NCD000770487_19980930_Johnson Controls Battery Group_FRBCERCLA PA SI_Expanded Site Inspection-OCR

,<· •'
· :1
.1~{1. ,j;,Z..i'/4,
,i.1;:'i'.,:.I.\~:.·:, ',~
•t''~·'c?• · "' ' ''J::~itiii:,~~ '·:t~t;~;~ ft/
'~
, ·~:¢.,~l ,jel~_, '. -)I.~. -" 11.,,,. •, )rTu·,•,, -~ -~-~~ ~--.}~
.-,
l~~~~ji~%~ ~~?.5~L,~~~,.~~ -~-----~~ ~=~~T~~~S~~
I'"""-"'" _,, . ..._ ... ,b~'j?'~ ;"'t~;:-v~~l~J~t":""~t,I!----., . ~ ~·"'~. ·:·'.~:~•~r~_,~,.:~n:~:?,4 ,,~,.,. "''"-··""'~~
IJ•• ~~{t~!t~:~J!~~-
•I ~,:t_;.;..-.•'-,o-,,,,. ~,::;,>; ·~ ,,,:'I:/. .. _.;,~--,~:••,;~,,~"'"~d:,;~~
:.'%t-1;{=f{1l~lltlt 1-~~,tr ... :l,7.c.:1,,l!l;;:i.,:-•".:C.
.•. ,-~-b..:.,:c?~:tr;:'Jh~•J~.-;
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
September 30, 1998
Mr. Phil Vorsatz, Chief
NC Site Management Section
US Environmental Protection Agency -Waste Division
Atlanta Federal Building
61 Forsyth Street, I Ith Floor
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3104
Subject: Expanded Site Inspection
DIVISION OF WASTE MANAGEMENT
Johnson Controls -Globe Battery Division
Winston-Salem, Forsyth County; NC
US EPA ID: NCD 000 770 487
Dear Mr. Vorsatz:
Enclosed is the Expanded Site Inspection (ESI) completed by the NC
Superfund Section for the Johnson Controls site near Winston-Salem, Forsyth County,
NC.
In 1978, Johnson Controls constructed the facility to manufacture, assemble and
charge automobile batteries. By 1984, plant production ranged from 6,000-11,000
batteries per day. Around 1992, the plant expanded operations with current production
estimated at between 14,000-22,000 batteries per day.
The facility is currently listed as a RCRA large quantity generator. The facility
generates hazardous wastestreams containing antimony, barium, lead and waste
petroleum naphtha, which are shipped offsite for treatment or disposal. In addition, the
facility reported at least 13 unpermitted releases of hazardous substances from the
plant to onsite soils or sedimentation basins since 1979. The facility also reported
fugitive or stack air emissions of antimony, arsenic, barium, barium compounds, carbon
monoxide, hydrogen gas, lead, lead compounds, nitrogen oxides, selenium, sulfuric acid
and sulfur dioxide.
The site is located near the top of a small hill that slopes northwest toward
Lowery Mill Creek and west toward an unnamed tributary to Lowery Mill Creek.
Surface runoff from the facility collects in catch basins and travels through underground
pipes to three splash pads at the heads of three sedimentation basins along the west
boundary of the site. These three basins collect stormwater runoff from the site which
is then discharged to two unnamed tributaries to Lowery Mill Creek. Lowery Mill
Creek flows into Salem Lake .
401 OBERLIN ROAD, SUITE 1 SO, RALEIGH, NC 27605
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/ AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER· 50% RECYCLED/I 0% P0ST•C0NSUMER PAPER
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Letter to Mr. Vorsatz
Johnson Controls ESI
September 30, 1998
Page2
Approximately 66,767 people are served by a drinking water intake located about 2.1 miles
downstream of the site at Salem Lake. People routinely fish at the Old Greensboro Road bridge over
Salem Lake, approximately 0.8 mile downstream of the site. A palustrine scrub-shrub type wetland
exists along the unnamed tributary that connects Basin # I to Lowery Mill Creek, for 0.25 mile of
wetland frontage, about 1200 feet west of the site. The National Wetland Inventory Maps identify
1.13 miles of wetland frontage bordering Lowery Mill Creek between the confluence of the unnamed
tributary and Salem Lake. Salem Lake has 0.24 miles of marshy wetland frontage at its headwaters
above the Old Greensboro Road bridge. There are approximately 43,662 people within a 4 mile
radius of the site. There are two known drinking water wells within a 0.25 mile radius of the site.
On August 11-13, 1997, the NC Superfund Section collected soil samples from three source
areas, soil samples in the overland runoff pathway from the site. The three source areas include soils
from an Acid Storage Tank area, a Lead Oxide Unloading area and a Drum Storage Area.
Groundwater samples and numerous surface water and sediment samples downstream of the site were
also collected to characterize any releases from the site that could impact known target receptors.
Elevated levels of numerous polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons and metals were detected in
surficial soil samples collected from the three source areas at the site. Of these contaminants,
benzo( a)anthracene, benzo(b/k)fluoranthene, benzo( a )pyrene, indeno( 1,2,3-cd)pyrene,
dibenzo(g,h,i)perylene, arsenic and lead were found in the lead oxide unloading area soil samples or
overland drainage soil samples in excess of either the August 1996 EPA Superfund Chemical Data
Matrix (SCDM) human health-based soil screening benchmarks, or the August 1998 North Carolina
Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch soil remediation goals (NC RG's). There are 630 employees
working within 200 feet of source areas at the site.
Though elevated levels of barium, copper, lead, manganese and zinc were identified in the
nearest residential well about 400 feet east of the site, the levels of contaminants did not exceed their
respective EPA Maximum Contaminant Levels, or State of North Carolina 2L groundwater
standards, and are not considered a health risk to residents.
Historic releases of barium and lead were reported in surface water samples collected from
the unnamed tributary below Basin #I. The current analytical results demonstrate an observed release
oflead from the site to surface water at levels that pose a significant threat to a nearby downstream
wetland. In addition, historic releases of phenanthrene, fluorantliene, pyrene, benzo(a)anthracene,
chrysene, benzo(b )fluoranthene, bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, chromium and lead were reported in
sediment samples collected from the unnamed tributary below Basin # I. The current round of
samples showed decreased levels of these contaminants in sediments downstream of the site.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Letter to Mr. Vorsatz
Johnson Controls ESI
September 30, 1998
Page 3.
Based on the analytical results, the site appears to be releasing lead to surface water at
concentrations that could pose a significant threat to a nearby wetland below Basin # I. The NC
Superfund Section therefore recommends this site for further remedial action under CERCLNSARA.
If you have any questions, please contact me at [phone], ext.315
Sincerely,
~~
Douglas Moore
Environmental Chemist
NC Superfund Section
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
EXPANDED SITE INSPECTION
Johnson Controls -Globe Battery Division
NCD 000 770 487
Winston -Salem, Forsyth County, North Carolina
Reference No. 02549
September 1998
Superfund Section
Division of Waste Management
North Carolina Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Prepared by:
£b,;;~tsw~
D~~ore
Environmental Chemist
' -.--!.;, .' _.,,
-R-e../-1M~·ei::._~/...:ed~'~' ::::. 9:-r::::--!:4.. __ ======:--'
Paf DeRosa, Head
Site Evaluation & Removal Branch
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
INTRODUCTION ................................................................ 3
SITE DESCRIPTION ............................................................. 3
2.1 Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2 Site Description ........................................................... 3
2.3 Operational History ........................................................ 7
2.4 Regulatory History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
WASTE/SOURCE SAMPLING .................................................... 10
3. I Source Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
3.1.1 Acid Storage Tank Area .................................................... 12
3 .1.2 Lead Oxide Unloading Dock . .. . .. .. . .. . . . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . . . .. . .. . .. . . 14
3.1.3 Drum Storage Area ........................................................ 15
3.2 Conclusions ............................................................. 15
GROUNDWATER PATHWAY .................................................... 17
4.1 Hydrogeology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
4.2 Groundwater Targets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
4.3 Groundwater Sample Locations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
4.4 Groundwater Analytical Results ............................................. 1°9
4.5 Groundwater Pathway Conclusions ........................................... 21
SURFACE WATER PATHWAY ................................................... 21
5.1 Hydrology ............................................................... 21
5.2 Surface Water Targets ..................................................... 23
5.3 Previous Surface Water Investigations ........................................ 24
5.4 Surface Water Sample Locations ............................................. 24
5.5 Surface Water Pathway Analytical Results ..................................... 27
5.5.1 QA/QC Considerations .................................................... 27
5.5.2 Surface Water Pathway Analytical Results ..................................... 29
5.5.2.1 The Unnamed Tributary below Basin# 1 ....................................... 29
5.5.2.2 The Unnamed Tributary below Basins #2 and #3 ................................ 29
5.5.2.3 Lowery Mill Creek ........................................................ 32
5.5.2.4 Salem Lake .............................................................. 32
5.6 Surface Water Pathway Conclusions ......................................... 34
SOIL EXPOSURE AND AIR PATHWAYS .......................................... 35
6.1 Physical Conditions ....................................................... 35
6.2 Soil Exposure and Air Pathway Targets ....................................... 36
6.3 Previous Soil and Air Sample Investigations .................................... 36
6.4 Soil Exposure and Air Pathway Sample Locations ............................... 37
6.5 Soil Sample Analytical Results .............................................. 37
6.6 Soil Exposure and Air Pathway Conclusions . 38
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 38
PHOTOGRAPHS
APPENDIX A
APPENDIXB
REFERENCES VOLUME I
REFERENCES VOLUME II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
LIST OFT ABLE·
Table I. Invcntrny of Annual Wastcstrcam Shipments for Johnson Controls O 980-J 995) .............. 7
Table 2 Inventrny of Reported Annual Air Emissions for Johnson Controls O 987-1996) .............. 9
Table 3. Source Sample Locations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I 0
Table 4 Source Sample Analytical Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Table 5. Groundwater Population within a 4.0 mile radius ...................................... 19
Table 6. Surface Water Samples -Descriptive Information ...................................... 25
Table 7-1. Surface Water Sample Analytical Results ........................................... 30
Table 7-2. Sediment Sample Analytical Result ................................................ 31
Table 8. Population Estimates within a 4.0 mile radius .......................................... 36
LIST OF FIGURE
I
Figure I -I :24,000 scale T_opographic Map ................................................. 4
I Figure 2 -Site Layout Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
I Figure 3 -1:200 scale Topographic Map .... : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Figure 4-1. Surface Water Pathway Maps ................................................... 18
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1•
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Johnson Controls-Globe Batteiy Division ("Johnson Controls") site is located at 2701
Johnson Controls Road, in a rural area east ofWmston-Salem, Forsyth County, North Carolina. The
plant was constructed in I 978 to manufacture automobile batteries. The site was undeveloped prior
to 1978.
In 1978, Johnson Controls constructed the facility to manufacture, assemble and charge
automobile batteries. By 1984, plant production ranged from 6,000-11,000 batteries per day.
Around 1992, the plant expanded operations with current production estimated at between 14, 000-
22, 000 batteries per day. Raw materials used in the production of batteries include pig lead, lead
oxide, barium sulphate, carbon black and sulfuric acid.
The facility is currently listed as a RCRA large quantity generator. The facility generates
hazardous wastestreams containing antimony, barium, lead and waste petroleum naphtha, which are
shipped off site for treatment or disposal. The wastewater treatment plant process uses sodium
hydroxide to raise the pH, then precipitates with ferrous sulfate, filters to remove the large solids, and
filter presses to produce the lead sludge filter cake. The facility ships filter cake and lead
contaminated solid wastes off-site to lead smelters.
Hazardous wastes generated during the operation are stored at the plant in 5 5 gallon drums
and IO mil polyethylene bags. Hazardous wastes generated at the plant consist of pasting conveyer
belts, floor sweeping compounds, fiber and plastic separators, waste paper toweling, wipe cloths,
cheese cloths, work gloves, whole HEP A filters, fabric bag filters, wastewater treatment plant residue
and wet scrubber (rotoclone) sludge. Wastewater treatment plant residue and rotoclone sludge are
removed on a batch basis and stored in a separate container storage area, and subsequently shipped
to a smelter. Disposal practices prior to 1980 are not well documented. The dry waste is
containerized and segregated in a separate waste storage area, prior to shipment to a smelter.
The facility operates the three surface impoundments for storm water runoff management
under a general stormwater management permit NCG030224, issued on August 20, 1993. The
facility has never been permitted under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. The
facility operates air emissions control equipment under air quality permit #00725R8, issued by the
Forsyth County Environmental Affairs Office. The facility operates under the "synthetic minor
source" category that places maintenance and operation restrictions on the air emissions control
equipment to avoid being subject to Title V of the Clean Air Act. The facility reported at least 13
unperrnitted releases of hazardous substances from the plant to onsite soils or sedimentation basins
since 1979. The facility reported fugitive or stack air emissions of antimony, arsenic, barium, barium
compounds, carbon monoxide, hydrogen gas, lead, lead compounds, nitrogen oxides, selenium,
sulfuric acid and sulfur dioxide.
The site is located near the top of a small hill that slopes northwest toward Lowery Mill Creek
and west toward an unnamed tributary to Lowery Mill Creek. Surface runoff from the facility collects
in catch basins and travels through underground pipes to three splash pads at the heads of three
sedimentation basins along the west boundary of the site. These three basins collect stormwater
runoff from the site which is then discharged to two unnamed tributaries to Lowery Mill Creek.
Lowery Mill Creek flows into Salem Lake.
Approximately 66,767 people are served by a drinking water intake located about 2.1 miles
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
downstream of the site at Salem Lake. People routinely fish at the Old Greensboro Road bridge over
Salem Lake, approximately 0.8 mile downstream of the site. A palustrine scrub-shrub type wetland
exists along the unnamed tributary that connects Basin #1 to Lowery Mill Creek, for 0.25 mile of
wetland frontage, about 1200 feet west of the site. The National Wetland Inventory Maps identify
1.13 miles of wetland frontage bordering Lowery Mill Creek between the confluence of the unnamed
tributary and Salem Lake. Salem Lake has 0.24 miles of marshy wetland frontage at its headwaters
above the Old Greensboro Road bridge. There are approximately 43,662 people within a 4 mile
radius of the site. There are two known drinking water wells within a 0.25 mile radius of the site.
On August 11°13, 1997, the NC Superfimd Section collected soil samples from three source
areas, soil samples in the overland runoff pathway from the site. The three source areas include soils
from an Acid Storage Tank area, a Lead Oxide Unloading area and a Drum Storage Area.
Groundwater samples and numerous surface water and sediment samples downstream of the site were
also collected to characterize any releases from the site that could impact known target receptors.
Elevated levels bf numerous polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons and metals were detected in
surficial soil samples collected from the three source areas at the site. Of these contaminants,
benzo( a)anthracene, benzo(b/k)fluoranthene, benzo( a)pyrene, indeno( 1,2,3-cd)pyrene,
dibenzo(g,h,i)perylene, arsenic and lead were found in the lead oxide unloading area soil samples or
overland drainage soil samples in excess of either the August 1996 EPA Superfund Chemical Data
Matrix (SCDM) human health-based soil screening benchmarks, or the August 1998 North Carolina
Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch soil remediation goals (NC RG's). There are 630 employees
working within 200 feet of source areas at the site.
The NC Superfund Section personnel collected a groundwater sample from the nearest
residence. Though elevated levels of barium, copper, lead, manganese and zinc were identified in
the nearest residential well about 400 feet east of the site, the levels of contaminants did not exceed
their respective EPA Maximum Contaminant Levels, or North Carolina groundwater standards, and
are not considered a health risk to residents. Of these contaminants, elevated levels of lead,
manganese and zinc were also found in onsite source soil samples collected during this investigation.
Historic releases of barium and lead were reported in surface water samples collected from
the unnamed tributary below Basin # 1. The current analytical results demonstrate an observed release
oflead from the site to surface water at levels that pose a significant threat to a nearby downstream
wetland. In addition, historic releases ofphenanthrene, fluoranthene, pyrene, benzo(a)anthracene,
chrysene, benzo(b )fluoranthene, bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, chromium and lead were reported in
sediment samples collected from the unnamed tributary below Basin # I. The current round of
samples showed decreased levels of these contaminants in sediments downstream of the site.
Based on the analytical results, the site appears to be releasing lead to surface water at
concentrations that could pose a significant threat to a nearby wetland below Basin # 1. The NC
Superfund Section therefore recommends this site for further remedial action under CERCLNSARA.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Under authority of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act of 1980 (CERCLA) and the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA),
the NC Superfund Section conducted an Expanded Site Inspection (ESI) at the Johnson Controls-
Globe Battery Division site, 2701 Johnson Controls Road, Winston-Salem, Forsyth County, North
Carolina. The purpose of this investigation was to collect information concerning conditions at the
site sufficient to assess the threat posed to human health and the environment and to determine the
need for additional CERCLNSARA or other appropriate action. The scope of the investigation
included review of available file information, a comprehensive target survey, onsite and offsite
reconnaissances (May 8, 1997, June 3, 1997, July 30, 1997 and March 4, 1998), interviewing
neighbors and collecting environmental samples (August 11-13, 1997).
2.0
2.1
SITE DESCRIPTION
Location
The Johnson Controls-Globe Battery Division ("Johnson Controls") site is located at 2701
Johnson Controls Road, Winston-Salem, Forsyth County, North Carolina (Fig. 1). The coordinates
forthe site are 36° 07' 09" North Latitude and 80° 09' 40" West Longitude (Ref. 1). The two year-
twenty four hour rainfall for Forsyth County averages 3.5 inches (Ref. 2). Normal annual total
precipitation averages 48 inches, while mean annual lake evaporation averages 3 8 inches, therefore,
net annual precipitation averages 10 inches near the site (Ref. 3).
2.2 Site Description
Johnson Controls operates an lead-acid automotive battery manufacturing facility at the 7 5. 15
acre site. The facility consists of a large manufacturing plant, a trailer maintenance building, a battery
storage facility, a concentrated acid storage and acid mixing building, a wastewater pretreatment
system, and offices. The site layout is presented in Figure 2. Asphalt parking surfaces, bare soil,
grass lawn, and woods comprise the soil cover around the facility. A chain link fence encloses the
facility with access controlled by a security guard (Ref 4).
The site is located near the top of a small hill that slopes northwest toward Lowery Mill Creek
and west toward an unnamed tributary to Lowery Mill Creek (Figs. 1, 3). Surface runoff from the
main facility collects in catch basins and travels through underground pipes to three splash pads at
the heads of three sedimentation basins along the west boundary of the site. These three basins
collect storm water runoff from the site, allowing particulates to settle out before being discharged
through a large diameter vertical overflow pipe in the dam to unnamed tributaries (Ref. 4; Fig. 3;
Photos 1-4). Basin # 1 discharges to a small unnamed intermittent tributary that directs runoff
northwest to Lowery Mill Creek. Basins #2 and #3 discharge to a second unnamed intermittent
tributary that directs runoff north to Lowery Mill Creek. The stormwater retention basins lie outside
the fenced areas of the site (Ref. 4). Light commercial industry and residences bound the site along
3
I JOHNSON CO,~TRDLS . ~ I SL! BATTERY DIVIS!□~· I ,no, -JOHNSON CONTROLS DRIVE WlrJSTON-SALEM SITE MAP
1 P.O. BOX i667 I KERNERSVILLE.NC 27285 ' RE:'.'ISIC:U C DATE·: 2/7 /94
TOTAL ~CREAGE ~ 75 !7
BUILDING AREA = 7. 4 A.CR.ES
P.A.RKir..:G LOTS. DRIVES = 9 ACRES
I
TRAILER
PARKING ASPHALT
,s'
"' ~ <
OQ " ~ ~ " "' "' 0
-f-----------= -------"
~---------~ ~f) ? \ ~ ~ ,--CONCENTRATED ,.,, -<t:
0 ACID STORAGE ~ , llJ ACID
f
r' SP
,-r ? GRASS
,-r ?
