green chain, and 500 micrograms per liter in the
drainage ditch near Highway 101. Storm water monitoring in the
1990s also sporadically detected these chemicals.
ERF’s Legal Action to Clean Up Mill A
On August 11, 1998, ERF filed a Complaint for Injunctive and
Declaratory Relief and Civil Penalties against Eel River
Sawmills. The Complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court,
Northern District, alleged numerous violations of the federal
Clean Water Act and the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act. Of primary concern to ERF was the presence of
chlorophenol and dioxin contamination at the site, the
potential threat that contamination posed to Rio Dell’s
municipal water supply, and the environmental threat to the
Eel River and its resident species. The extent of
contamination at the site had never been characterized.
In August 1999, ERF and Eel River Sawmills, with help from the
mediation services of JAMS Endispute, reached a settlement.
The settlement was memorialized in a Consent Decree entered by
the U.S. District Court on August 23, 1999. The Consent
Decree required Eel River Sawmills to conduct a subsurface
investigation for contamination at Mill A, and to clean up
soil contamination to levels which protect human health,
protect the quality of surface water runoff, and protect
groundwater quality. The Decree also required Eel River
Sawmills to abate non-storm water discharges from the site; to
adopt EPA target levels for determining whether storm water
pollution control measures are adequate; and to make revisions
to the Mill A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. Eel River
Sawmills was also obligated to pay $190,000 for consultant
oversight funds; restitution funds for protection, restoration
and education projects regarding North Coast water bodies,
wildlife, or human health issues; and reimbursement for
ERF’s attorneys’ fees and litigation costs.
Ongoing Investigation of Mill A Contamination
Eel River Sawmills hired the Santa Rosa
firm, Environet Consulting, to conduct an initial
investigation of shallow soil contamination at Mill A, as
required by the Consent Decree. That initial investigation
consisted of soil sampling throughout the site, with
particular emphasis on areas where wood treatment activities
occurred and areas where treated lumber was stored. The
investigation determined that pentachlorophenol is present in
soils at the green chain at concentrations up to 940 mg/kg.
Samples taken in areas of high pentachlorophenol contamination
show that dioxins and furans are also present.The next phase
of the Mill A site investigation will entail the installation
of groundwater monitoring wells to determine the on-site
groundwater flow direction and gradient, and to sample for
pentachlorophenol.
| 
