NCD001810365_19840301_Martin-Marietta Sodyeco Inc. (Clariant)_FRBCERCLA C_Pre-NPL file 1976 - 1984-OCR

•
SITE NAME: /}?//1£..T//V IMA-£/ElT7} {.5'4-IV.OtJZ C,/I.Eff)_(!,/),<!.;!1.)
ID II: /)V (!,/} ~ t /ff 03'(i;, S-/
THIS SITE IS A TSD, DO NOT SCHEDULE SITE INVESTIGATION.
:>
• • POLLUTION PREVENTION PAYS PROJECT OF
M.M. KIMBERLEY
Dept. of Marine, Earth & Atmospheric Sciences
N.C. State University
March 1, 1984
1) TITLE: Pollution Recognition in Existing Wells by
Neutron-Activation Analysis
2) OBJECTIVES: We propose to collect, analyze, and interpret
water-quality samples from existing, potentially polluted wells,
using neutron-activation analysis. We would help to determine
where the drilling of new monitoring wells could be avoided.
3) PROCEDURES: We have selected several diverse sites of known
or potential pollution at which wells presently exist. We will
sample water on multiple occasions, analyze it by neutron
activation, and interpret the results geochemically to determine
the degree of anthropogenic contamination.
4) PERIOD OF WORK: March 1, 1984 to June 30, 1985.
5) PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: M.M. Kimberley, N.C. State University.
6) OTHER PERSONNEL: B.J. Bellis and S.K. Liddle, graduate
students at N.C. State University.
7) RELEVANCE: Given the high cost of drilling new monitoring
·wells, it is unlikely that groundwater pollution could be
measured at many additional sites in the near future unless we
attempt to use a highly sensitive and moderately inexpensive
technique like neutron activation to examine existing wells.
8) RELATION TO OTHER PROJECTS: We expect that disposal sites
which we identify in the proposed study to be severely
- 1 -
• •
contaminating groundwater will become the subject of more
detailed organic analysis by the N.C. Department of Human
Resources (DHR) and others, e.g. Dr. DiGiano. DHR is initiating
a two-year literature study of landfill sites and this DHR study
should guide future selection of sites for investigation by
neutron activation and other types of analysis. We also plan to
cooperate with Drs. Amoozegar-Fard, Robarge, and DiGiano by
analyzing well water at sites where they plan to study soil
chemistry, provided that wells exist at the sites they select.
9) a) POTENTIAL USER GROUPS: The N.C. Dept. of Human Resources
and the Dept. of Natural Resources and Community Development
would be the prime users at the state-wide level. Councils of
Government near the investigated sites also would use the
results.
b) INTERACTION WITH USER GROUPS: We would make any requested
presentation, as we have with previously funded projects.
10) FACILITIES: Neutron-activation analysis would be conducted
with our pure-germanium detector. This has a resolution of 1.8
Kev. Sample prepartion would be conducted in our well-equipped
geochemical .laboratory, Room 224 of Withers Hall.
11) PUBLICATION: A manuscript describing our results would be
published as a WRRI report and also submitted to a journal like
Water Resources Research,.
12) DETERMINATION OF NEED: Existing inorganic water analysis by
government researchers is largely performed by atomic-absorption
spectrophotometry. We seek to demonstrate that
neutron-activation analysis is generally superio"r and that this
-2 -
•
technique offers the best hope of using existing wells to monitor
pollution.
- 3 -
• • APPENDIX A
Analysis of Organic Contaminants in
Unsaturated and Saturated Zones
Organic contaminants are to be analyzed in both the solid and liquid phases
of subsurface samples. In the unsaturated zone, analysis of the "liquid phase"
is made complicated by the fact that the interstitial space is by definition
only partially filled with water. Some form of void space analysis will be
required. Special procedures will be needed to address this analytical problem.
The organic contaminants sorbed on the solid phase, i.e. the soil particles,
in both the saturated and unsaturated zones will need to be desorbed for·analysis.
The literature does not provide a standard procedure for extraction. Solvents
vary as do the procedures for extracting; simple shaking, soxhlet extraction,
heated solvents and ultrasonics have all been used (1,2). Much of the
emphasis has been on recovery of pesticides. However, this research deals with
analysis of organic contaminants from as yet unknown field sites. It is likely,
therefore, that many classes of organic compounds will be encountered and the
rec~very procedure will be influenced by which compounds are present.
For field sites contaminated with volatile organic solvents, such as
trichloroethylene, it is possible to use a simple thermal desorption from the
soil particles. The compounds are trapped and concentrated on a series of
suitable adsorbents, then thermally desorbed into a capillary column (or
packed column) for gas chromato g-aphic analysis. We have a UNACON 780
concentrator that can accept soil samples. Various gas chromatography (GC)
devices are available for quantitative analysis. We routinely use GC for
analysis of tetrachloroethylene, trichloroethylene, and dichloroethane;
similar solvents are analyzed using the same procedure (3).
'..: .. • •
For less volatile compounds such as phenolic derivatives (creosote
waste is one good example) or pesticides, a combination of solvent extraction
and sonification will be used. Methylene chloride or a non-chlorinated
solvent such as acetone or hexane are common choices (4). The literature
provides some comparisons of recovery efficiencies with various solvents for
specific pesticides (2). We are currently using a combination of acetone and
sonification to extract organic compounds adsorbed on activated carbon. The
proper choice of procedure will depend on what information is provided about
the type of contaminants present at the field sites.