,s'
WOODS
UNLOAD PO_INT \ ~ X OQ 0 I':
BATTERY \
STORAGE
FACILITY
RD
r'
WOODS
COMPACTOR
BATTERY SHIPPING DOCK
COMPACTOR
r:::;;J
□
ACID MIXING -o O
BUILDING ~ --"',._U)
~
WOODS -J .. . " E
RECYCLI/JG DUMPSTER ~
'....EAD OXIDE IJNLOAO POINT
DUMPSTER
POLY RECEIVING
LEAD RECEIVING-~ LEAD SCRJ..P . · SHIPPING
CAUSTIC POINT
E1'Fl..OYEE PARXI~ LOT AsPtlALT
. TREfS \
. C.-RASS
~ f ~ \ /
? SEDIMENTATION WOODS WOODS BASINS
f -f
J ~OVERFLOW PIPE ~·-
? LSWALE ""
;-./" .-v--
I @)
I
\
,.s-,-r
SP
SEDIMENTATION BASINS ,.s-
SWALE
WOOO':i
WOODS
V\...
PROPANE FILL POINT
L.P.TANKS
"'-·
½.
WOODS
WOODS
SEDIMENTATION
BASINS
--SWALE
LEGEND
SHEET RUNOFF -STORH SEWER
LOCATION WHERE
STORMWATER L:::.WES PROPERTY
* CATCH BASIN
--0--MANHOLE
---0-SEALED MANHOLE
~ SPLASH PAO
o· ~o· 100· L._-1 __
SCALE
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
West Mountain Road and Walkerton-Guthrie Road to the east and south with agriculture to the southwest
(Ref 4; Fig. 1, 3; Photo 5).
2.3 Operational History
In 1978, Johnson Controls constructed the facility to manufacture, assemble and charge
automobile batteries. By 1984, plant production ranged from 6,000-11,000 batteries per day (Ref 5, p.
B-2). Around 1992, the plant expanded operations with current production estimated at between 14,000-
22,000 batteries per day (Ref 4). Raw materials used in the production of batteries include pig lead, lead
oxide, barium sulphate, carbon black and sulfuric acid (Ref 5, pp. B-l ,B-2).
The wastewater pretreatment process uses sodium hydroxide to raise the pH, then precipitates
with ferrous sulfate, filters to remove the large solids, and filter presses to produce the lead sludge filter
cake. The facility ships filter cake and lead contaminated solid wastes off-site to lead smelters (Ref 4).
The treated wastewater is either recycled back through the operation (in the case of the lead oxide mill)
or discharged to the City ofWinston-Salem publicly owned treatment works (POTW) (Ref 4, p. 1).
Hazardous wastes generated during the operation are stored at the plant in 5 5 gallon drums and
10 mil polyethylene bags. Hazardous wastes generated at the plant consist of pasting conveyer belts, floor
sweeping compounds, fiber and plastic separators, waste paper toweling, wipe cloths, cheese cloths, work
gloves, whole HEP A filters, fabric bag filters, wastewater treatment plant residue and wet scrubber
( rotoclone) sludge. Wastewater treatment plant residue and rotoclone sludge are removed on a batch
basis and stored in a separate container storage area, and subsequently shipped to a smelter (Ref 5, pp.
C-1 ). Disposal practices prior to 1980 are not well documented. The dry waste is containerized and
segregated in a separate waste storage area, prior to shipment to a smelter.
Since 1980, the facility has generated and shipped offsite hazardous wastestreams containing
antimony, barium, lead and waste petroleum naphtha. The following table summarizes available file
information on facility shipments.
Table 1.
Inventory of Annual Wastestream Shipments for Johnson Controls (1980-1995)
Total Reported in Pounds Petrolewn
Year Antimony Bariwn (Q005) Lead (Q008) Naphtha !DOOi)
1980 400t 122,000t
1987t 96 31,275t/ 19,434
!988t 120 63,133t/12,500
1989t 120 45,866t I 224
I 990t 250 36,375t/ 250
199It 5 1,035
! 992t 22,298 8,478,886
1993t 21,364 3,444 6,103,721
1994t 6,657,915
I 995t 27,588 8,494,045
1996t 26,130 5,218,077
2,640t
3,520t
t NC RCRA Files -Part A Application (1980), Annual Reports (1987, 1988, 1989, 1990) (Appendix A)
t EPA Toxic Release Inventory Database (1997) (Appendix A)
7
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2.4 Regulatory History
The facility was placed on CERCLIS in August 1980 (Ref 4 7), after filing a RCRA Part A
Application with EPA (Ref 6). On October 8, 1981, the USEP A withdrew the facility from its active
permit file, indicating the site activities no longer involved storage of hazardous wastes (Ref 7). On
November 9, 1981, the USEPA reclassified the site as a generator and interim status storer of
hazardous wastes (Ref 8). On December 2, 1981, a RCRA Interim Status Inspection cited the
facility for failure to maintain personnel training records and job descriptions and failure to adopt an
emergency contingency plan (Ref 9). A December 1984 RCRA Interim Status Inspection noted
surface water runoff as a concern (Ref I 0). Johnson Controls submitted an RCRA Part B application
in I 984 for permission to construct a hazardous waste storage area (Ref 5). Johnson Controls
withdrew its RCRA Part B application opting to establish an alternative means of disposal for
hazardous wastes instead of storing hazardous wastes onsite for more than 90 days (Ref 11 ). The
facility is currently listed as an RCRA large quantity generator (Ref 12).
On May 22, 1984, the North Carolina Superfund Section conducted a Preliminary Assessment
of the facility that recommended no further action under CERCLA (Ref 13). On September 12,
1990, NUS Corporation, under contract with the EPA, conducted a Phase I Site Screening
Investigation of the facility, which recommended the site progress to a Phase II Site Screening
Investigation (SSI) (Ref 10). On May 9, 1991, Greenhorne & O'Mara, Inc., under contract with
North Carolina Superfund Section, conducted a Phase II SST, that included collection and analyses
of nine (9) environmental samples at the site. The Phase II SST identified releases from the site and
recommended that the Johnson Controls site progress to the next phase of the pre-remedial process
(Ref 14). On August 11-13, 1997, the North Carolina Superfund Section conducted an Expanded
Site Inspection (ESI) which included collection of on-site soil samples, off-site surface water and
sediment samples and off-site drinking water well samples (Ref 15).
The facility operates the three surface impoundments for storm water runoff management
under a general stormwater management permit NCG030224, issued by the state on August 20, 1993
(Ref 16). There are no limitations or industry standards stated in the general permit. The facility
uses the sample results to assess the effectiveness of its stormwater management program. The
facility has never been permitted under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (Ref
16).
The facility was granted Industrial User Pre-treatment discharge permit # I 044 beginning
October I, 1978. The permit authorizes discharge of wastewater from the facility pre-treatment
system and sanitary sewer sources. The wastestreams originate from battery wash, laundry, showers
and cooling tower blowdown. The permit places restrictions on levels of copper, lead, nickel,
chromium, cadmium and zinc discharged to the Winston-Salem/Forsyth County publicly owned
treatment works (POTW) (Ref 48).
The facility reported at least 13 unpermitted releases of hazardous substances from the
plant since 1979. In I 979, the company reported a 3,000 gallon spill of sulfuric acid to the plant
8
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
property, which was neutralized, shoveled into steel drums and shipped to a municipal landfill in
Forsyth County. They also reported a release of lead oxide dust covering about I acre which
occurred while changing filter bags from air ventilation equipment at the plant (Ref. 17). On August
11, 1981, approximately 1,000 gallons oflead oxide and lead sulphate containing wastewaters spilled
to sedimentation basin # I (Ref. 17, p. 2) . The facility removed and shipped 324 tons of lead
contaminated soil from the basin and disposed the soil to the RCRA landfill in Pinewood, S.C. (Ref.
18, p. 18). An unknown amount spilled from a leaking valve in a sulfuric acid transfer line in 1996
(Ref 4). According to the EPA's Toxic Release Inventory, the facility reported discharges to surface
water of 250 pounds of lead in 1987, I 00 pounds oflead compounds in 1988, 250 pounds oflead
compounds in 1989, 5 pounds oflead in 1990, 5 pounds of lead compounds in 1991, 1992 and 1993,
and 10 I pounds oflead compounds in 1994. The facility reported a one-time release of 114 pounds
oflead compounds to a surface impoundment in 1995 (Appendix A).
The facility operates air emissions control equipment under air quality permit #00725R8,
issued by the Forsyth County Environmental Affairs Office. The facility operates under the "synthetic
minor source" category that places maintenance and operation restrictions on the air emissions
control equipment to avoid being subject to Title V of the Clean Air Act (Ref. 19). The permit
regulates roughly 49 lead and particulate point source emissions according to lead-acid battery
industry standards (Ref 19, 20). On September 18, 1996, the facility received one violation due to
visible emissions released from a failed baghouse. There are no current violations reported at the
facility (Ref.20).
The facility reported fugitive or stack air emissions of antimony, arsenic, barium, barium
compounds, carbon monoxide, hydrogen gas, lead, lead compounds, nitrogen oxides, selenium,
sulfuric acid and sulfur dioxide. The following table summarizes available information on air emissions
from the facility.
Table 2
Inventory of Reported Annual Air Emissions for Johnson Controls (I 987-1996)
Fugitive Air Emissions (lbs.) Stack Air Emissions (lbs.)
To!!: Sll ];!~ Eb Hz~ Sb Ba Eb H2SQ4 As Se SO2-1:!Qx CQ Hz_
1987t 0.25 ---12 184 4 1,583 0.25
1988t 0.25 ---13 185 4 1,680 0.25
1989t 0.25 ---250 250 4 1,700 0.25
1990t 5 250 4 4.0 1,070 5.0
199It 5 250 I 1.0 610 5.0
1992t 0.25 ---5 250 5 0.25 750
1993t 0.25 0.25 IO 50 0.25 211
1994t 0.25 ---42 50 I 243 0.25
1995t 0.25 ---42 3 243
1996t 56 2 ---390/45It ---0.I4t 0.Qlt 48.lt5.6ITt l.4Tt l,151Tt
T = tons per year
t Forsyth County Environmental Affairs Report, 1996 (Ref. 19) t US EPA Toxic Release Inventory Database, 1997 (Appendix A)
9
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•·
3.0 WASTE/SOURCE SAMPLING
The site layout map depicts three potential source areas identified by the NC Superfund
Section during the onsite reconnaissance and a review of available files (Figur~s 2, 3). These three
sources include contaminated soils at the acid storage tank area, the lead oxidJ unloading area and
I
the drum storage area. All source samples were collected according to the May ) 996 EPA
Environmental Investigations Standard Operating Procedures and Quality ~ssurance Manual.
Johnson Controls, through RMT Consultants of Greenville, S.C, received f Plit samples of all
environmental samples collected during the August 1997 Expanded Site 11spection sampling
investigation (Ref 15). \
The sampling plan was chosen to determine the presence of contaminants at the three I identified potential site source areas (Ref 21 ). Source sample locations are described in Table 3 and
shown in Figure 3. I
Lead deposited by fugitive air emissions easily adsorbs to clay-rich soils. Since air emissions
could influence background soil lead concentrations, the sample plan incorpora!ed a background
location from geologically similar soils least affected by emissions from the site (Ref 5, Page B-6;
Ref 21 ). A background soil sample and duplicate background soil sample were collected from
surficial soils located in a wooded area northwest of the site (Ref 15).
Table 3.
Source Sample Locations
Johnson Controls -Globe Battery Division
Expanded Site Inspection (August 11-13, 1997)
Sample Id# Location Justification Sample Matrix \ Analyses
I
JB-001-SL * NW of facility Background GrabSoil V ,~,!, including
TG:LP metals. I
I
JB-101-SL * NW of facility Split background to Grab Soil V,~,I including
test sample TCLP metals.
handling variability I
JB-003-SL * East of Acid Potential Source and Grab Soil V,S41, including
Mixing Bldg. establish dimensions TC P metals.
JB-004-SL * North of Acid Potential Source and Grab Soil v,sli, including
Mixing Bldg. establish dimensions TCL\P metals.
I
JB-005-SL * Drain, Northeast of Potential Source and Grab Soil V,S,I, including
Acid Storage Bldg. establish dimensions TCLP metals. I
JB-006-SL * Lead Oxide Potential Source Grab Soil V,S,~ including
Unloading Dock TCL~ metals.
10
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-
JB-007-SL * Lead Oxide Potential Source Grab Soil V,S,I including
Unloading Dock TCLP metals
JB-008-SL * Drwn Storage Area Potential Source Grab Soil
\
V,S,1 including
TCLP metals
JB-009-SL * Drwn Storage Area Potential Source Grab Soil I V ,S,J including
TCLP metals
JB-010-SL * NW comer of Acid Attribution Grab Soil V,S,1
Storage Bldg.
JC-011-SL Below Splash Pad at Attribution and Grab Soil I V,S,I
north end offacility Potential Source
JC-012-SL In runoff pathway Attribution and Grab Soil \V,S,I
above Basin 3 Potential Source
JC-013-SL Below Splash Pad Attribution and Grab Soil \V,S,l
above Basin 2 Potential Sow-ce
I
JC-014-SL Below Splash Pad Attribution and Grab Soil r,s,J
above Basin 1 Potential Source
V = Volatile Organics, S = Semi-volatile organics, I= Inorganics
TCLP = Toxicity Characteristics Leaching Procedure
* Sample tracking software required change to field sample numbers prior to CLP lab shipment.
The US EPA arranged for analyses and shipment of all soil samples to laboratones
participating in the US EPA Contract Laboratory Program (CLP). The CLP labdratories analyzed
the soil samples for inorganic analytes (Target Analyte List), purgeable and ex~ractable organics
compounds (Target Compound List), as specified in the CLP Statement of Work. \us EPA Special
Analytical Services requested the CLP laboratory perform Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure
for inorganics (TCLP-Metals) per EPA Method 1311. US EPA Region IV, Sciende and Ecosystem
Support Division (SESD) or its contractors validated and attached Data Qualificir Reports to the
analytical results provided to the NC Superfund Section. Complete copies of the v~lidated data and
Data Qualifier Reports were also provided to Johnson Controls (Ref 22) and arb attached in the
Appendix B of this report. \
EPA considers a contaminant "significantly above background", if detected at concentrations
equal to, or greater than three times the background concentrations, or if detected in\ the sample, but
not detected in the background. Routine sampling and analysis variations can introduce a degree of
error into the analytical data. Data validation checks the usability of the analytical dta for HRS and
identifies the error (bias) present. The validation process assigns qualifiers, such Js "J", to biased
data. For example, "J" qualified results indicate the sample concentrations are estimated, but may be
used to determine an observed release. Where "J" qualified results are reported,\EPA guidance
directs the user to detennine the actual sample bias for that compound and arithmetically manipulate
the sample results by a predetennined factor, if appropriate. The new results are then\used to decide
if the compound in question is "significantly above background". The EPA guidance on using "J"
qualified data is attached as Ref 23 . Where multiple background samples were 1collected, the
1 1
I
I
I
I
I
D
I
I
I
I
g
H
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
determination whether contaminants detected were "significantly above backgroun " was made based
on the higher concentration of the detected contaminant in either of the backgrohnd sample(s).
The initial data review revealed quality control problems with the T AL anal~es generated for
onsite soil samples by the CLP laboratory (Ref 24). The US EPA Region IV requested the CLP
laboratory generate a new chain-of-custody, and submit the samples to the Scienpe and Ecosystem
Support Division (SESD) inorganics laboratory in Athens, Georgia for reanalyses. The CLP
laboratory reanalyzed the original extracts using furnace atomic absorption for 1Jad only, and then
submitted the samples and new sample results to EPA SESD-Athens. Both the C~P laboratory and
EPA-SESD maintained proper chain-of-custody for the onsite soil samples (Ref :115). EPA-SESD
reanalyzed the samples for T AL inorganics in the Athens, Georgia laboratory following EPA standard
laboratory procedures (Ref 26). A copy of all three sets of analytical results is attached in Appendix
B. EPA-SESD validated the T AL sample results and submitted the results to t~e NC Superfund . I
Section for review. No significant quality control problems were noted in the T AL sample results
submitted by EPA-SESD. The EPA SESD instructed the NC Superfund Section \to use the SESD
analytical results for evaluating TAL contaminants in onsite soil samples (Appendix B).
3.1 Source Areas
3.1.1 Acid Storage Tank Area
As noted previously, the facility reported at least two spills of sulfuric acid at the facility. In
I 979, the company reported a 3,000 gallon spill of sulfuric acid to the plant proJerty, which was
neutralized, shoveled into steel drums and shipped to a municipal landfill (Ref 1\7). The facility
remediated the I 996 spill by lime application to surface soil, but did not excavate c<l>ntaminated soil
due to the small scale (Ref 4, p. 2). A composite surface soil sample (JC-SS-02) c~llected near the
acid storage tank area in I 992 exhibited elevated levels of arsenic and calcium, compared with the
background soil sample (JC-SS-01). A soil boring, advanced to 11 feet below gra~e near the acid
storage area (JC-SB-02) in 1992, also exhibited elevated concentrations of arsenic and calcium,
compared with the background soil boring (JC-SB-OJ) (Ref 14, p.2, Table I, Figu~e 2).
On August 13, 1997, the NC Superfund Section collected surface soil graJ samples in the
vicinity of the Acid Storage Area (JB-010-SL), the Acid Transfer Line (JB-003tSL), the Acid
Mixing/Formation Area (JB-004-SL), and at the head of a drainage pipe between the Acid Storage
and Battery Storage Areas (JB-005-SL) (Table 3; Figure 3). The samples were tollected using
precleaned stainless steel sampling scoops and pyrex pans. The soil types varied frorri a light brown,
medium to coarse-grained sand to a dark brown, fine-grained silty sand or clayey sa~d (Ref 15, p.
17-19; Photos 7, 13).
On August 13, I 997, the NC Superfund Section collected a background surface1 soil grab (JB-
00 I-SL) sample from a wooded area, approximately 800 feet northwest of the main facility. The soil
background soil sample was collected from a location least likely to be affected by dmissions from
the site and from a soil profile similar to source soil samples collected at the site\ A duplicate
background surface soil grab sample (JB-10 !-SL) was collected from the same locatioA to determine
the amount of sample handling variability. The soil type was medium brown, fine to m~dium-grained
silty sand (Ref I 5, p. 17; Photo 6). As shown in Table 4, eighteen inorganic analytes were
12
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 4.
Source Sample Analytical Results -Expanded Site Inspection (August 11-13, 1997)
Johnson Controls -Globe Battery Division (NCO 000 770 487)
Background Soil Acid Storage Area Lead Oxide Unloading
Analv1e Units JB-001-SL JB-101-SL JB-003-SL JB-004-SL JB-005-SL JB-010-SL JB-006-SL JB-007-SL
Toluene uo/ka 11 U 11 U 13 U 16 U 11 U 13 U 16 U 12 U
Acenaohthene ua/ka 370 U 370 UJ 440 U 540 UJ 370 UJ 420 U 510 U 64 J
Dibenzofuran ua/ka 370 U 370 UJ 440 U 540 UJ 370 UJ 420 U 510 U 47 J
Fluorene ua/ka 370 U 370 UJ 440 U 540 UJ 370 UJ 420 U 510 U 100 J
Phenanthrene ua/ka 370 U 370 UJ 440 U 540 UJ 370 UJ 420 U 460 J ~~4i:3~200.
Anthracene ua/ka 370 U 370 UJ 440 U 540 UJ 370 UJ 420 U 510 U 200 J
Fluoranthene ua/ka 370 U 370 UJ 440 U 160 J 370 UJ 54 J ~1,soo ~41600
Pvrene ua/ko 370 U 370 UJ 440 U 130 J 370 UJ 45 J ~1~400 ~5!900
Benzo(a )anthracene ua/kg 370 U 370 UJ 440 U 68 J 370 UJ 420 U li!,~6JQ , C.iil":2;;3_00
Chrvsene ua/ka 370 U 370 UJ 440 U 190 J 370 UJ 420 U &~1f300 ~4f300
Benzo(b/klfluoranthe ua/ka 370 U 370 UJ 440 U 280 J 370 UJ 420 UJ ' "Y2-,809, ~:.;Ef8,!l.®
Benzo(a)pvrene uo/kg 370 U 370 UJ 440 U 74 J 370 UJ 420 UJ :::C~J,\k1'i!).ll0 ; ;',j:-;;Jil3,!IO_O
lndeno(1,2,3-cd)ovre ua/ka 370 U 370 UJ 440 U 540 UJ 370 UJ 420 UJ i-<~.8JO l,i,1:,l!ll2\900
Dibenzo<a, h)anthrar ua/ka 370 U 370 UJ 440 U 540 UJ 370 UJ 420 UJ 220 J : '..;.,'7!11)
Benzo1n,h,ilnervlene uo/ko 370 U 370 UJ 440 U 540 UJ 370 UJ 420 UJ :'%-~~870 :Jli.~3;JOO
Carbazole ua/ka 370 U 370 UJ 440 U 540 UJ 370 UJ 420 U 95 J ir.~~:690
Background Soil Acid Storage Area Lead Oxide Unloading
Analvte Units JB-001-SL JB-101-SL JB-003-SL JB-004-SL JB-005-SL JB-010-SL JB-006-SL JB-007-SL
Aluminum mo/kn 17,000.00 16,000.00 22,000.00 34,000.00 37,000.00 31,000.00 45,000.00 47,000.00
Antimonv mo/ko 8.0 U 8.0 U 12 U 12 U 16 U 12 U 16 U 16 U
Arsenic mo/ka 2.60 2.50 2.10 4.30 5.20 6.80 ~9r,40 7.20
Barium ma/ka 88.00 88.00 90.00 130.00 120.00 100.00 130.00 150.00
Bervllium ma/ka 1.0 U 1.0 U 1.5 U 1.5 U 2.0 U 1.5 U 2.0 U 2.0 U
Cadmium ma/ka 1.0 U 1.0 U 1.5 U 1.5 U 2.0 U 1.5 U 2.0 U 2.0 U
Calcium ma/ka 440.00 420.00 ~'½3)000'00 ~2,,100,00 e'~S;B00\00 1,100.00 ~9'.000:00 ~21200;00
Chromium ma/ka 36.00 35.00 34.00 41.00 38.00 48.00 48.00 40.00
Cobalt ma/ka 12.00 13.00 12.00 15.00 8.60 16.00 14.00 16.00
Conner ma/ka 21.00 21.00 32.00 44.00 40.00 24.00 45.00 40.00
Iron ma/ka 20,000.00 20,000.00 31,000.00 36,000.00 32,000.00 35,000.00 50,000.00 43,000.00
Lead ma/kg 27.00 25.00 13.00 ~130,QO 23.00 32.00 · ·:31300:00 " 1180();0!)
Mannesium mo/ko 2,400.00 2,400.00 6,600.00 4,900.00 5,100.00 2,700.00 4,100.00 5,000.00
Man□anese mo/ko 320.00 340.00 710.00 ~1ftoo:oo 390.00 720.00 860.00 ~1~200l00
Total Mercurv mo/ko 0.05 U 0.05 U 0.05 U 0.05 U 0.05 U 0.05 U ~0;07, 0.05 U
Molvbdenum mo/ko 2.0 U 2.0 U 3.0 U ~4120 ~.8120 3.0 U 4.0 U 4.0 U
Nickel mo/ka 9.20 9.30 16.00 19.00 15.00 14.00 21.00 20.00
Potassium ma/ka 1,800.00 1,800.00 3,300.00 3,400.00 5,100.00 2,800.00 3,300.00 ill/!5)500!00
Selenium ma/ka 8.0 U 8.0 U 15 U 15 U 16 U 12 U 25 U 16 U
Silver ma/ka 2.0 U 2.0 U 3.0 U 3.0 U 4.0 U 3.0 U 4.0 U 4.0 U
Sodium ma/ka 200 U 200 U ~600!00 300 U 400 U 300 U !jjf,1i200l00 400 U
Strontium ma/ka 5.60 5.40 16.00 11.00 ~;26100 4.00 ,~24100 15.00
Tellurium ma/ka 10 U 10 U 15 U 15 U 20 U 15 U 20 U 20 U
Thallium ma/ka 20 U 20 U 30 U 30 U 40 U 30 U 40 U 40 U
Tin ma/ka 5.0 U 6.5 U 7.8 U 7.5 U 10 U 7.5 U 10 U 10 U
Titanium ma/ka 1,100.00 1,200.00 1,900.00 1,600.00 1,400.00 1,300.00 1,400.00 2,100.00
Vanadium ma/ka 48.00 48.00 78.00 85.00 77.00 78.00 110.00 86.00
Yttrium ma/ka 10.00 11.00 12.00 23.00 8.60 17.00 17.00 18.00
Zinc ma/ka 33.00 33.00 61.00 fi:~14.0100 68.00 ';i',,~430:00 ~300:00 ~160'.00
(A)= EPA guidance: cleanup @ 400 mg/kg (areas of child exposure), >5000 mg/kg (in other areas where contact less likely)
Shading indicates a result significantly above the associated background levels or using EPA guidance (Ref. 23).
Bold indicates result exceeding it's associated EPA Superfund Chemical Data Matrix (SCDM) benchmark (Ref. 27).
U = Not Detected
J = Estimated Value
NA = Not Analysed
Former Drum Storage
JB-008-SL JB-009-SL JC-014-SL
2J 11 U 11 U
350 U 360 U 44 J
350 U 360 U 370 U
350 U 360 U 65 J
350 U 360 U ~17700
350 U 360 U 110 J
54 J 360 U -5 '400
50 J 360 U ~2;900
350 U 360 U . <,t4-""I H2!l!l
42 J 360 U -2~300
350 U 360 U ~ :~4;~00
350 U 360 U ,, l!.;;-1.l~!l.ll.O
350 U 360 U ·:;t•\tt\j;.;g!O
350 U 360 U 270 J
350 U 360 U ~'-i!:R!860
350 U 360 U 390 J
Former Drum Storage
JB-008-SL JB-009-SL JC-014-SL
30,000.00 23,000.00 20,000.00
12 U 12 U 2.4 J
4.10 1.80 1.7 U
180.00 130.00 84.00
1.5 U 1.5 U 0.91 J
1.5 U 1.5 U 0.25 U
850.00 880.00 720.00
25.00 22.00 38.00
13.00 11.00 14.00
29.00 23.00 25.00
32,000.00 26,000.00 25,000.00
~-~'794'00 80.00 E.-"i.190!00
5,400.00 3,900.00 3,000.00
~~1~500)00 w:1~,100100 560.00
0.05 U 0.05 U 0.12 U
3.0 U 3.0 U NA
14.00 14.00 16.00
!'.i.i.S:900,00 4,500.00 2,800.00
12 U 12 U 1.2 U
3.0 U 3.0 U 0.53 J
300 U 300 U 180 J
6.10 4.70 NA
15 U 15 U NA
30 U 30 U 1.5 J
15 U 7.5 U NA
2.400.00 1,600.00 NA
57.00 49.00 51.00
22.00 19.00 NA
88.00 77.00 72.00
EPA SCDM NC RG's
(Ref. 27) (Ref. 28)
I
I
3,100 mg/ki 620 mg/kg
2,300 mg/ki 460 mg/kg
0.88 mg/kg 0.88 mg/kg
88 mg/kg 88 mg/kg
0.8~ mg/kg 0.88 mg/kg
0.0~8 mg/k10.088 mg/kg
0.88 mg/kg 0.88 mg/kg
0.088 mg/k1 0.088 mg/kg
32.0 mg/kg
EPA SCDM NC RG's
(Ref. 27) (Ref. 28)
0.43 mg/kg 4.6 mg/kg
-----(A) 400 mg/kg
11,000 mg/I
23.0 mg/kg 4.6 mg/kg
390 mg/kg
47,000 mg/I
23,000 mg/14,600 mg/kg
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
reported in the two background soil samples. The low variability noted between the two background
soil samples (less then 20"/o Relative Percent Deviation in all 18 analytes) provides evidence of good
field soil sampling technique, and suggests a strong confidence in the laboratory analytical precision
for the soil matrix (Appendix B).
Compared to the background soil samples, the surficial soil grab sample (JB-003-SL)
exhibited elevated levels of calcium (3,000 mg/kg) and sodium (600 mg/kg) near a historic spill at the
Acid Transfer Line. Compared to the background soil samples, surficial soil grab sample (JB-004-
SL) exhibited elevated levels of calcium (2,100 mg/kg), lead (130 mg/kg), manganese (1;100 mg/kg),
molybdenum (4.2 mg/kg) and zinc (140 mg/kg) in a drainage swale near the Acid Mixing/Formation
Area. Compared to the background soil samples, surficial soil grab sample (JB-005-SL) exhibited
elevated levels of calcium (5,800 mg/kg), molybdenum (8.2 mg/kg) and strontium (26 mg/kg) at the
head of a drainage pipe between the Acid Storage and Battery Storage Areas. Compared to the
background soil samples, surficial soil grab sample (JB-010-SL) exhibited an elevated level of zinc
(430 mg/kg) at the comer of the Acid Storage Building. None of the contaminant concentrations
found in these samples exceed the August 1996 EPA Superfund Chemical Data Matrix (SCDM)
human health-based soil screening benchmarks, or the North Carolina Inactive Hazardous Sites
Branch soil remediation goals (NC RG's) (Refs. 27, 28). The sample points covered an triangularly
shaped area 50 feet x 150 feet x 150 feet, or 3,454 square feet (Fig. 3; Ref. 15)
Overland runoff from this area is directed north underneath the main facility to a splash pad
where it discharges to surface soils (Fig. 2) . From there, the overland runoff crosses open grass-
covered soil for about 100 yards to a culvert that directs the drainage under an asphalt drive. The
culvert discharges to a drainage swale that directs the runoff for another 100 yards to Basin 3. Two
surface soil grab samples were collected in the overland runoff pathways between the Acid Storage
Area and Basin 3-one soil sample about 25 feet below the splash pad, north of the main facility (JC-
011-SL), and a second soil sample about 10 feet downgradient of the culvert of the asphalt drive (JC-
012-SL) (Table 3; Figure 3; Ref. 15, pp. 17-18). The soil collected below the splash pad was a light
brown, fine to medium-grained sand deposited in two small bars in the overland runoff pathway. The
soil collected below the culvert was a red-brown, silty clay with little fine to medium-grained sand
deposited in a small bar formed by an eddy current below a pile of vegetation (Ref. 15). Compared
to the background soil samples, no elevated levels of either TCL or T AL contaminants were identified
in the soil grab samples from the overland runoff pathway connecting the north end of the facility to
Basin 3 (Appendix B; Table 4; Photos 14, 15).
3.1.2 Lead Oxide Unloading Dock
Lead oxide is unloaded from train cars or trucks at the east side of the main facility (Ref. 4;
Fig. 2). Prior to the ESI, no samples had been collected near the lead oxide unload point. In 1980,
the facility reportedly used the area for hazardous waste storage (Ref. 7, p. 13).
According to the Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology, the following metals
are reportedly present in lead alloys used in automotive batteries: antimony, arsenic, barium, calcium,
14
n
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
n
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
runoff pathway that discharges to Basin I (Appendix B; Table 4).
The levels ofbenzo(a)anthracene, benzo(b/k)fluoranthene, benzo(a)pyrene and indeno (1,2,3-
cd)pyrene found in the overland runoff pathway soil sample exceeds either the August I 996 EPA
Superfund Chemical Data Matrix (SCDM) human health-based soil screening benchmarks, or the
August 1998 North Carolina Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch soil remediation goals (NC RG's)
(Refs. 27, 28). Results exceeding EPA SCDM benchmarks are highlighted in bold above and in Table
4.
3.1.3 Drum Storage Area
In 1980, the facility reportedly stored hazardous waste at the southeast corner of the site (Ref.
7, p. 13). In a May 1991 reconnaissance, Greenhorne and O'Mara, Inc. noted that materials such as
plastic battery cases, aluminum flake paste, battery terminals, 55-gallon drums of petroleum-based
lubricants and broken battery parts were stored in this area (Ref. 14, p. 4). A composite soil sample
collected at that time near a loading dock/drum storage area (JC-SS-03) exhibited elevated levels of
calcium and lead (Ref. 14, p. 2, Table I, Figure 2).
On August 13, I 997, the NC Superfund Section collected two surface soil grab samples (JB-
008-SL and JB-009-SL) from the former drum storage area (Table 3; Figure 3). The soil in this area
was light brown, fine to medium-grained sand or silty sand (Ref. 15, p. 21; Photos 11, 12).
Compared to the background soil samples, the surface soil grab sample (JB-008-SL) exhibited
elevated levels oflead (94 mg/kg), manganese (1,500 mg/kg) and potassium (6,900 mg/kg) near the
railroad tracks. Likewise, the surface soil grab sample (JB-009-SL) exhibited elevated levels of
manganese (1,100 mg/kg) near a yellow fire hydrant (Appendix B; Ref. 15, p. 21). None of the
contaminant concentrations found in this area exceed the August 1996 EPA Superfund Chemical
Data Matrix (SCDM) human health-based soil screening benchmarks, or the August I 998 North
Carolina Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch soil remediation goals (NC RG's) (Refs. 27, 28). The
sample points cover an area 200 feet long by 10 feet wide, or 2,000 square feet (Figure 3; Ref. 15,
p. 21).
3.2 Conclusions
The August 1997 analytical results found elevated levels of phenanthrene, fluoranthene,
pyrene, benzo(a)anthracene, chrysene, benzo(b/k)fluoranthene, benzo(a)pyrene, indeno(l,2,3-
cd)pyrene, benzo(g,h,i)perylene, carbazole, arsenic, calcium, lead, manganese, total mercury,
molybdenum, potassium, sodium, strontium and zinc in surficial soil samples collected from three
source areas at the site. Of these contaminants, benzo(a)anthracene, benzo(b/k)fluoranthene,
benzo(a)pyrene, indeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene, dibenzo(g,h,i)perylene, arsenic and lead found in the lead
oxide unloading area soil samples exceed either the August 1996 EPA Superfund Chemical Data
Matrix (SCDM) human health-based soil screening benchmarks, or the August 1998 North Carolina
Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch soil remediation goals (NC RG's).
16
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I .~
I
I
I
A soil sample from the overland runoff pathway connecting the site to Basin 1 exhibited
elevated levels of phenanthrene, fluoranthene, pyrene, benzo(a)anthracene, chrysene,
benzo(b/k)fluoranthene, benzo(a)pyrene, indeno(l ,2,3-cd)pyrene , benzo(g,h,i)perylene and lead.
The levels of benzo(a)anthracene, benzo(b/k)fluoranthene, benzo(a)pyrene and indeno (1,2,3-
cd)pyrene exceed either the August 1996 EPA Superfund Chemical Data Matrix (SCDM) human
health-based soil screening benchmarks, or the August 1998 No.rth C\lrolina Inactive Hazardous Sites
Branch soil remediation go~ls (NC RG's). ;,:
4.0 GROUNDWATER PATHWAY
4.1 Hydrogeology
Forsyth County is located in the Milton Belt of the Piedmont Physiographic Province (Ref.
30). The Piedmont Province is typically underlain by three zones; (I) a regolith zone (2) a transition
zone and (3) underlying fractured crystalline bedrock. The regolith zone is composed of saprolite
( clay rich residual materials derived from inplace weathering of bedrock), alluvium ( deposits of
unconsolidated sediments by streams and rivers) and soil (the uppermost layer called the natural
medium for plant growth) (Ref. 31, p. 7-8). The transition zone is where the unconsolidated material
grades into bedrock consisting primarily of saprolite and partially weathered bedrock (Ref. 31, p. 9).
The fractured bedrock has a crystalline texture with many closely spaced fractures near the bedrock
surface. Fracture frequency and size decrease with depth due to increasing lithostatic pressure (Ref.
31, p. 20). Biotite gneiss and schists comprise the bedrock of the Milton Belt (Ref. 30).
Recharged by rainfall, groundwater stores in the regolith zone and gradually percolates into
the transition and fractured bedrock zones (Ref. 31 ). Both the transition zones and the fractured
bedrock zones act as transfer zones for groundwater. However, most wells are cased beyond the
transition zone into bedrock (Ref. 31 ). The fractures in the bedrock act as conduits that serve to
transfer water to discharge points such as wells (Ref. 31 ).
The depth to groundwater under the site is about 60 feet below grade, based on the difference
between the onsite surface elevation (903 feet ams!) and the elevation of the closest known
groundwater seep (844 feet ams!) (Figures 3, 4-1 ). A nearby resident, Mr. Otis Crews, reported the
depth to groundwater in his well at 50 feet below land surface (Ref. 15, p. 20). Groundwater flow
would be expected to follow gravity and topography from areas of high to low elevation.
Groundwater at the site is expected to flow west and north towards the unnamed tributaries of
Lowery Creek and Lowery Creek (Figure 2).
4.2 Groundwater Targets
Most of the residents within a 4.0 mile radius of the site obtain their water from the Winston-
Salem/Forsyth County Water System. Forsyth County operates a surface water intake at the Salem
Lake dam, approximately 2.1 miles downstream of the site, that provides the drinking water for the
17
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Winston-Salem/Forsyth County municipal system (Ref. 32; Fig. 1; Photo 34). The system provides
drinking water for the city of Winston-Salem, the towns of Clemmons, Kernersville and Rural Hall
and for parts of rural Forsyth County (Ref 32).
The city of Walkertown obtains drinking water from groundwater wells located between 3
and 4 miles from the site. The municipal water system collects groundwater from four wells,
screened at 175 feet and deeper. The Winston-Salem/Forsyth County municipal water system
provides a backup supply for the city of Walkertown (Ref. 33; Fig. 1). The Yorktown Subdivision
operates a community well that serves 274 residents, approximately 2.6 miles southwest of the site.
The Green Acres Mobile Home Court operates a community well that serves 40 residents,
approximately 3.8 miles north of the site (Ref 49).
A windshield survey and review of the available Forsyth County Water Line maps identified
three wells within a 0.5 mile radius of the site that currently use groundwater as their drinking water
supply. The number of houses within a 0.5 -4.0 mile radius that depend on private groundwater
wells for their drinking water supplies was estimated by multiplying the number of houses in this
sector that do not have access to municipal water supply lines by 2.40, the 1990 US Census average
of persons per household for Forsyth County (Ref. 34; Figure 1). The nearest well is adjacent to the
Henry Moore residence at 263 5 West Mountain Road, approximately 400 feet east of the site (Ref.
15, p. 20; Figure 3).
Table 5. Groundwater Population within a 4.0 mile radius
Radius Private Well, Pop. Community Well, Pop. Total GW Population
0 -0.25 mile 2 0 2
0.25 -0.50 mile 3 0 3
0.50 -1.0 mile 22 0 22
1.0 -2.0 miles 382 0 382
2.0 -3.0 miles 514 274 788
3 .0 -4.0 miles 233 3,801 4,034
4.3 Groundwater Sample Locations
No groundwater monitoring wells are at the site, and no groundwater samples have been
collected during previous investigations of the facility.
On August 13, 1997, the NC Superfund Section collected two groundwater samples from two
nearby drinking water wells. The first sample (JC-00 I-PW) was collected from the Henry Moore
residence at 2635 West Mountain Road, about 400 feet east of the facility. The second sample (JC-
002-PW) was collected from the Otis Crews residence, about 2100 feet southwest of the facility. The
19
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Superfund Section purged both wells for 15 minutes before sampling the groundwater, and field
tested the samples for pH, conductivity, temperature, turbidity and total dissolved solids (TDS) (Ref
15, p. 20; Figure 4-1 ).
On August 13, 1997, the NC Superfund Section collected a water sample from a groundwater
spring located about 1200 feet west and downgradient of the facility (Figure 4-1 ). The spring sample
was collected to determine if groundwater below the facility was discharging contaminants to the
surface water pathway. Due to the low discharge rate from the spring, the sample was collected by
digging a 2-foot diameter basin in the overland runoff path below the spring to collect the runoff
After recharging the collection basin long enough to settle the solids, the Superfund Section collected
an aqueous sample (JC-005-SW). After sampling, the aqueous sample from the basin was field tested
for pH, conductivity, temperature, turbidity and TDS. A soil sample was collected of a shallow bar
located in the overland path below the spring, following collection of the aqueous samples. The soil
was an olive-gray, medium to fine-grained sand and silt mix with a moderate organic content and a
slight decay odor. The soil sample was labeled "JC-005-SD" (Ref 15, p. 12, 15, 16; Photo 21 ).
4.4 Groundwater Analytical Results
Numerous quality control samples were collected during the sampling event to verify the
integrity ofthe sampling and handling procedures. A pre-preservative blank (JC-001-PB) and post-
preservative blank (JC-002-PB) were prepared in the field to determine if any Target Analyte List
contaminants were introduced into the aqueous samples during preservation. The analytical results
did not detect any Target Analyte List inorganic contaminants at concentrations above the contract
required detection limits in the preservative blanks. Two sets of volatile organic aqueous trip blanks
(JC-00 I-TB and JC-002-TB) were prepared in the field prior to sampling. The trip blanks were
placed inside each of the sampling vans to determine if any volatile organic contaminants were
introduced into the samples during the entire sampling trip. The analytical results did not detect any
Target Compound List volatile organic contaminants at concentrations above the contract required
detection limits. A volatile organic soil trip blank (JC-003-TB) was prepared before arrival at the
site. The soil trip blank was prepared following EPA procedures using oven-baked play sand and
organic free water. The trip blank was placed inside a sampling team van to identify any Target
Compound List volatile organic contaminants introduced into the soil samples during the sampling
event. The analytical results detected a qualitative hit of toluene at a concentration (2 Jug/kg) below
the contract required detection limit (IO U ug/kg). Overall, the quality control samples verify that
Target Analyte List and Target Compound List contaminants were not introduced into the aqueous
samples during the sample event (Ref 15, pp. 1-2; Appendix B).
Compared to the background private well sample collected at the Otis Crews residence (JC-
002-PW), a drinking water well sample (JC-00 I-PW) collected from the Henry Moore residence well
exhibited elevated levels of barium (31 ug/1), copper ( 490 ug/1), lead (I I ug/1), zinc (26 ug/1) and
manganese (8 J ug/1). The well sample from the Henry Moore residence exhibited a pH of6.02@
19.9 ° Celsius, a specific conductivity of 57.1 uS, TDS of 28.0 mg/I, and turbidity of 0.4
Nephelometric Turbidity Units (NTU). None of the contaminants exceed their current August 1996
20
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
EPA SCDM drinking water benchmarks, or State of North Carolina groundwater standards (Table
7-1; Appendix B; Refs. 27, 35).
Compared to the background surface water sample from the unnamed tributary (JC-00 I-SW),
an elevated concentration of vanadium (6 J ug/1) was detected in the aqueous sample (JC-005-SW)
collected below the spring. The concentration of vanadium found in the spring sample does not
exceed the applicable August 1996 EPA Superfund Chemical Data Matrix benchmark. There are
no current State of North Carolina groundwater standards for vanadium (Ref 35). The aqueous
sample from the spring exhibited a pH of 6. 78 @23. I ° Celsius, a specific conductivity of 79. 5 uS,
TDS of 41.6 mg/I, and turbidity of 5.1 Nephelometric Turbidity Units (NTU) (Table 7-1; Appendix
B; Ref 15; Ref 27). No elevated levels of T AL or TCL analytes were detected in the soil sample
(JC-005-SD) collected below the spring (Table 7-2).
4.5 Groundwater Pathway Conclusions
On August 13, 1997, The NC Superfund Section personnel collected a groundwater sample
from the nearest residence (JC-001-PW). Compared to the background well sample, elevated levels
of barium, copper, lead, manganese and zinc were identified in the nearest residential well about 400
feet east of the site. Of these contaminants, elevated levels of lead, manganese and zinc were also
found in onsite source soil samples collected during this investigation. Fortunately, the levels of
contaminants did not exceed their respective EPA SCDM drinking water benchmarks, or State of
North Carolina groundwater standards. Results of well samples were reviewed by a toxicologist with
the North Carolina Occupational and Environmental Epidemiology Section, who concluded that the
water should be considered safe for drinking, cooking and bathing purposes. The well owners were
notified of the results and recommendation for continued normal usage (Ref 36).
Since the nearest well could not be visually observed (i.e. a subsurface buried wellhead), relevant
information on the well construction method could not be obtained. Due to its age, there was no
available well log information filed with the NC groundwater section. Therefore, it is not clear
whether the contaminants resulted from degradation of materials used in the construction of the older
well, or whether they originally migrated from the site. The spring sample contained an elevated level
of vanadium. Since vanadium was not detected in onsite sources or in surface water runoff samples
from the site, it is not believed to have migrated from the site.
5.0 SURFACE WATER PATHWAY
5.1 Hydrology
The site is located near the top of a small hill that slopes northwest toward Lowery Mill Creek
and west toward an unnamed tributary to Lowery Mill Creek (Figs. I, 3, 4-1 ). Surface runoff from
the main facility collects in catch basins and travels through underground pipes to three splash pads
at the heads of three sedimentation basins along the west boundary of the site. These three basins
collect storm water runoff from the site, allowing particulates to settle out before being discharged
21
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
through large diameter vertical overflow pipes in each dam to unnamed tributaries (Ref 4; Fig. 3;
Photos 1-4). Basin # 1 discharges to a small unnamed intermittent tributary that directs runoff
northwest to Lowery Mill Creek. Basins #2 and #3 discharge to a second unnamed intermittent
tributary that directs runoff north to Lowery Mill Creek. The stormwater retention basins lie outside
the fenced areas of the site (Ref 4).
The three sediment collection basins are located on the slope of the small hill, immediately
downgradient of the site (Figs 3, 4-1 ). Consequently, the two tributaries that receive drainage from
these basins follow the decline of the slope with flow concentrated in irregularly shaped, deeply
carved, permanent channels. Since the recharge area draining into these channels near the site is small
and interrupted by the sedimentation basins, the flow of water into these tributaries is intermittent.
However, the grade of the channel creates enough current to transport most of the finer-grained
sediments downgrade to the transition zone near the bottom of the hill. The transition zone is marked
by a change in the grade of the hill, reducing the current energy. At these transition zones, the
intermittent tributaries deposit the finer-grained sediments in the original stream channel, filling the
original stream bed and creating a braided stream that exhibits an irregular sheet flow pattern (Photo
22). These transition zones correspond to wetland areas shown in Figures 3 and 4-1. There is
sufficient upland drainage area above the transition zones to create perennial flow within the
wetlands (Figure 4-1 ).
On June 3, 1997, Mr. John Thomas of the United States Army Corps of Engineers, surveyed
the two main tributaries below sedimentation Basins # 1, # 2 and # 3. Mr. Thomas identified two
wetland areas with boundaries originating near the general transition zones (Ref 37, 38; Figure 4-1).
The wetland area boundaries occur very close to the 100 year floodplain boundary for Lowery Mill
Creek (Ref 39). Mr. Thomas concluded that jurisdictional wetlands are present at these locations.
Under current EPA policy, the probable point of entry (PPE) of contamination to surface water
begins at the head of either wetland along the tributaries. The flow in either of the two first segments
averages 1.0 cubic feet per second (cfs). Runoff from Basin #1 travels about 1,200 feet overland to
the first PPE (PPE1), and about 900 feet from Basins #2 and #3 to the second PPE (PPE2) (Figure
4-1).
The highest scoring overland flow pathway was used to evaluate the site --from Basin # I to
the first PPE (PPE1). The first segment of the surface water pathway would therefore extend from
the beginning of the wetland downstream 0.13 miles from PPE1 to the mouth of the unnamed
tributary on Lowery Mill Creek.
The second segment of the surface water pathway continues along Lowery Mill Creek, and
extends 0.6 miles downstream to the headwaters of Salem Lake, near the Old Greensboro Road
bridge (Figures 1; 4-1 ). Lowery Mill Creek exhibits a characteristic meandering pattern common to
mature streams with strongly eroded banks and deep pools on the outer bends and depositional point
bars on the inside of the bends (Photo 28). Each bend of the meander is typically separated by a riffle.
The flow within the second segment averages 9.0 cfs. Lowery Mill Creek is a class WS-III stream,
protected as a water supply and suitable for aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife,
22
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
secondary recreation, and agriculture (Ref 40, 41 ).
The third segment of the surface water pathway begins at the headwaters of Salem Lake near
the Old Greensboro Road bridge and extends 1.4 miles downstream to the Salem Lake Dam. Salem
Lake is a Class WS-III lake, protected as a water supply and suitable for aquatic life propagation and
survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation, and agriculture. Salem Lake discharges to Salem
Creek with a flow estimated to be 27 cfs (Ref 40, 41 ).
The fourth segment of the surface water pathway begins in Salem Creek below the Salem
Lake Dam and extends 12. 9 miles downstream to the end of the 15 mile target distance limit. Salem
Creek is a Class C water suitable for aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary
recreation, and agriculture. The flow for this segment was estimated to be 71 cfs near the end of the
segment (Ref 40, 41 ).
5.2 Surface Water Targets
Forsyth County operates a surface water intake at the Salem Lake dam, approximately 2.1
miles downstream of PPE1, that provides the drinking water for the Winston-Salem/Forsyth County
municipal system (Ref 32; Fig. I; Photo 34). The system provides drinking water for the city of
Winston-Salem, the towns of Clemmons, Winston-Salem and Rural Hall and for parts of rural Forsyth
County (Ref 32). The population served by the entire system is reportedly 222,557 people, with an
estimated 30% contribution from the Salem Lake intake, for an apportioned population of 66,767
people served by the Salem Lake intake (Ref 32).
According to Officer Cary Bostic, District 7 Wildlife Enforcement Officer, Salem Lake is
regularly fished by boat. People fish from the Old Greensboro Road bridge over Salem Lake,
approximately 0.8 mile downstream of PPE1 (Ref 42). No fishery production data was available for
Salem Lake.
As previously reported, a palustrine scrub-shrub type wetland exists along the unnamed
tributary that connects Basin #I to Lowery Mill Creek, for 0.25 miles of wetland frontage (Figs. 3,
4-1). The National Wetland Inventory Maps identify 1.13 miles of wetland frontage bordering
Lowery Mill Creek between the confluence of the unnamed tributary and Salem Lake. Salem Lake
has 0.24 miles of marshy wetland frontage at its headwaters above the Old Greensboro Road bridge.
According to the National Wetland Inventory Maps, 0. 70 miles of wetland frontage borders the
segments of Salem Creek between the Salem Lake dam downstream to the end of the 15 mile surface
water target distance limit (Ref 43).
According to the NC Natural Heritage Program, there are no occurrences of rare, threatened,
or endangered plant or animal species within the 15-mile target distance limit below the site (Ref. 44).
5.3 Previous Surface Water Investigations
23
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
On June 25, 1991, personnel from Greenhome and O'Mara sampled surface water and
sediment samples from the two main tributaries that receive runoff from the site. One set was
collected from the unnamed tributary that connects sedimentation Basin # 1 to Lowery Mill Creek
("SW-02" and "SED-02"), and the other set was collected from the unnamed tributary that connects
sedimentation Basins #2 and #3 to Lowery Mill Creek ("SW-01" and "SED-01 "). The samples were
submitted to the North Carolina State Laboratory of Public Health for purgeable and extractable
organics (TCL) and inorganics (TAL) analyses (Ref 14).
Compared to the surface water sample collected north of the site (SW-01), surface water
sample (SW-02) exhibited elevated levels of barium (90 ug/1), and lead (1,035 ug/1) from the unnamed
tributary below Basin #1 (Ref 14, p. 3). The concentration oflead found in the surface water below
Basin #1 exceeds the August 1996 EPA SCDM ambient water quality criteria benchmark of3.2 ug/1
for determining chronic risk posed to aquatic organisms (Ref 27, p. B-55).
Using the sediment sample collected north of the site (SED-01) as the background, the
sediment sample (SED-02) exhibited elevated levels of phenanthrene (367 ug/kg), fluoranthene
(2, 167 ug/kg), pyrene (1,700 ug/kg), benzo( a) anthracene (800 ug/kg), chrysene ( 1, 783 ug/kg), bis(2-
ethylhexyl)phthalate (4,683 ug/kg), benzo(b)fluoranthene (1,667 ug/kg), chromium (45 mg/kg) and
lead (4,700 mg/kg) from the unnamed tributary below Basin # 1. Lead was shown to leach from the
same sediment sample (SED-02) at levels (144.87 mg/I) roughly 29 times greater that the RCRA
regulatory levels that would classify a hazardous waste (5.0 mg/I) (Ref 14, p. 2-3). There are
currently no promulgated EPA SCDM benchmarks for determining the ecological risk posed by
contaminated sediments. However, the levels of lead and benzo(b )fluoranthene found in sediment
would exceed the current EPA human health-based soil screening benchmark or State of North
Carolina Inactive Hazardous Sites branch soil remediation goals (Ref 27, 28).
5.4 Surface Water Sample Locations
During the May 1997 onsite reconnaissance, three sedimentation basins were observed that
retain runoff along the west boundary of the site (Ref 4). The basins are part of a permitted
stormwater management plan for the facility. The discharge from the basins enters two tributaries
where it is then directed through wetlands to Lowery Mill Creek (Ref 16; Figures 3, 4-1 ). Since the
facility recently dredged and rebuilt the sedimentation basins, the ESI sampling design incorporated
collection of soil samples in the runoff pathway entering each basin (JC-012-SL, JC-013-SL and JC-
014-SL) and below the spillway from each basin (JC-002-SD, JC-003-SD and JC-004-SD) (Ref 15;
Photos 1-4; Table 3, 6; Figure 4-1). Water samples were also collected below the spillway from
Basins 1 (JC-004-SW) and 3 (JC-002-SW). No water sample was obtained below Basin #2 due to
insufficient flow (Ref 15, pp. 13, 15, 19). The contaminant levels detected in soil samples from the
runoff pathway entering each basin were previously discussed in Section 3. 0 of this report.
The ESI sample teams collected numerous surface water and sediment samples from the
unnamed tributaries leading from the site to Lowery Mill Creek, from Lowery Mill Creek and from
24
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Salem Lake, to determine if contamination could be identified in surface water or sediments from each
of the primary targets. In addition, the teams collected numerous surface water and sediment control
samples as a quality control measure to evaluate whether any alternate sources may be discharging
to Lowery Mill Creek between the site and the nearest fishery. Each team recorded the surface water
sample locations by Global Positioning System (GPS) along with pH, temperature, conductivity and
turbidity readings of each aqueous sample point and the physical characteristics of each sediment
sample ( color, sheen, odor, etc ... ) in a log book dedicated to this. investigation (Ref 15, Attachment).
The sample locations are described in Table 6 and marked in Figures I and 4-1.
The ESI sample teams collected duplicate surface water and sediment samples from either
surface water or sediment locations considered critical to the ~S score for the site to confirm the
presence of any contaminants that were detected in these samples. In addition, a double volume of
surface water samples was collected from the background location on Lowery Mill Creek to be used
as the matrix spike and matrix spike duplicate sample by the contract laboratory. For quality control
purposes, the sample investigation included two trip blanks, a field blank, a soil trip blank, a pre-
. I
preservative blank and a post-preservative blank to evaluate the potential for cross contamination
(Ref 16, 21).
There are several mixing zones between the site and the nearest fishery. Sample locations
from mixing zones were chosen to collect a well-mixed representative sample. Since the site
contaminants consist primarily of metals which are known to easily sorb to organic sediments,
sediment samples were collected from fine, silty, dark-colored sediments containing relatively high
organic contents, where possible (Ref 16, 21 ).
Since surface water from Salem Lake may contain a naturally higher turbidity than surface
water from Lowery Mill Creek, a background surface water and sediment sample was collected from
the south wing of Salem Lake at the Old Greensboro Road brid~e for comparison (JC-021-SW/SD).
The sampling technique for surface water from Salem Lake involved collection of a three-point
vertical composite of the water column, using a peristaltic pump/vacuum jug arrangement (Photos
30, 32). A surface water grab sample was collected from the drinking water intake on Salem Lake
(JC-020-SW) to address any potential public health concerns (Ref 16, 21; Figure I).
I
Table 6. Surface Water Samples -Descriptive Information
Sample ID# Location (Photo#) Justification Matrices Analvses
JC-001-SW/SD UT above confluence of drainage Background for UT Aqueous TCL
below Basin #1 (18) Sediment TAL
JC-002-SW/SD Below spillway of Basin #3 (23) Establish release from Basin #3 Aqueous TCL
for attribution Sediment TAL
JC-003-SD (t) ' Below spillway of Basin #2 (24) Establish release from Basin #2 Sediment TCL
for attribution TAL
25
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
JC-004-SW/SD
JC-005-SW /SD
JC-006-SW/SD
JC-l06-SW
JC-007-SW/SD
JC-107-SW
JC-008-SW/SD
JC-108-SD
JC-009-SW/SD
JC-0IO-SW/SD
JC-01 I-SW/SD
JC-012-SW/SD
JC-013-SW/SD
JC-014-SW/SD
Below spillway of Basin #1
(19,20)
Spring to UT of Basin #I (21)
332 feet below wetland
headwater on UT of Basin # 1
(22)
Sarne as JC-006-SW (22)
300 feet below wetland
headwater on UT of Basins #2
and #3. (25)
Sarne as JC-007-SW (25)
Lowery Creek above the
confluence with UT of Basins #2
and #3.
Sarne as JC-008-SD
Lowery Creek below confluence
with UT of Basins #2 and #3.
(26)
UT discharging to Lowery Creek,
about 500 feet downstream of
confluence with UT of Basins #2
and #3.
UT discharging to Lowery Creek,
about 1000 feet downstream of
confluence with UT of Basins #2
and#3.
Lowery Creek below confluence
with UT of Basin #1. (27,28)
UT discharging to North side of
Lowery Creek, about 200 feet
downstream of confluence with
UT of Basin # I.
UT discharging to South side of
Lowery Creek, about l000 feel
downstream of confluence with
UT of Basin # I.
Establish release from Basin# I Aqueous TCL
for attribution Sediment TAL
Establish release from GW Aqueous TCL
discharge for attrjbution Sediment TAL
Establish release impacting the Aqueous TCL
nearest SW target. Sediment TAL
QA/QC AqucousiDuplicate Aqueous TCL
sample to confi~ Sediment TAL
Establish release impacting the Aqueous TCL
nearest SW target. Sediment TAL
QA/QC Aqueous Duplicate Aqueous TCL
sample to confimi Sediment TAL
Background and MS/MSD Aqueous TCL
(triple volume col,lected) Sediment TAL
QA/QC Sediment Split sample Sediment TCL
to test sample handling TAL
variability.
Establish release from UT of Aqueous TCL
Basins #2 and #3 to Lowery Sediment TAL
Creek
Control Sample Aqueous TCL
I Sediment TAL
Control Sample Aqueous TCL
Sediment TAL
I Establish release from unnamed Aqueous TCL
tributary of Basin # 1 to Lowery Sediment TAL
Creek
Control Sample Aqueous TCL
Sediment TAL
Control Sample Aqueous TCL
Sediment TAL
I
26
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
JC-015-SW/SD UT discharging to North side of Control Sample Aqueous
Lowery Creek, about 1,300 feet Sediment
downstream of confluence with
UT of Basin # I
JC-016-SD <1> UT discharging to North side of Control Sample Aqueous
Salem Lake, about 3,000 feet Sediment
downstream of confluence with
UT of Basin #1
-JC-017-SW/SD UT discharging to North side of Control Sample : Aqueous
Salem Lake, about 3,500 feet Sediment
downstream of confluence with
UT of Basin # 1
JC-018-SW /SD North of Old Greensboro Road Establish release impacting Aqueous
bridge over Salem Lake (32,33) nearest fishery and additional Sediment
wetland frontage ,
JC-019-SD Sarne as JC-018-SD (33) QNQC Sediment Duplicate to Aqueous
confirm Sediment
JC-020-SW From Salem Lake drinking water Public Health Concern Aqueous
intake (34)
JC-021-SW/SD South wing of Salem Lake at Background for JC-018-Aqueous -Greensboro Road bridge (30,31) SW/SD through JC-020-SW Sediment
(t) Insufficient flow to collect aqueous sample. TAL = Target Analyte List (inorganic analytes)
TCL = Target Compound List (purgeable and extractable organic compounds)
5_5 Surface Water Pathway Analytical Results
TCL
TAL
TCL
TAL
TCL
TAL
TCL
TAL
TCL
TAL
TCL
TAL
TCL
TAL
Complete copies of the validated data and Data Qualifier Reports are provided in the
Appendix B of this report. Surface water analytical results ·are summarized in Tables 7-1 and
sediment analytical results are summarized in Table 7-2.
5.5.1 QA/QC Considerations
The US EPA arranged for analyses and shipment of all surface water and sediment samples
to laboratories participating in the US EPA Contract Laboratory Program (CLP}. The CLP
laboratories analyzed the samples for inorganic analytes (Target Analyte List), purgeable and
extractable organics compounds (Target Compound List}, as ,specified in the CLP Statement of
Work. US EPA Region IV, Science and Ecosystem Support Divi~ion (SESD) validated and attached
Data Qualifier Reports to the analytical results provided to the NC Superfund Section.
EPA considers a contaminant "significantly above background", if detected at concentrations
equal to, or greater than three times the background concentrations, or if detected in the sample, but
27
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
not detected in the background. Routine sampling and analysis variations can introduce a degree of
error into the analytical data. Data validation checks the usability:ofthe analytical data and identifies
the error (bias) present. The validation process assigns qualifiers, such as "J", to biased data. For ' example, "J" qualified results indicate the sample concentratioris are estimated, but may be used to
determine an observed release. Where "J" qualified results are reported, EPA guidance directs the
user to determine the actual sample bias for that compound and arithmetically manipulate the sample
results by a predetermined factor, if appropriate. The new results are then used to decide if the
compound in question is "significantly above background". The EPA guidance on using "J" qualified
data is attached as Ref 23 . Where multiple background samples were collected, the determination
whether contaminants detected were "significantly above background" was based on the higher
concentration of the detected contaminant in either of the background sample(s).
Several TCL extractable samples were qualified as "JN", due to exceeding holding times. The
holding times are designed to ensure against unacceptable losses in transit and in the laboratory that
would create unreliable results and an inaccurate representation, of the original sample result. Any
sample result flagged as "JN" was not used in evaluating the site score.
The QNQC sample results demonstrate that no TCL or T AL analytes were introduced into
the field aqueous samples during the sample preservation. Toluene was reported in the soil trip blank,
at a concentration below the CRDL. Since it was also found in several sediment samples at
concentrations below the CRDL, and is a possible lab artifact, toluene was not used in evaluating a
release to soil or sediments at the site.
The US EPA shipped spike samples to the analytical contract laboratories. The validated
results did not report any problems associated with the Blind Spi,ke recoveries for aqueous samples,
suggesting that the sample handling and analytical procedures performed by the laboratories were
acceptable, and suggesting a strong confidence in the laboratory accuracy. A blind spike recovery
problem was reported for the sodium analyte, which would affect any hits of sodium in soil and
sediment samples. However, sodium was not detected at '.concentrations significantly above
background in any of the soil or sediment samples.
Two sets of matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate aqueous' samples were collected in the field
for analyses by the contract laboratories. The validated re~ults did not report any problems
associated with the matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate recoveries in the aqueous samples, providing
evidence of good field sampling technique, and suggesting a strong confidence in the laboratory
analytical precision for the aqueous matrix.
The sediment sample handling variability was determined through analyses of split samples
(JC-008-SD and JC-108-SD) collected in the field, and a statisticalicomparison of the relative percent
deviation between the reported analytical results. No organic T~L compounds were reported in the
two samples. The low sample variability between the two sediment samples (less than 20% relative
percent deviation between 12 of the 13 inorganic T AL analytek) provides evidence of good field
sampling technique, and suggests a strong confidence in the laboratory analytical precision for the
'
28
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
sediment matrix. Only aluminum exhibited a RPO greater than 20 % (21.2 %).
5.5.2 Surface Water Pathway Analytical Results
5.5.2.1 Ihc Unnamed Tributar:y ~ Basin #I
The surface water analytical results are summarized in Talile 7-1. Compared to an upgradient
aqueous background sample for Basin # I (JC-00 I-SW), aqueous sample JC-004-SW exhibited
I elevated concentrations of lead (22 ug/1) and manganese (270 ug/1) in the unnamed tributary (UT)
below Basin #1. Further downstream in the UT, surface water sample JC-006-SW exhibited elevated
concentrations oflead (5 ug/1), manganese (360 ug/1), and iron (2,600 ug/1). The surface water was
collected approximately 332 feet below the head of the first wetland along the unnamed tributary
below Basin #1 (Ref. 15; Fig. 4-1; Photo 22). A duplicate surface water sample (JC-106-SW)
collected at the same location confirmed the presence of lead (5 1ug/l), manganese (350 ug/1), nickel
(3J ug/1) and iron (2,500 ug/1) in the surface water. Iron and nickel were not attributable to the site.
According to EPA guidance, manganese bioaccumulates in aquktic organisms. However, EPA has
not promulgated an associated ecotoxicity factor, nor an 1ecologically-based aquatic SCDM
benchmark for manganese. According to EPA guidance, lead is' highly toxic to and bioaccumulates
in aquatic organisms. The concentrations oflead found in both surface water samples exceed the
EPA's ecologically-based ambient water quality criteria benchm~rk of3.2 ug/1. Thus, a release ofa
highly toxic and bioaccumulative substance found at concentrations above the aquatic benchmarks
within a wetland constitutes a potential ecological risk that warrants further action (Ref. 27).
The sediment sample analytical results are summarized in Table 7-2. Compared to an
upgradient background sediment sample from the UT (JC-OOl~SD), sediment sample JC-004-SD
exhibited an elevated concentration oflead (340 mg/kg) collected from the unnamed tributary below
Basin # I. Further downstream in the UT, sediment sample JC-006-SD exhibited elevated
concentrations of methyl ethyl ketone (89 ug/1), lead (300 mg/kg), antimony (5 J mg/kg), thallium
I
(6.4 J mg/kg) and iron (73,000 mg/kg). This sample was collected approximately 332 feet below the
head of the first wetland (Ref. 15; Fig 4-1). There are currently no promulgated EPA ecologically-
based SCDM benchmarks for making a determination of the eco,logical risk posed by contaminated
sediments (Ref. 27).
5.5.2.2 Ihc Unnamed Tributar:y belfilv Basins #1,, Jl.!!.!l. #3
The surface water analytical results are summarized in Table 7-1. Compared to the upgradient
background surface water sample (JC-001-SW), surface water saniple JC-002-SW collected from the
unnamed tributary below Basin #3 exhibited elevated concentrations of nickel (3 J ug/1), vanadium
' (4 J ug/1), manganese (500 ug/1) and iron (1,800 ug/1) (Photo 23). Due to an
29
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 7-1
Surface Water Analytical Results -Expanded Site Inspection (August 11-13, 1997)
Johnson Controls -Globe Battery Division .
Winston-Salem, Forsyth County, North Carolina
USEPA ID: NCO 000 770 487
Backaround UT Basin 1 UT Basin 2 UT Basin 3 Sorina 81 Wetland 81 Wet Cnf. 82 Wetland
Analvtes Units JC-001-SW JC-004-SW JC-003-SW JC-002-SW JC-005-SW JC-006-SW JC-106-SW JC-007-SW
Silver UQ/L 2U 2U NA 2U 2U 2U 2U 2U
Arsenic ua/L 7U 7U NA 7U 7U 7U 7U 7U
Barium ua/L 41 36 NA 17 33 32 32 74
Bervllium ua/L 1 U 1 U NA 1 U 1 U 1 U 1 U 1 U
Cobalt ua/L 2U 2U NA 2U 2U 2U 2U 2J
Chromium ua/L 1 U 1 U NA SU 1 U 1 U 4U 1 U
Conner ua/L SU SU NA 4U 7U 4U 4U 3U
Nickel ua/L 1 U 1 U NA 3!'Ji1.i'<::~® 1 J 1 U 3l'J!~ 1 U
Lead ug/L 2U .oi¾~1',.'JC"&!22 NA 2U 2U !:i S2U
Antimony ug/L SU SU NA SU SU SU SU
Selenium ug/L SU SU NA SU SU SU SU
Thallium ug/L 6U 6U NA 6U 6U 6U 6U
Vanadium ug/L 2U 1 U NA 4r'J~'i!,!f 5ru~ ... ~.;5t, 1 U 1 J
Zinc ug/L 7U 20 U NA au au 7U 20 U
Total Mercurv ug/L 0.20 U 0.20 U NA 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U
Aluminum ua/L 160 U 200 U NA 780 U 590 U 210 U 200 U
Manaanese ua/L 33 li~270 NA ~~illll:500 24 ~360 ~~350
Calcium ua/L 6,900 5,200 NA 6,400 6,400 5,700 5,600
Maanesium ua/L 2,500 2,500 NA 2,400 2,100 2,300 2,300
Iron ua/L 340 630 NA m;'~1J8()(1 850 ~~2!600 -1'1!~.iG2:soo
Sodium ug/L 5400 J 6700 J NA 4100 J 7200 J 5500 J 5400 J
Potassium ug/L 1,400 1,700 NA 1,800 1,300 1,400
AWQC -Ambient Water Quality Cntena OW RID -Drinking Water Reference Dose Benchmark
Shading indicates a result significantly above the associated background levels or using EPA guidance (Ref. 23).
Bold indicates result exceeding it's associated EPA Superfund Chemical Data Matrix (SCDM) benchmark (Ref. 27).
U = Not Detected
J = Estimated Value
NA = Not Analysed (No flow in UT below Basin #2)
1,300
SU
SU
6U
1 U
20 U
0.20 U
120 U
lli_~1t700
8,500
2,600
~';,16;000
4000 J
1,400
B2 Wet Cnf
JC-107-SW
2U
7U
72
1 U
2U
1 U
1 U
1 U
2U
SU
SU
6U
1 U
9U
0.20 U
90 U
~1\600
8,300
2,500
~1Sl000
3900 J
1,300
Backaround
JC-008-SW
2U
7U
24
1 U
2U
4U
3U
3J
2U
SU
SU
6U
2U
6U
0.20 U
190 U
350
6,000
2,400
1,300
4500 J
1,400
LMC< 82/3 LMC< 81
JC-009-SW JC-012-SW
2U 2U
7U 7U
27 23
1 U 1 U
2U 2U
i!!i,~15 ~~ .. 29
20 U 9U
BJ ,1s·:1;1m:.c:;,,
2U 3:U~~:~
SU SU
SU SU
6U 6U
1 J 1 J
SU 9U
~0,34 0.20 U
~';~230 150 U
370 330
6,400 5,800
2,600 2,400
1,800 1,400
5300 J 4700 J
1,500 1,300
Salem Bkad. Salem<LMC Intake
JC-021-SW JC-018-SW JC-020-SW
2U 2U 2U
7U 7U 7U
24 26 14
1 U 1 U 1 U
2U 1 U 2U
1 U 1 U 1 U
SU SU 7U
1 U 1 U 1 U
4J 42U
SU SU SU
SU SU SU
6U 6U 6U
2U 2U 1 U
20 U · ~ilf~l.1':,/l0 ~Al-26
0.20 U . 0.20 U 0.20 U
180 U 240 U 90 U
150 300 45
7,200 6,000 5,700
2,800 2,500 2,300
1,200 2,000 180 U
6800 J 4400 J 5000 J
1,800 1,400 1,600
EPA SCDM (Ref. 27)
AWQC DWRfD
11 ug/L
160 ug/L
3.2 ug/L
----ug/L
110 ug/L
0.012 ug/L
----ug/L
----ug/L
100 ug/L
730 ug/L
15 ug/L
260 ug/L
11,000 ug/L
2.0 ug/L
----ug/L
5,100 ug/L
1000 ug/L ----ug/L
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Background UT Basin 1
Analytes Units JC-001-SD JC-004-SD
Toluene ug/kg 17 U 2J
Methyl Ethyl Ketone ug/kg 17 U 17 U
Acenaphthene ug/kg 560 U 550 U
Fluorene ug/kg 560 U 550 U
Phenanthrene ug/kg 560 U 550 U
Anthracene ug/kg 560 U . 550 U
Fluoranthene ug/kg 560 U 87 J
Pyrene ug/kg 560 U 63 J
Benzo(a)anthracene ug/kg 560 U 550 U
Chrysene ug/kg 560 U · 550 U
Benzo(b/k)fluoranthen ug/kg 560 U 87 J
Benzo(a)pyrene ug/kg 560 U 550 U
lndeno(1,2,3-cd)pyren ug/kg 560 U 550 U
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracer ug/kg 560 U 550 U
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene ug/kg 560 U 550 U
Carbazole ug/kg 560 U , 550 U
(3 and/or 4-)methylphe ug/kg 560 U 550 U
Silver mg/kg 0.70 U , 0.61 U
Arsenic mg/kg 2.5 U 2.1 U
Barium mg/kg 120 88
Beryllium mg/kg 1.3 J 0.91 J
Cobalt mg/kg 12 J 6.4J
Chromium mg/kg 31 29 J
Copper mg/kg 25 15
Nickel mg/kg 15 10 J
Lead mg/kg 24 I•. 340
Antimony mg/kg 1.8 U 1.5 U
Selenium mg/kg 1.8 U 1.5 U
Thallium mg/kg 2.1 U 1.8 U
Vanadium mg/kg 48 36
Zinc mg/kg 71 56 J
Total Mercury mg/kg 0.17 U 0.14 U
Aluminum mg/kg 20,000 13,000
Manganese mg/kg 490 140
Calcium mg/kg 1,200 920
Magnesium mg/kg 4,400 2,900
Iron mg/kg 22,000 13,000
Sodium mg/kg 190 J 160 J
Potassium mg/kg 4,400 2,600
% Moisture 44 35
Table 7-2
Sediment Sample Analytical Results -Expanded Site Inspection (August 11-13, 1997)
Johnson Controls -Globe Battery Division
Winston-Salem, Forsyth County, North Carolina
USEPA ID: NCO 000 770 487
UT Basin 2 UT Basin 3 Spring B1 Wetland B2 Wetland Background LMC< B2/3
JC-003-SD JC-002-SD JC-005-SD JC-006-SD JC-007-SD JC-008-SD JC-108-SD JC-009-SD
2J 2J 2J 42 U 10 U 15 U 15 U 20 U
14 U 15 U 15 U lr•:<>x .. , 89 10 U 15 U 15 U 20 U
470 U 500 U 500 U 1400 U 1000 U 500 U 490 U 670 U
470 U 500 U 500 U 1400 U 1000 U 500 U 490 U 670 U
470 U 500 U 500 U 1400 U 1000 U 500 U 490 U 670 U
470 U 500 U 500 U 1400 U 1000 U 500 U 490 U 670 U
470 U 500 U 500 U 230 J 1000 U 500 U 490 U 670 U
470 U 500 U 500 U 160 J 1000 U 500 U 490 U 670 U
470 U 500 U 500 U 1400 U 1000 U 500 U 490 U 670 U
470 U 500 U 500 U 180 J 1000 U 500 U 490 U 670 U
470 U 500 U 500 U 210 J 1000 U 500 U 490 U 670 U
470 U 500 U 500 U 1400 U 1000 U 500 U 490 U 670 U
470 U 500 U 500 U 1400 U 1000 U 500 U 490 U 670 U
470 U 500 U 500 U 1400 U 1000 U 500 U 490 U 670 U
470 U 500 U 500 U 1400 U 1000 U 500 U 490 U 670 U
470 U 500 U 500 U 1400 U 1000 U 500 U 490 U 670 U
470 U 500 U 500 U 150 J 1000 U 500 U 490 U 670 U
0.51 U .. 0.56 U 1.6 U 0.93 U 0.67 U 0.65 U 0.80 U
2J 2U 2U 5.6 U ... ~ 2.4 U 3U 2.8 U
69 160 38 240 170 120 110 160
0.62 J 0.76 J 0.60 J 2.1 J 1.7 J 1.3 J 1.2 J 1.9 J
5.9 J 21 2.9 J 26 J 14 J 13 J 11 J 18 J
16 J 21 17 J 60 40 34 30 49
9.20 15 8 49 31 20 19 28
6.7 J 9.5 J 6.1 J 30 J 18 J 14 12 J 21
52 25 7 jf;, . ·300 34 JN 15 14 22
1.3 U 1.9 J 1.4 U 5t!J;;• ; .. 5 .1.J •. ~ 1.7 U 2J 4U
1.3 U ,, '<' "; 3.1 1.4 U 4U 2.7 JN 1.7 U 1.6 U 2.3 J
1.5 U 1.8 U 1.7 U pf;4-'.J •. t.·. ··•.•· 2.8 U 2U 1.9 U 4U
24 33 15 93 73 52 47 74
49 J 91 18 J 130 97 69 62 100
0.13 U 0.13 U 0.14 U 0.38 U . 1.1 0.16 U 0.16 U 0.21 U
7,000 14,000 5,100 50,000 43,000 26,000 21,000 38,000
460 5,600 51 1,400 550 570 520 930
460 920 880 1,800 1,200 1,100 910 1,300
2,000 2,000 1,100 4,200 2,800 3,300 2,900 4,000
13,000 21,000 4,900 . '_.· 73;000 · 71,000 26,000 23,000 40,000
110 J 130 J 120 J 250 J 200 J 180 J 170 J 250 J
2,000 1,800 650 3,400 2,200 2,800 2,400 3,400
25 32 30 76 69 42 39 53
Shading indicates a result significantly above the associated background levels or using EPA guidance (Ref. 23).
U = Not Detected
J = Estimated Value
JN = Analyte presence tentatively identified.
LMC< B1 Salem Bkgd. Salem<LMC
JC-012-SD JC-021-SD JC-018-SD JC-019-SD
15 U I 24 U 4J 4J
15 U I 24 U 28 U 24 U
'
490 U 800 U 910 UJ 780 UJ
490 U 800 U 910 UJ 780 UJ
490 U 800 U 910 UJ 780 UJ
490 U 800 U 910 UJ 780 UJ
490 U 800 U 910 UJ 120 J
490 U 800 U 910 UJ 120 J
490 U, 800 U 910 UJ 780 UJ
490 U. 800 U 910 UJ 780 UJ
490 U. 800 U 910 UJ 780 UJ
490 U: 800 U 910 UJ 780 UJ
490 U 800 U 910 UJ 780 UJ
490 U 800 U 910 UJ 780 UJ
490 U 800 U 910 UJ 780 UJ
490 U 800 U 910 UJ 780 UJ
490 U 800 U 910 UJ 780 UJ
0.60 U 0.94 J 0.79 U 0.80 U
2.1 U 4.9 5.1 4.4 J
, 140 270 230 200
1.3 J 2.2 2.6 2.2
14 J 24 22 19 J
37 62 63 55
17 47 42 33
15 30 27 24
16 46 JN 47 JN 38
3U 4J 3.2 J 3.3 J
1.5 U 2U 2.8 JN ~
3U 4U 3J 2.8 J
56 100 110 94
69 130 130 110
0.14 U 0.25 U 0.27 U 0.21 U
25,000 66,000 56,000 49,000
'470 490 630 530
. 730 1,400 1,700 1,500
4,200 5,100 5,000 4,500
28,000 64,000 44,000 40,000
170 J . 350 J 300 J 260 J
3,800 4,300 4,200 3,700
35 62 63 57
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
insufficient flow, no surface water sample was collected from the tributary below Basin #2. Further
downstream, surface water sample JC-007-SW exhibited elevated concentrations of manganese
(1,700 ug/1) and iron (16,000 ug/1). This sample was collected from the unnamed tributary below
Basins #2 and #3 near its confluence with Lowery Mill Creek. A duplicate surface water sample (JC-
107-SW) collected at the same location confirmed the presence of manganese (1,600 ug/1) and iron
(I 5,000 ug/1). Iron is not attributable to the site. According to EPA guidance, manganese
bioaccumulates in aquatic organisms. However, EPA has not promulgated an associated ecotoxicity
factor, nor an ecologically-based aquatic SCDM benchmark for manganese (Ref. 27).
The sediment sample analytical results are summarized in Table 7-2. Compared to an
upgradient background sediment sample (JC-00 I-SD), sediment sample JC-002-SD collected from
the unnamed tributary below Basin #3 exhibited elevated concentrations of selenium (3. I mg/kg),
silver (3.8 mg/kg) and manganese (5,600 mg/kg). No elevated concentrations of any TCL or T AL
contaminants were found _in sediment sample JC-003-SD collected from the unnamed tributary
downgradient of Basin #2. Further downstream, sediment sample JC-007-SD exhibited elevated
concentrations of arsenic ( 5. 9 mg/kg), antimony ( 5. I J mg/kg), total mercury (I. I mg/kg) and iron
(71,000 mg/kg). This sample was collected from the unnamed tributary below Basins #2 and #3 near
its confluence with Lowery Mill Creek (Ref. 15). There are currently no promulgated EPA
ecologically-based SCDM benchmarks for making a determination of the ecological risk posed by
contaminated sediments (Ref. 27).
5.5.2,3 Lowery Mill~
The surface water analytical results are summarized in Table 7-1. Compared to the upstream
background surface water sample (JC-008-SW) collected upstream in Lowery Mill Creek, surface
water sample (JC-009-SW) exhibited elevated concentrations of aluminum (230 ug/1), chromium ( 15
ug/1) and total mercury (0.34 ug/1). This sample was collected from Lowery Mill Creek, about 300
feet downstream of the confluence with the unnamed tributary below Basins #2 and #3 (Ref. 15).
According to EPA guidance, chromium exhibits low bioaccumulation and moderate ecotoxicity in
aquatic organisms, and has a published ecologically-based benchmark of 11 ug/1. Mercury exhibits
a high bioaccumulation and ecotoxicity to aquatic organisms and has a published aquatic benchmark
of0.012 ug/1. (Ref. 27).
Compared to the upstream background surface water (JC-008-SW), surface water sample JC-
012-SW exhibited elevated concentrations of chromium (29 ug/1), nickel (15 J ug/1) and lead (3 J
ug/1). The sample was collected from Lowery Mill Creek, about 200 feet downstream of the
confluence with the unnamed tributary below Basin # I. Of the three contaminants, lead exhibits a
high bioaccumulation and high ecotoxicity in aquatic organisms and has a published ecologically-
based benchmark of 3.2 ug/1 (Ref. 27). The presence of a highly ecotoxic and bioaccumulative
substance at concentrations below the aquatic benchmarks within a wetland suggests an attenuated
ecological risk may be posed to wetland organisms. The wetland frontage subject to this attenuated
ecological risk extends from sample point JC-006-SW, downstream to sample point JC-012-SW, for
a total of 480 feet of frontage (0.09 miles) (Figure 4-1).
32
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The sediment sample analytical results are summarized in Table 7-2. Compared to the
upstream sediment sample (JC-008-SD), no elevated concentrations ofTCL or TAL analytes were
detected in the two sediment samples (JC-009-SD and JC-012-SD) to Lowery Mill Creek (Table 6-2;
Figure 4-1; Photos 26-28).
Neither of the intervening surface water or sediment control samples (JC-010-SW/SD, JC-
011-SW/SD) collected between the JC-009-SW/SD and JC-012-SW/SD sample points exhibited
elevated concentrations of lead, as compared to their respective background surface water and
sediment samples (JC-001-SW/SD) (Appendix B).
5,5,2,4 Salem Lake
The surface water analytical results are summarized in Table 7-1. Compared to the
background surface water sample (JC-021-SW) collected from the south wing of Salem Lake,
surface water sample JC-018-SW exhibited an elevated concentration of zinc (40 ug/1). This sample
was collected from the Old Greensboro Road bridge over the north wing of Salem Lake (Photo 32).
The 3-point vertical composite of the ~urface water column could document a release to the nearest
fishery and additional wetland targets. According to EPA guidance, zinc is persistent in aquatic
environments, exhibits a moderately high bioaccumulation and a low ecotoxicity to aquatic organisms.
Zinc also has an ecologically-based SCDM screening benchmark of 110 ug/1 for determining risks to
wetlands (Ref. 27). Thus, the zinc concentrations found in the surface water sample suggest that it
does not pose a serious risk to aquatic organisms in wetlands. Nonetheless, an attributable release
of zinc from the site was not established during the ESI or previous SI investigations.
Compared to the background surface water sample (JC-021-SW), an elevated concentration
of zinc (26 ug/1) was detected in a grab sample JC-020-SW collected near the raw drinking water
intake near the Salem Lake dam, about 2.1 miles downstream of the site (Ref 15; p. 3; Photo 34).
According to EPA guidance, zinc is persistent in aquatic environments, exhibits a low human toxicity,
and has a published human health-based drinking water reference dose screening concentration of 11
mg/L (Ref 27). Thus, zinc does not pose a serious drinking water threat to humans at the
concentrations found in the surface water sample.
Compared to the background sediment sample (JC-021-SD) collected from the south wing
of Salem Lake, an elevated concentration of selenium (3 J mg/kg) was detected in sediment sample
JC-019-SD collected about I 00 feet upstream of the Old Greensboro Road bridge over the north
wing of Salem Lake (Ref 15, p. 5; Photo 33). The presence of selenium was not confirmed in
sediment sample JC-018-SD at the same location. According to EPA guidance, selenium
bioaccumulates in and is highly toxic to aquatic organisms. Selenium is moderately toxic to humans
(Ref 27). There are currently-no promulgated EPA ecologically-based benchmarks for determining
the risk posed by contaminated sediments to aquatic organisms. Therefore, the risk posed by
selenium contaminated sediments to terrestrial and aquatic organisms, and humans is indeterminate.
33
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
Compared to the background sediment from the upgradient UT (JC-001-SD}, an elevated
concentration of selenium (2.3 mg/kg) was detected in a sediment control sample (JC-014-SD)
collected from a unnamed tributary that discharges to Lowery Mill Creek, about 1000 feet
downstream of the unnamed tributary of Basin #I. No other elevated levels of selenium were
detected in the intervening surface water or sediment control samples from the tributaries that
discharge to Lowery Mill Creek between the site and Salem Lake.
5.6 Surface Water Pathway Conclusions
Historic releases of barium and lead were reported in surface water samples collected from
the unnamed tributary below Basin #I. The concentration of lead would exceed the current EPA
ecologically-based benchmark. In addition, historic releases of phenanthrene, fluoranthene, pyrene,
benzo(a)anthracene, chrysene, benzo(b )fluoranthene, bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, chromium and lead
were reported in sediment samples collected from the unnamed tributary below Basin# I. Lead was
found to be capable of leaching from the sediment at levels roughly 29 times greater than the
regulatory levels that would classify it as a hazardous waste under the RCRA program. Likewise,
the lead and benzo(b )fluoranthene concentrations would exceed their respective EPA human health-
based soil screening benchmark or State remediation goals (Ref 27).
The current analytical results reported elevated levels of phenanthrene, fluoranthene, pyrene,
benzo( a)anthracene, chrysene, benzo(b )fluoranthene, benzo( a)pyrene, indeno( I ,2,3-cd}pyrene,
benzo(g,h,i)perylene and lead discharging from the site to Basin # 1, and elevated levels of lead in
sediment and aqueous samples collected from the unnamed tributary below Basin #1 (Section 3.0).
The most recent set of sediment samples below Basin # I also exhibited fluoranthene, pyrene and
benzo(b )fluoranthene, but at concentrations too small to be considered reliably quantified.
Comparing the current to the historic analytical results, it appears that many similar compounds are
present in onsite soils and in the overland runoff pathway from the site, but the concentrations appear
to have shown a decrease within the last 6 years.
The current analytical results from source, attribution and target samples demonstrate an
observed release oflead from the site to a wetland that exists along the unnamed tributary connecting
Basin # 1 to Lowery Mill Creek. Elevated levels of lead have been found in onsite soil samples (JC-
006-SL & JC-007-SL}, in overland runoff samples that connect the site to the sedimentation Basin
#1 (JC-014-SL}, in samples of runoff below Basin #1 (JC-004-SW/SD}, and in samples of surface
water and sediment from the nearest known wetland (JC-006-SW/SD & JC-106-SW/SD).
According to EPA, lead exhibits a high bioaccumulation and high ecotoxicity to aquatic organisms,
and an observed release oflead has been demonstrated at levels that may pose a significant threat to
the nearest wetland (Ref 27). The segment affected by this observed release extends 332 linear feet
downstream from the head of the wetland, for a total of664 feet of wetland frontage (or 0.13 miles).
An observed release oflead was found in a surface water sample (JC-012-SW) from Lowery
Mill Creek at levels that would not exceed the ecologically-based benchmark (Ref 27). This is an
observed release that would extend the affected area downstream for an additional 500 feet to the
34
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
sample point (JC-012-SW}, for a total of700 feet of additional wetland frontage (or 0.13 miles).
Zinc was detected in a surface water sample collected from the Old Greensboro Road bridge
over the north wing of Salem Lake and selenium was detected in one of the two sediment samples
collected about I 00 feet upstream of the Old Greensboro Road bridge. However, the sample results
do not demonstrate a pattern of zinc or selenium contamination originating from the site that would
affect downstream targets. More importantly though, neither zinc nor selenium pose a serious enough
health threat to humans or aquatic environments at their respective concentrations to warrant federal
action.
Zinc was detected in a grab sample collected near the raw drinking water intake at the Salem
Lake dam, about 2.1 miles downstream of the site. According to EPA, there is very little threat
posed to human populations at the concentrations found in surface water. In addition, the sample
results do not demonstrate a pattern of zinc contamination originating from the site that would affect
downstream targets.
6.0 SOIL EXPOSURE AND AIR PATHWAYS
6.1 Physical Conditions
The 75-acre site is located in a rural setting. The surrounding area is used for light
commercial industry and residences along West Mountain Road and Walkerton-Guthrie Road to the
east and south, and agriculture to the southwest (Ref 4; Photo 5).
Johnson Controls operates an automotive battery manufacturing facility at the site. The
facility consists of a large manufacturing plant, a truck maintenance building, a battery storage
warehouse, an acid storage building, a wastewater pretreatment system, and offices. The site layout
is presented in Figure 2. The remainder of the site is covered with asphalt parking surfaces, bare soil,
grass lawn, and woods. The facility is surrounded by a chain link fence and access is controlled by
a security guard (Ref 4,5; Photo 5).
The site is located near the top of a small hill that slopes northwest toward Lowery Mill Creek
and west toward an unnamed tributary to Lowery Mill Creek (Figs. I, 3). Surface runoff from the
main facility collects in catch basins and travels through underground pipes to three splash pads at
the heads of three sedimentation basins along the west boundary of the site. These three basins
collect stormwater runoff from the site, allowing particulates to settle out before being discharged
through a large diameter vertical overflow pipe in the dam to unnamed tributaries (Ref 4; Fig. 3;
Photos 1-4). Basin #I discharges to a small unnamed intermittent tributary that directs runoff
northwest to Lowery Mill Creek. Basins #2 and #3 discharge to a second unnamed intermittent
tributary that directs runoff north to Lowery Mill Creek. The stormwater retention basins lie outside
the fenced areas of the site (Ref 4; Figures 3, 4-1).
The site is underlain by Madison Series soil complex, except on sideslopes where it is mapped
35
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
as Pacolet Series soil. Madison soils are formed from in-place weathering of mica schist and mica
gneiss. The typical Madison soil profile exhibits a 6 inch surface layer of reddish-brown fine sandy
loam, followed by a 22 inch layer of red clay, a 6 inch layer of red clay loam and a 22 inch layer of
mottled red and yellowish-brown, partly weathered mica gneiss and schist that crushes to a sandy
clay loam. The permeability of Madison series soil is moderate and the soil is medium to strongly acid
(Ref. 45).
6.2
The prevailing wind direction for the site is from the southwest (Ref. 5, figure B-3).
Soil Exposure and Air Pathway Targets
At the time of the ESI investigation, there were 630 workers employed at the Johnson
Controls facility working within 200 feet of the onsite source areas (Ref. 4). There are no schools,
day care facilities or residents on or within 200 feet of known areas of soil contamination (Figure I).
The nearest school is the East Forsyth High School, located approximately 0.4 miles east of the
facility. East Forsyth High School has 1,300 students and 135 employees (Ref. 4). According to
the North Carolina Center for Geographic Information and Analysis (CGIA), the population estimates
within specified distance rings around the site are presented below in Table 8 (Ref. 46).
Table 8. Population Estimates within a 4.0 mile radius.
-· »-~·-·· -. 1,...,0: ..... r-.. . -.
Onsite 610 630
0-0.25 m;J, 53 683
0.25 -0.50 m;Je I 618 2 301
n SQ • I O m;1. I 149 3 450
1 "-?.0-ile 4 710 8 160
2.0 -1.0 mile 12 045 20 205
1: n _ ,1 ".....,;1,. 00 ~,7 "..,. L' L',..,
There are no sensitive environments or wetlands located on the site property (Ref. 4).
Wetlands within a 4.0 mile radius are identified on the National Wetland Inventory maps (Ref. 43).
The nearest wetland was approximately 900 feet north-northwest of the site (Ref. 37, 38; Figures 3,
4-1 ). There are no State or Federally designated endangered or threatened species located within a
4.0 mile radius of the site. No other sensitive environments were located within a 4.0 mile radius of
the site (Ref. 44).
6.3 Previous Soil and Air Sample Investigations
Johnson Controls currently operates air quality control equipment under air quality permit
#00725R8, issued by the Forsyth County Environmental Affairs Office. The facility operates under
the "synthetic minor source" category that places maintenance and operation restrictions on the air
36
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
quality control equipment, in order to avoid being subject to Title V of the Clean Air Act. The permit
regulates lead and particulate emissions from roughly 30 point source stacks at the facility in
accordance with lead-acid battery industry standards. On September 18, 1996, the facility received
one violation due to visible emissions released from a failed baghouse. There are no current
violations reported at the facility (Ref. 19, 20). Historic air emissions are summarized in Table 2.
Historic soil samples collected at the site are discussed in Section 3.0 titled "Waste/Source
Sampling". The historic soil sample results demonstrated elevated levels of arsenic, calcium and lead
onsite. The facility reported that arsenic and lead are generated by the production of lead-acid
batteries, and the levels of both constituents found in onsite soils exceed current published EPA
human health-based soil screening benchmarks, or August 1998 State Inactive Hazardous Sites
Branch soil remediation goals for residential use (Ref 27, 28).
6.4 Soil Exposure and Air Pathway Sample Locations
On August 11-13, 1997, the NC Superfund Section collected 8 soil samples at or
downgradient of 3 potential source areas identified at the site. The soil sample locations are described
in Table 3 of Section 3.0 titled "Waste/Source Sampling" and sample locations are marked on
Figures 3 and 4-1. Since surficial soil samples were collected, no air monitoring was conducted
during the sampling investigation. No formal air sampling investigation was conducted during the
ESI since the facility operates in compliance with its air quality permit. All ESI samples were
collected by NC Superfund Section personnel in accordance with the ~ 122§ EPA Environmental
Investigations Standard Operating Procedures aud Quality Assurance Manual .
6.5 Soil Sample Analytical Results
The soil samples were submitted to laboratories participating in the US EPA Contract
Laboratory Program (CLP) and analyzed for inorganic compounds (Target Analyte List), purgeable
and extractable organics compounds (Target Compound List), as specified in the CLP Statement of
Work. US EPA Special Analytical Services requested the CLP laboratory perform Toxicity
Characteristic Leachate Procedure for inorganics (TCLP-Metals) per EPA Method 1311. Data was
validated through the US EPA Region IV, Science and Ecosystem Support Division, and the
validated data along the attached Data Qualifier Reports were provided to the NC Superfund Section.
Complete copies of the validated data and Data Qualifier Reports are provided in the Appendix B of
this report.
Soil sample analytical results from the 3 source areas have been summarized in Table 4 of
Section 3.0 titled "Waste/Source Sampling". Based on the August 1997 analytical results, elevated
levels ofphenanthrene, fluoranthene, pyrene, benzo(a)anthracene, chrysene, benzo(b/k)fluoranthene,
benzo(a)pyrene, indeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene, benzo(g,h,i)perylene, carbazole, arsenic, calcium, lead,
manganese, total mercury, molybdenum, potassium, sodium, strontium and zinc were detected in
surficial soil samples collected from three source areas at the site. Of these contaminants,
benzo( a)anthracene, benzo(b/k)fluoranthene, benzo( a)pyrene, indeno( 1,2,3-cd)pyrene,
37
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
dibenzo(g,h,i)perylene, arsenic and lead found in the lead oxide unloading area soil samples exceed
either the August 1996 EPA Superfund Chemical Data Matrix (SCDM) human health-based soil
screening benchmarks, or the August 1998 North Carolina Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch soil
remediation goals (NC RG's).
A soil sample from the overland runoff pathway connecting the site to Basin I exhibited
elevated levels of phenanthrene, fluoranthene, pyrene, benzo(a)anthracene, chrysene,
benzo(b/k)fluoranthene, benzo(a)pyrene, indeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene, benzo(g,h,i)perylene and lead.
The levels of benzo(a)anthracene, benzo(b/k)fluoranthene, benzo(a)pyrene and indeno (1,2,3-
cd)pyrene exceed either the August 1996 EPA Superfund Chemical Data Matrix (SCDM) human
health-based soil screening benchmarks, or the August 1998 North Carolina Inactive Hazardous Sites
Branch soil remediation goals (NC RG's).
6.6 Soil Exposure and Air Pathway Conclusions
The analytical results from onsite soil samples demonstrate elevated levels of numerous
hazardous substances remaining in soils at various locations at concentrations exceeding published
human health-based screening benchmarks. There are 63 0 workers employed at the facility within
200 feet of these contaminated soils. There are no residences, schools or day care facilities within
200 feet of any of the known areas of soil contamination at the site.
Although the facility reports annual fugitive emissions oflead and lead compounds, the results
of the stack tests as reported during conversations with Forsyth County regulators indicate that the
facility is operating within compliance ofits air quality permit limitations. Since the facility stacks are
part of a process that is actively regulated under the direction of Forsyth County Department of
Environmental Affairs, the stack releases are not considered CERCLA-eligible. Based on their low
particulate mobility and limited volume, there is little probability of the onsite soil contaminants at the
three CERCLA eligible sources being entrained to air at quantities that could affect enough air
pathway receptors to warrant federal action.
7.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The NC Superfund Section conducted an Expanded Site Inspection of the Johnson Controls-
Globe Battery Division site to determine the need for further action under CERCLA. The scope of
the investigation included review of available file information, a comprehensive target survey, onsite
and offsite reconnaissances (May 8, June 3, and July 30, 1997), interviewing neighbors, collecting
environmental samples (August 11-13, 1997) and collecting additional non-sampling information to
document Hazard Ranking System factors. Samples were collected from onsite and offsite soil,
groundwater, surface water and sediments.
On August 11-13, 1997, the NC Superfund Section collected soil samples from three source
areas and in the overland runoff pathway from the three source areas. Compared to their appropriate
background soil samples, elevated levels ofphenanthrene, fluoranthene, pyrene, benzo(a)anthracene,
38
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
chrysene, benzo(b/k)fluoranthene, benzo(a)pyrene, indeno(l ,2,3-cd)pyrene, benzo(g,h,i)perylene,
carbazole, arsenic, calcium, lead, manganese, total mercury, molybdenum, potassium, sodium,
strontium and zinc were detected in surficial soil samples collected from three source areas at the site.
Ofthese contaminants, benzo(a)anthracene, benzo(b/k)fluoranthene, benzo(a)pyrene, indeno(l,2,3-
cd)pyrene, dibenzo(g,h,i)perylene, arsenic and lead found in the lead oxide unloading area soil
samples exceed either the August 1996 EPA Superfund Chemical Data Matrix (SCDM) human
health-based soil screening benchmarks, or the August 1998 North Carolina Inactive Hazardous Sites
Branch soil remediation goals (NC RG's).
A soil sample from the overland runoff pathway connecting the site to Basin 1 exhibited
elevated levels of phenanthrene, fluoranthene, pyrene, benzo( a )anthracene, chrysene,
benzo(b/k)fluoranthene, benzo(a)pyrene, indeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene, benzo(g,h,i)perylene and lead.
The levels of benzo(a)anthracene, benzo(b/k)fluoranthene, benzo(a)pyrene and indeno (1,2,3-
cd)pyrene exceed either the August 1996 EPA Superfund Chemical Data Matrix (SCDM) human
health-based soil screening benchmarks, or the May 1997 North Carolina Inactive Hazardous Sites
Branch soil remediation goals (NC RG's).
No formal air samples were collected during the ESI investigation since the site is in
compliance with the restrictions ofit air quality permit. Since the facility stacks are part of a process
that is actively regulated under the direction of Forsyth County Department of Environmental Affairs,
the stack releases are not considered CERCLA-eligible. Based on their low particulate mobility and
limited volume, there is little probability of the onsite soil contaminants at the three CERCLA sources
being entrained to air at quantities that could affect enough air pathway receptors to warrant federal
action.
During the August 13, 1997 ESI, The NC Superfund Section personnel collected a
groundwater sample from the nearest residence and an upgradient background well. Compared to
the background well sample, elevated levels of barium, copper, lead, manganese and zinc were
identified in the nearest residential well to the site. Of these contaminants, elevated levels of lead,
manganese and zinc were also found in onsite source soil samples collected during this investigation.
Fortunately, the levels of contaminants did not exceed their respective EPA Maximum Contaminant
Levels, or North Carolina groundwater standards. Due to the low levels of contaminants, the site
does not pose a sufficient threat to groundwater users to warrant federal action.
Historic releases of barium and lead were reported in surface water samples collected from
the unnamed tributary below Basin # 1. In addition, historic releases of phenanthrene, fluoranthene,
pyrene, benzo(a)anthracene, chrysene, benzo(b)fluoranthene, bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, chromium
and lead were reported in sediment samples collected from the unnamed tributary below Basin # 1.
The ESI analytical results reported elevated levels of phenanthrene, fluoranthene, pyrene,
benzo( a)anthracene, chrysene, benzo(b )fluoranthene, benzo( a)pyrene, indeno( 1,2,3-cd)pyrene,
benzo(g,h,i)perylene and lead discharging from the site to Basin # 1, and elevated levels of lead in
sediment and aqueous samples collected from the unnamed tributary below Basin # I. The most
39
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
recent set of sediment samples below Basin # I also exhibited fluoranthene, pyrene and
benzo(b )fluoranthene, but at concentrations too small to be considered reliably quantified.
Comparing the current to the historic analytical results, it appears that many similar compounds are
present in onsite soils and in the overland runoff pathway from the site, but the concentrations have
shown a decrease within the last 6 years.
The current analytical results from source, attribution and target samples demonstrate an
observed release oflead from the site to surface water collected from a wetland that exists along the
unnamed tributary connecting Basin # I to Lowery Mill Creek. Elevated levels of lead have been
found in onsite soil samples (JC-006-SL & JC-007-SL), in overland runoff samples that connect the
site to the sedimentation Basin #1 (JC-014-SL), in samples of runoff below Basin #1 (JC-004-
SW/SD), and in samples of surface water and sediment from the nearest known wetland (JC-006-
SW/SD & JC-106-SW/SD). Lead exhibits a high bioaccumulation and high ecotoxicity to aquatic
organisms, and an observed release of lead has been demonstrated in surface water samples at levels
that pose a significant threat to the nearest wetland. The segment affected by this observed release
extends 332 linear feet downstream from the head of the wetland, for a total of664 feet of wetland
frontage (or 0.13 miles).
An observed release oflead was found in a surface water sample (JC-012-SW) from Lowery
Mill Creek at levels that would not exceed the ecologically-based benchmark. This is an observed
release that would extend the affected area downstream for an additional 500 feet to the sample point
(JC-012-SW), for a total of700 feet of additional wetland frontage (or 0.13 miles).
Based on the analytical results, the site appears to be releasing lead to surface water at
concentrations that could pose a significant threat to the nearby wetland. Based on these findings,
The NC Superfund Section recommends the site for further remedial action under CERCLNSARA.
40
i/ I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Volume I/ References 1 -18
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Volume II/ References 19 -34
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
IO.
11.
Johnson Controls-Globe Battery Division
Expanded Site Inspection
References
United States Environmental Protection Agency. Publication No. 9345.0-0lA. Guidance for
Performing Preliminary Assessments under CERCLA, Appendix E, September 1991.
Latitude/Longitude Worksheet #2. Johnson Controls, Inc., 2701 Johnson Controls Dr.,
Winston-Salem, N.C. 27285. March 2, 1998.
United States Department of Commerce. Technical Paper No. 40: Rainfall Frequency Atlas
of the United States. Issued 1961.
United States Department of Commerce. Climatic Atlas of the United States. National
Climatic Center, Asheville, NC. 1979.
Moore, Douglas, Environmental Chemist, NC Superfund Section. Memo to File. Subj.:
Onsite Reconnaissance. Johnson Controls-Globe Battery Division. Winston-Salem, Forsyth
County, North Carolina. US EPA ID: NCD 000 770 487. May 12, 1997.
Environmental Research and Technology, Inc. RCRA Part B Application for Hazardous
Waste Storage Area. Prepared for Johnson Controls, Inc. Globe Battery Division, Winston-
Salem,North Carolina, In Conjunction with: Johnson Controls, Inc., Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Document D-144, June 1984.
EPA Hazardous Waste Permit Application (EPA Forms 3510-1 and 3510-3) for Johnson
Controls, Inc., Globe Battery Division, Winston Salem, North Carolina. Filed by Milton C.
Zillis. 1981.
Taimi, T. Michael (EPA). Letter to Mr. Robert F. Nicolai (Johnson Controls) regarding
withdrawal of the Part A Hazardous Waste Permit Application. October 8, 1981.
Thoman, Daniel P. (EPA). Letter to Mr. Robert F. Nicolai (Johnson Controls) regarding
reactivation of file and notification of Part A Hazardous Waste Permit Application.
November 9, 1981.
RCRA Inspection Report for Johnson Controls, Inc., Globe Battery Division. December 2,
1981.
Tanner, Terry L. (NUS Corporation). Phase I Site Screening Inspection report, Johnson
Controls, Inc. Globe Battery. Winston-Salem, Forsyth County, North Carolina. EPA ID No.
NCTE. TDD No. F4-9001-170. September 12, 1990.
Meyer, William L. (NCDHR). Letter to Mr. Mark Pegram (Johnson Controls) regarding
intent to deny hazardous waste permit. May 27, 1986.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Edwards, R.J (DENR). Letter to Mr. Eric Henningsberg (Johnson Controls) regarding
change in facility status under RCRA program. September 21, 1995.
Potential Hazardous Waste Site Preliminary Assessment (EPA Form 2070-120) for Johnson
Controls, Inc., Globe Battery Division. Filed by O.W. Strickland (NCDHR). May 22, 1984.
Greenhorne and O'Mara, Inc., Phase II Screening Site Investigation for the Johnson
Controls, Inc., Globe Battery Division. Winston-Salem, Forsyth County, North Carolina,
NCD 000 770 487. October 1991, Revised February 1992.
Moore, Douglas (NC DENR). Memorandum to File. Subject: Expanded Site Inspection
Sampling Trip, Johnson Controls -Globe Battery Division, Winston-Salem, Forsyth County,
North Carolina. NCD 000 770 487. August 18, 1997.
Moore, Douglas (NC DENR). Memorandum to File. Subject: File Information. Johnson
Controls -Globe Battery Division, Winston-Salem, Forsyth County, North Carolina. NCO
000 770 487. May 7, 1997.
Nicolai, Robert F., Manager -Environmental Control, Johnson Controls. Letter to Mr. Frank
Moore, Department of Human Resources. Subject: Johnson Controls, Inc.'s EPA
Notifications of Previous Hazardous Waste Spills dated 6/8/81 -Winston Salem Facility -
NCD 000770487. December 8, 1983.
Pegram, Mark, Engineering Manager, Johnson Controls. Letter to Mr. Steve Phibbs, N.C.
Department of Human Resources, Solid and Hazardous Waste Management Branch. Subject:
Lead Spill Clean-Up Proposal. May 13, 1983. w/attachments.
Russ, Robert 0., Environmental Specialist, Forsyth County Environmental Affairs
Department. Letter to Doug Moore, NC Superfund Section. w/Enclosures. January 8,
1998.
Moore, Douglas (NC DENR). Memo to File. Subject: Air Quality Information. Johnson
Controls -Globe Battery Division, Winston-Salem, Forsyth County, North Carolina. NCD
000 770 487. January 6, 1998.
Moore, Douglas (NC DENR). Letter to Phil Vorsatz, Chief -NC Site Management Section,
US EPA. Subject: Expanded Site Inspection Sampling Plan. Johnson Controls -Globe
Battery Division. Winston-Salem, Forsyth County, NC. US EPA ID: NCD 000 770 487.
June 26, 1997 w/attachments.
Moore, Douglas (NC DENR). Letter to Mrs. Debbie Hastings, CHMM -Johnson Controls,
Inc. -Automotive Systems Group. Subject: Analytical Results -Expanded Site Inspection.
Johnson Controls -Globe Battery Division. January 22, 1998.
United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
Response. "Using Qualified Data to Document an Observed Release". Directive 9285.7-
14FS. July 1994.
Moore, Douglas (NC DENR). Letter to Mr. Gary Bennett, USEP A -Science and Ecosystem
Division. Subject: Data Reinvestigation Request for Antech Limited CLP RAS/SAS
Analytical Results (EPA Case No. 97-0329). Johnson Controls -Expanded Site Inspection.
US EPA ID: NCD 000 770 487. September 30, 1997.
Bates, Keith. Environmental Scientist -Office of Quality Assurance, Science and Ecosystem
Support Division, US EPA Region IV. Letter to Mr. Doug Moore, State of North Carolina
Superfund Program. Subject: Chain of Custody for Johnson Control Project. May 7, 1998.
Scifres, Jenny. Chief -Inorganics Chemisty Section, Science and Ecosystem Support
Division, US EPA Region IV. Letter to Mr. Douglas Moore, NC Superfund Section. May
18, 1998.
United States Environmental Protection Agency. Superfund Chemical Data Matrix.
Appendix B. Hazard Ranking System. Hazardous Substances Benchmarks. August 19,
1996.
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources. Division of
Waste Management. Superfund Section -Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch. Guidelines for
Assessment and Cleanup. August I 998.
Kirk-OthmerEncyclopedia of Chemical Technology. Third Edition. (John Wiley and Sons,
Inc.: New York. Chichester. Brisbane. Toronto) 1978. Volume 3, pp. 649-659.
Geologic Map of North Carolina. North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and
Community Development, Division of Land Resources. Compiled by the North Carolina
Geological Survey. 1985.
United States Geological Survey. The Hydrogeological Framework and a Reconnaissance
of Ground-Water Quality in the Piedmont Province of North Carolina, with a design for
future study. By Douglas A. Hamed. Water Resources Investigations Report 88-4130.
Raleigh, North Carolina : 1989.
Moore, Douglas (NC DENR), Memo to File. Subject: Winston-Salem/Forsyth County
Water System. Johnson Controls -Globe Battery Division. Winston-Salem, Forsyth County,
NC. USEPAID:NCD000770487. July 17, 1998.
Moore, Douglas (NC DENR), Memo to File. Subject: Walkertown Water System. Johnson
Controls -Globe Battery Division. Winston-Salem, Forsyth County, NC. US EPA ID: NCD
000 770 487. July IS, 1998.
Glynn. M. Joan (G&O). Population Calculations Re: Groundwater and air populations
within a 4 mile radius of the Johnson Controls, Inc. Globe Battery Division. September 16,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
1991. Revised February 14, 1992.
North Carolina Administrative Code, Title 15 A, Subchapter 2L. Classifications and Water
Quality Standards Applicable to the Groundwaters of North Carolina.
DeRosa, Pat (NC DENR). Well Notification Letters to Mr. Henry Moore and Mr. Otis Crew.
Subject: Well Sample Results. Johnson Controls -Globe Battery Division. Winston-Salem,
Forsyth County, NC. US EPA ID: NCO 000 770 487. February 5, 1998.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District. Notification of Jurisdictional
Determination. Action ID: 199700928. July 7, 1997.
Moore, Douglas (NC DENR). Memo to File. Subject: Wetland Delineation. Johnson
Controls-Globe Battery Division. Winston-Salem, Forsyth County, NC. US EPA ID: NCO
000 770 487. June 4, I 997. ·
National Flood Insurance Program. Flood Insurance Rate Map. City of Winston-Salem,
North Carolina, Forsyth County. Community Panel Number 375360 0045F. Map Revised:
January 5, 1984. ·
State of North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources.
Classifications and Water Quality Standards Assigned to the Waters of the Yadkin-Pee Dee
RiverBasin. Chapter 15ANCAC2B.0309. Febraury 1, 1993.
Moore, Douglas (NC DENR). Memo to File. Subject: Flow Calculations. Johnson
Controls-Globe Battery Division. Winston-Salem, Forsyth County, NC. US EPA ID: NCO
000 770 487. July 23, 1998.
Moore, Douglas (NC DENR). Memo to File. Subject: Fishery Information for Salem Lake.
Johnson Controls -Globe Battery Division. Winston-Salem, Forsyth County, NC. US EPA
ID: NCO 000 770 487. April 24, 1997.
United States Department of the Interior. Fish and Wildlife Service. National Wetland
Inventory Maps. (Walkertown, NC; Winston-Salem East, NC; Winston-Salem West, NC).
Moore, Douglas (NC DENR). Memo to File. Subject: Natural Heritage Program File
Review. Johnson Controls -Globe Battery Division. Winston-Salem, Forsyth County, NC.
US EPA ID: NCO 000 770 487. April 23, 1997.
United States Department of Agriculture. Soil Conservation Service. Soil Survey of Forsyth
County, North Carolina. Issued May 1976.
North Carolina Center for Geographic Information and Analysis. Population Estimates
within a 4.0 mile radius. Johnson Controls. US EPA ID: NCO 000 770 487. January 06,
1998.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
47. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Comprehensive Environmental Response
Compensation and Liability Act Information System (CERCLIS 3). Sorted by State and Site
Name. Current through February 2, 1998.
48. Moore, Douglas (NC DENR). Memo to File. Subject: POTW Permit. Johnson Controls -
Globe Battery Division. Winston-Salem, Forsyth County, NC. US EPA ID: NCD 000 770
487. September 30, 1998.
49. North Carolina Public Water Supply Database. Printout of registered wells. Latitude
36/02/30 to 30/11/00. Longitude 80/05/00 to 80/14/00. April 25, 1997.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
II.
12.
13.
Johnson Controls -Globe Battery Division
Expanded Site Inspection
Photograph Log
Condition of Basin #1. Storm water discharges to basin at eroded area on opposite bank
( center of photo). According to employee, basin was recently dredged and reseeded with new
grass to stabilize the banks (May 8, 1997).
Condition of Basin #I. Storm water discharges from basin through the vertical overflow pipe
at darn (near the bottom center of photo) (May 8, 1997).
Condition of Basin #2. Storm water discharges to basin at drainage feature ( center of photo),
and discharges from the basin through the vertical overflow pipe at the darn (near the bottom
center of photo). According to employee, basin was recently dredged and reseeded with new
grass to stabilize the banks (May 8, 1997).
Condition of Basin #3. Storm water discharges to basin at eroded area on opposite bank
( center of photo). According to employee, basin was recently dredged and reseeded with new
grass to stabilize the banks (May 8, 1997).
NC Department of Transportation aerial photo showing Johnson Controls facility and
surrounding community (March 19, 1994). ·
Background soil sample point JC-001/101-SL and JB-001/101-SL, in wooded area northwest
of the facility (August 13, 1997).
Soil sample point JC-004-SL in the overland runoff pathway leading from the acid mixing
building to a catch basin. The Vitro equipment and Battery Formation area vent fans are
visible in the upper right hand comer (August 13, 1997).
Soil sample point JC-006-SL, in drainage ditch opposite Loading Bay #15 (August 13, 1997).
Closeup of soil sample point JC-006-SL, showing devegetated soil in drainage ditch, opposite
Loading Bay #15. (August 13, 1997).
Soil sample point JC-007-SL, in drainage ditch opposite Loading Bay #13 (August 13, 1997).
Soil sample point JC-008-SL in grassy area reportedly used for drum storage near the
southeast comer of the facility (August 13, 1997).
Soil sample JC-009-SL in grassy area reportedly used for drum storage near intersection of
railroad tracks at southeast comer of facility (August 13, 1997).
Soil sample JC-010-SL collected from 5 x 7 foot bare area at northwest comer of acid
r
I
I storage building (August 13, 1997). ..
14. Soil sample JC-0 I I-SL, collected from soil deposited in the overland runoff pathway north
I of the main facility. Runoff from the acid storage area discharges from the pipe shown in the
center of the photo (August 13, 1997).
I 15. Soil sample JC-012-SL, collected from a drainage culvert north of the main facility in the
overland runoff pathway to Basin #3 (August 13, 1997).
I 16. Soil sample JC-013-SL, collected below the splash pad at the head ofBasin #2. Overland
runoff discharges to Basin #2 through the pipe shown in the center of the photo (August 13,
I 1997).
17. Soil sample JC-014-SL, collected in the overland runoff pathway about 30 feet upgradient
I ofBasin #1. Runoff from the facility discharges through a pipe located upgradient of this
point and drains across bare soil to Basin I (August 13, I 997).
I 18. Background surface water and sediment sample JC-001-SW/SD. Sample collected on the
unnamed tributary above the confluence with the branch from Basin I. (August 13, 1997).
I 19. Surface water JC-004-SW, collected from the unnamed tributary about 250 feet below Basin
I. (August 13, 1997).
I 20. Sediment sample JC-004-SD, collected from the unnamed tributary about 250 feet below
Basin I. Note: Visible in the center of the photo is a small seep that originates about 225 feet
I 21.
below Basin I and discharges to the unnamed tributary at this point. (August 13, 1997).
Surface water sample JC-005-SW, collected from a small pool near the base of a spring that
I discharges to the unnamed tributary below Basin I. (August 13, 1997).
22. Surface water sample JC-006-SW and duplicate surface water sample JC-I 06-SW, collected
I from a point 332 feet into the nearby wetland bordering the unnamed tributary below Basin
I (August 12, 1997).
I 23. Surface water sample JC-002-SW, collected from the unnamed tributary about I 50 feet
below Basin 3. (August 13, 1997).
I 24. Condition of unnamed tributary below Basin 2. Since the unnamed tributary was dry, no
surface water sample could be collected. Sediment sample JC-003-SD was collected near this
spot, about 100 feet below Basin 2 (August 13, 1997).
I 25. The unnamed tributary below Basins 2 and 3, about 75 feet upstream of the confluence with
Lowery Mill Creek. Surface water sample JC-007-SW and duplicate surface water sample
I JC-107-SW were collected from the small pool shown in center of the photo. The tributary
at this point exhibited orange stained sediment (August 12, 1997).
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
Surface water sample JC-009-SW, collected from Lowery Mill Creek, about 300 feet
downstream of the discharge from the unnamed tributary below Basins 2 and 3. (August 12,
1997).
Surface water sample JC-012-SW, collected from Lowery Mill Creek, about 140 feet
downstream of the discharge from the unnamed tributary below Basin I.· (August 12, 1997).
Sediment sample JC-012-SD, collected from Lowery Mill Creek, about 140 feet downstream
of the discharge from the unnamed tributary below Basin I. Lowery Mill Creek exhibits a
characteristic meandering pattern common to mature streams with strongly eroded banks,
deep pools on the outer bends and depositional point bars on the inner bends (August 12,
1997).
Background surface water and sediment samples collected from this area looking east from
the Greensboro Road bridge over the south wing of Salem Lake (August 11, 1997).
Background surface water sample JC-021-SW, collected at the Greensboro Road bridge over
the south wing of Salem Lake. Photo shows the vacuum jug and peristaltic pump assembly
used to collect a 3-point vertical composite of the water column at this location (August 11,
1997).
Background sediment sampling for JC-021-SD above the Greensboro Road bridge over the
south wing of Salem Lake (August 11, 1997).
Surface water sample JC-018-SW, collected at the Greensboro Road bridge over the north
wing of Salem Lake. Photo shows the vacuum jug and peristaltic pump assembly used to
collect a 3-point vertical composite of the water column at this location (August 11, 1997).
Sediment sample JC-018-SD and duplicate sediment sample JC-019-SD, collected from a
3-point composite of silty deposition bars on the south bank of Salem Lake, about 200 feet
north of Greensboro Road (August 11, 1997).
Surface water sample JC-020-SW, collected near the Salem Lake dam. The Forsyth County
drinking water intake is visible near the top center of the photo. (August 11, I 997).
--

-

-

-
-

-

-
-----

-
i;s,'~;~-~~~-
) j:-·~ . . ···1
,€ -·, };
' ~ l ~t
f . "f
,,,.~ l ·. m..,, ,. ·~ , ;:;
-~lt ·
' " , t,1.
ta~ .. :' Bl : I i1
' .
' j ·~ .
• , .. ~ 1
.... sr .i;};: :f
· -,171{ :,,.ii&
. l,.s, ~ l ,,.,lf, ~
' t.,'-..,, , ••
')~~ !~,..-
:if;;,: .•• --,'!
'l•t,;""'"'', ..
:ilf;. \/:
-~~~ ,~, ... . •-N~4i%J.£@ -~ mJ.
ei! 0 2s
,,
,....
-.~,xw -.sT.~,..:ZSJ..J.j,$.&.@_; 4.::Git-..!IS\J.. •. .-o.!'. ke.;;.;;;,...,.;ss:g __ £.,
PHOT03.
PHOTO 4 .
... -·-. -. -.·•::::-. .:~
if -~, ... ~• ....
~ ·••
'Ii :
.t . ,
. ,
--:-:.~--:
1
•07
2
TES
DEP
GICAL SUR
T
y
IO
a 15'
J5". I
'
~\';2 ,,
•J· £_) -"07 -~
-=-->;
{':-'
•o;
.1
10
-=1 r --" H/0 r I ' / . ,~';:$.:' " : -. . ~ ,.
:---~ "1/:t, ~ ) -
-l =rt1i_·5~ 11 '"•'io0• ~-LI /? r r:,,,,,~ r_.t-~~ \:;
'°(ll)
C : ,,
=-~) /~-'~""'':o
' 1 1<' ~
l"-/ 1lr \~ I I ,,
i •
''
,
"89
Produc the Um d Sta s Geological Survey
I by uses, NOS/NOA and North Carolina Geodetic Survey
a e by Ph tagramme!r11 m~thods lrom aerial photograp
taken 1948 fopogrophy by planet able surveys I ½49-o
North erican Odium l 27 (N 27) Pr Jee n and
10 000 fo tick N t Caroln c ordinate systen
(Lambert con rm~I n1
Blue 1000-meter Unl\lersal lransv, r~ Mercator tic s zon 17
North Amer,cdn Datum I 83 NAD 83) 1s sh ~n by da~hed
cornr.r licks value of the hill between NAD 27 and NAD 3
for 7 1mrte mtersectim,, are obt:mable from National Geodetic
Survey N OCON sc,flware
Red l1n 1nd1cates areas 1n which only I mdmark bu1ld1ngs are sho
*
I
I 4 OOscale lo gr ph1c p
J son ntrol -Glob Battery Ut
Wmston-S , I or y C unty, C
US ~l'A llJ NCD 00 770 487
D
STA E OF ORTH CAR LINA
ARTMENT OF TUR L
RALEIGH,
,w.
"
ORT!
D NOMIC R
CARO N
. ' '
.
~-'
ff -/'<>--
,{~-~~
~) ~' \j ~1,;
'"' 'J ,.,
< ,-,--
CC;."""< 11
. ' ' -
' ' l( "
CONT
IOIK
JR I TERV
ATIONAL ~COD£TIC ~TIC
,,
" " \ \ ""I; ' ' '
C ET
DATU
OURC S
00 OJ EE"
'" '"
f.OMr [S', TIil" L Ls FV CTANDARD ·o CP/\T AL cu ACY c.A~s
SALE 8Y U S GEOLOGICAL SU
DENVER C OAA B0225 OR S N VIRGINIA 22092
LDER DESCRIBING TOPOG~APHIC MAPS AND SYMBOLS IS AV LABLE ON REOU
• 'I •JI / ·.'
)•:y
Co
LKERTO
ORTH
7 5 M UT
QU DR N
NA FORSYTH CO
PH O OG
W!IIKe--r1f
..::-'\o-""' .::=i ' '
RANCL LOCAIIUN
Rr.v1s1ons ow 1n purple compiled r LOuperal1on w
State of Nort Carolina agern;1es from aerial pbotographs
taken 1991 Jnd other snurc Th.s I matlon n
f1cl<1 checked Map edited 1994
Information shown I purple n1ay not nmet
standar and mJy conihct with rev1ously map
Purple tint 1nd1cates extens10
\ !., c,
I,.. \ ' ,\f, I
-"'"h -
"I '\'.I .J. I 1r-i,.;
' "
,,
Prima hghway
hard surface
Secondary h1ghw~y
hard surface
R
lriler Route
r
~r ,< {
V '::"'""'.'', ••• --·
" { 78-
ICATION
L(I duly road r,
irpro, d surface
~d roa
U ' Route
rU or
TO LEM T,
D 1994
OMA 4-9 II SW-SERIES VB
, , , I
,, ,,.,..,,.~"'"
. ' ,, J
LE
DE
u D T s
I
STA OF ELE S CRE QUADRA
LIN
GLE
RTME T OF TH
GEOLOGIC U
C'
. ' '
11''; ~Q
TERIO
y
•
D
I • "'-=--;fr.'11 ~ • y!\
I ,---'<
/ l c,. -~ ','' 1,r
I I ,-~ <\
ll~-\.1 ~f [c,
C C ,,.,,•., I;,,_ I
. .
'
) )
.J1) ,, .
., ..
' ', ' '((' ~ ·_ 1-' ii
[.::\_.)·<. 4
,., -,\ I
' )"
'
• I • I
ELOPME
11 _ "1~ <;¢Xy 1
! 1Jk,,ilifi: -~~"'' ,z
' . •=r d "
' . ' ' '
\
. (
Ii t ~w "' ' ' ' \-;; ~
I ':~:§i; I '
. jj.,,, ., .
I
·11( \
\ (-(
\I
'i • II
" 7-·:_;j-""':', "'"·
yl ", -!
,-,
•
,,
y
'f\ :, ~ \
j
.
'l
·I
( 11•
~ ,,
'
I
' :::: \_,
75
I
,.~· ' 1'. .
• •• j:f'
~, ,h
,,,
.
/ I I f
/ / •,;/,
1/ :::>-----
) . .-, )'
I
. . '
9$(_ :C---_ 1
I .
' , -=--"
' )
'f-"', '. ',•
. • I I . •,
/-, \ j
i -~ )
\) ~ -
' '
~LLI
odu ed by th United Sta s olog1cal Surv
Control S, NOS/NOAA U S Soil C nservat1on Serv,ce
North C olrn eodet1c Survey
graph bv pho gram tnc mcth s from aerial photo,:ra
taken 1 %5 F1rld checked 1%
North American D~h•m 7 INAD 271 Pro1ect1an a11d
JO 000.foot ticks North Ca,olina coordinate sy:;tem
Ila, ert conformal conic)
C Blue lOOO~neter Ur11vcrsal Tra11sverse Metcat t ks zone 17
Nor l\menran llatu of 983 INAD 31 shown by dashed
corner ticks The values the shift between A 27 and NAO 83
for 7 5-rninute 1ntersect10 s are obtainable from Nat nal tic
Survey NI\D( ON software
Re<l bnl 1nd1cates areo1~ rn which only landmark bu1ld1ngs ar ,t10\o\n
F111e red do shed lines 1nd1cale selected fence and field Ines where
generally v1,1ble on aerial p otogra s T s inf mat1on unchecked
" : U\\'
.y! ..
~· Y.1--,. -~. J,.,: . . ... "'
.\
;; ..
• I·
' ,v1 1
/·_~ --
r~
?
' c ~-,, ,r\
.:,','j~} cul~'•
;,,. ~ ·ll_~ • • • ;c-,
r • t
'
'
\Ii 'T,,l,l<
· J."'
I
/.
.:.. I II» -' . • 1 I "'--/ ~ -'---' y . ._.,,,* a,.,, . ' ' ' I -~ ,.,.
'\""
"'' 11
• I •"c;""c-:7'"""::~
. ·"'= . • • -11'
{
'
\J)
11 -t~
' ';\,'s'S.'---~ .--~
\
i
)
-Yi~
/ _,.,;tt ~ !} '"' ,---
, , ~-D, ,.._ ;:J ' :;, \ "'¾•--(
_1 o.r:r
.'.'( ,.._ ,,,
\'\ I ~
11, ·:. f -
,-·" , ;'I !1 I ~ ;I I / j ,--., \ ,'-i'i·
1 -~ ~ --J) 1/Sl' •el ' -7-. -
----\ -·-:, / I I,_
\,. / , · V .11 ;,, ··"'-~-' ~
.YJ<:]I,~ '
• ';:>.
' ' -J,. . di0
'
.
/ -) / ,f1~-: 00 ) -/' ,-, .. ~,l~"'?'~ \l':>" \,,
c!/5<'~ -, ~ -1 ) "1 I ~ / ~ff<~•,,'(f.~. Ir 1'1: V
>"·c'""--'-'t'__\ (1):1,, if lj ii/: i; .) ' •. .. ..L~'.'"""'lhloc.'+c..C'.,J', "'".'.' /_~/_/_,2/_/__'cS;'"';Socc,;;;?'-R:~~""2,"2Cc'L.2._L,.(.-,~d1::ii+,;,2.L2c:Jcl '.\"';' JJcc·c...:,,,:,,.c-'~ '82 5 'l!J WC T ,3, •&, JO <,
-~
124 11Ls,1, ', 0'''''"' 0 MILS
11
UTM QRID ANO 1994 ~A~NETl~ NOR H
OECLINATION Al crnn~ SHSSI
lDER
1 l. ooc
::::J\ CUH I\ 1:.HI L 1
DNJ\L GEODETIC VERT AL
r 1:.1:. I
' 79?9
= ~ILOI E rn
.~ IH N/\IIU AL MA ~r.f.l ~ TJ\NDARD,
ALE BY U S GEOLOGICAL SUR Y
V GINIA "" IS A AILA ON REOUEST
ev1s10ns snolil1 1n purp compiled 1n cao~eratm mth
Sidle at North arol1na o~cnc,cs lrorn o~nal photo~raph,
takrn 91 and ot er ,urce, Thi farmat10 n
IIPld checked Map edit 1994
lnfanriul1or1 sl10wr1 1r> pu1ple may not meet U ment
Priirary h1 h~av
ere urf
s~0 J1dc1r~ r1g11va
rard ,;urfac
<;\ardards and may conf 1 with prev1ou;ly mapped c to s
Purple tint md1cale, e~tN1s1on of ~rban are~s
NORTH R
JES INUTE S OP GR PHJ
/IC CL S
'00 1 36 l
""'~ --.,,-.. , ;; '\_, ¼,; _ 910 00
~~ ,~-, -.,,,-rLu
~~~
.0·. " '
'
% I ''l
• I I I I 1 1 \
' ,j :,, ,{i''"' :.;L ,f,ii
I• , l I ,Ii ~
{ . ,, ~ / 111' ,,, 1·~ ' :,;j}'!1<-(;d" '.c:-vl)l
< \i:n< ' '-\ '::-"' "'118
. '
'
H/' ,J
' ' 1,7, ·C,1 •
~, l / ' Ji ,~ -'..,---;-_.....,
/
"
4007
' s
(
;i--\ /!
1) ···,/t C <x!•~o Y -,:,ra;,rJ
"8\flfOm
•
{"',. -" ,,, ,.
' J
/• Jf, [)0 so· o
FICA 0
~ghtdut) rua
rnprov,.,J ,urf
liar
u
SlteR1J!e
ILLE, N. C.
2
1969
REVISED 1994
DMII 4~5\l SE-SERIFS VB4-2
"
'I
I
\
I
/
l
I
I
•
.,
-
i
.-..
, ,.. \
I I
' /' ~ )
)
I
WATEti SUPPLY LINE;
APPROXIMATE PROPERTV LINE
C,k'OUND SUl<F:.CE CONTOURS
-------
/
'l 1.1AP COMPIL[D FROM WIN5TON·5ALEM
: •. ,T ·,uADl'IANGLE: MAP 17 !, ~11N :jlQlt.;S) AND
" ,)c\[ BATTEl<V DIVISION SITE DEVELOPMENT
·.:,,~.DATED 11/11/77, 1"•!:,0J:T SCALE
-------
/
I
/
f:: "" "' -,.., -'
"-
\
l I
, I
I ,
I
I
SJ
\ I \
\
\. /
) . /
. ) ',
. -· . .. ---,--,
0
' I I \ \ \ .
\ ' \ \
\
••• IT .. ,,. 01.11
i;-~ ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH & TECHNOLOGY.INC.
~[.J 696 VIRGINIA ROAD. CONCORD, MASSACHUSETTS 01742
TITU: TOPOGRAPHIC MAP
GLOBE BATTERY
WINSTON-SALEM,
ca Tl I
'IC Al I
DIVISION PLANT
NORTH CAROLINA
: , 200 B-1
/
E 1,650,000
X
/ 827,5
826.6
X !_
\
\ 82
~~
-------_.. . ==::\
~~~:::_j,::.:-~ \ I I\.'-I I
I I I
9 I.B
ROADS WATER -------... __ ___,,-
DRIVES ----------DAM ~~ ----------
BRIDGE =e=J= FENCE --x )(---·
CULVERT ~ f--WALL
RAILROAD TRANS.LINE le TOWER -e-----~--
D D HORIZONTAL CONTROL /2-i USGS BUILDINGS
X 21-2
TREES ~ VERTICAL CONTROL BM-5
SWAMP ·-----~-CONTOURS ~ :::::::::==. --~ 1
E ,651,000
--I -_,,, -_ ...... _./
INDEX TO SHEETS
048 049 050
·-
025 026 051
--.
010 027 052
200 0 20Q 400 600
.J I I
SCALE I '=200' CONTOUR INTERVAL 2'
E 1,652,000
GRIDS BASED OU NORTH CAROLINA
ST ATE COORDINATE SYSTEM
199J DATUM
E 1,653,000 E 1,654,000
1 :200 scale Topographic Map
(showing on-and off-site sample locations -August 11-13, 1997)
Johnson Controls -Globe Battery Division
Winston-Salem, Forsyth County, NC
US EPA ID: NCD 000 770 487
N 866,000
N 86~.0Q0
N 864,000
Pl 86J.OOO
~4 1962.000
WINSTON=SALEM9 NoCo
CITY OF WINSTON-SALEM
DATE OF PHOTO~RAPHY r[BRUARY, 1990
lXt benotec ossociotes
ENCN.lRS. ~qc,•Tlc rs •"1'0TOGIIAIAC TR'STS
C Cl IJU1ll1S. t'I IO
()4886?
648882
'
I
'
,-!,
' ' J
...... ' ...
' J
ROADS
DRIVES
BRIOC.E
CULVERT
RAil.ROAD
BUILDINGS
TREES
SWA~P
i
B26,G
X
X
821,5
\ 82
)
DD
~
WATER
□At;
fHICE
WALL
& TO"ER TRMIS.Lil,E
HORIZONT Al CONTROL
CONTROL VERTICAL
ccr.TOIIRS
I
lh '--__,
X
lJSGS
21-2 e .. -s
93~.b . ' /
, > , J
. , JI
.r. *I/, M,~,~~JJ\v~--,
. ,
)., '~---/ -' / . ~~:3,5 1 , r~~i,, --::, -/
-2 , '-4. X 1
I r
( I
.,:,_~,., .,,..-
~,.o
2:0
c::s..1-
\rf_-; , . , ,.
I / 1 1 1( ,
400 600
t al.
CCHTOUR INTCRVl 2'
I NORTH CAROi.NA GRIDS BASED OI OINlT( SYSTEU
SH TE COORJ 0ATlJIJ 19!
JC-015-S\V
' . . :.,;....:.~-~:===~'\._' .!
TION c,§Al,EM7
WINS NSTON-SALEM
(:ITY OF WI rt!lquAR< ,990
DATE 01' Pf•OTo,.,af>HY
lXt
Pl 865.000
N 8£.4.000
I
j
H 86lJ)C0