Before attempting to quantify the amounts of major organic chemicals
present, a GC/:15 (gas chromatography/mass spectroscopy) analysis will be made
at each field site. This is intended to provide qualitative information
regarding the number and type of compounds present. GC/MS facilities are
available within the department. The service is provided to any researcher
for a fee of $104 per hour of GC/MS time. However, the samples must first be
prepared by extraction and clean-up procedures.
2
The liquid phase samples withdrawn from the saturated zone can be
analyzed by standard GC procedures, with or without solvent extraction. The
choice of solvent and other preparatory steps (e.g. derivatization) again
depends on the organic chemical of interest. For volatile solvents, a direct
aqueous injection can be used whereas for phenolic derivatives methylene
chloride extraction and phenylacetate· derivatization can be used (4). We have
both flame ionization and electron capture detectors for GC analysis.
Procedures for void space analysis in the unsaturated zone are not well
documented. One possible technique involves in-situ withdrawal of void space
air out of the soil sample using a vacuum pump. This would measure the
volatilized organir. chemicals that may be trapped in the interstitial space.
•. . • • 3
Some development work will be needed, although there are studies underway under
the sponsorship of the EPA G;-oundwater Research Laboratory to address this
problem.
An MS graduate student in the Department of Environmental Sciences and
Engineering at the University of North Carolina will perform the organic
analysis of the field samples under the direction of Dr. Francis A. DiGiano.
It is envisioned that two field sites will be selected and that the sample
matrix will include spatial variations. Given the time and budget constraints,
the total number of samples should be limited to perhaps thirty.
-. • •
References
1. Johnsen, R. E. and Starr, R. I., "Ultra rapid Extraction of Insecticides from Soil Using a New Ultrasonic Technique," JAFC 20(1) :48-51 (1972).
4
2. Smith, A. E., "Comparison of Solvent Systems for the Extraction of Atrazine, Benzoylprop, Flamprop and Trifuralin from Weathered Field Soils," JAFC 29:111-115 (1981).
3. The Determination of Halogenated Chemicals by the Purge and Trap Method, U.S. EPA Report No. 600/4-81-059 (1981).
4. Goerlitz, 0. F. and Brown, E., "Methods for Analysis of Organic Substances in Water," U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water Resources Investigation (1972).
•
•
SUMMARY
· Assessment of the Movement of Po 11 utan.ts
Through Soils Near Waste· Disposal Sites
~\-z., A. Arnoozegar-Fard, vi. P. Robarge
7 -s7--:S~ ,-d.. and C. Cogger
41--t IT· Evaluating and monitoring waste disposal sites must be considered as essen-
tial components of any waste management program. Authorization of a waste dis-
posal/retention site re~uires knowledge of the soil, geology and hydrology of
the site location. This includes such information as soil depth, texture,
structure, permeability, soil parent material, underlyin9 fractured rock or
saprolite materials, depth to the ground water, seasonal variation of ground
water, as well as direction of flow. For monitoring purposes, however, the
usual practice is periodic evaluation of ground water quality and flow direction
to detect contamination. A complement to this approach is to place drain lines
and collection systems under a waste site and monitor the liquids _removed from
the drainage system for analyses'. It is important to realize that although
both methods of monitoring may reveal leakage of the pollutants from the storage
or disposal area, the time of detection may be several years after failure.
Therefore, it is necesifory to monitor the soil under and around waste. sites in
order to detect leakage through the containing structure and,determine the
magnitude of the failure.
Soils are variable in terms of their physical, chemical and morphological
properties and the nature of this variability will dictate the degree of
sampling required to properly monitor a waste disposal site. The degree of
variability found in a number of soils is illustrated in Table 1, which lists
the mean, standard deviation, and coefficient of variation (C.V. = S.D./mean
x 100) for ten different soil properties. The majority of the studies per-
formed on soil variability however, have consi_dered only agricultural fields.
•
This project will evaluate soil var.iability in the ,vicinity of waste dis-
posal/retention sites in North Carolina. The objective of the study is to
characterize the chemical and physical rrorerties· of the soil profile that are
important in deterr,1ining the movernent of pollutants in the vicinity of waste
storage/disposal sites. Initial emphasis will be on the Piedmont and perhaps
Upper_ Coastal Plain. Briefly, soil samples will be collected on a long transect
(about 100 m), or a number of short transects (20 m), around a retention pond at
50 cm depth'intervals extending from the soil surface to a depth of up to 4 m.
Soils will be collected by using a soil probe truck, or hand augers, and
analyzed for a number of chemical and physical properties such as CEC, EC, pH,
particle size distribution, soil moisture characteristics and bulk density. In
addition the samples will be analyzed for the component, organic and/or organic,
retained in the site.
The study is expected to provide information with respect to:
1. Spatial variability of important soil physical and chemical properties
as a function of depth and horizontal directions.
2. The inter-relationship among various soil properties in order to predict
the minimum arnount of sampling required to characterize and monitor a
site. ·,
Geostatistical techniques will be employed to analyze the.da_ta. These techniques
have been used successfully in various studies ranging from developing a nitrogen
map for a cotton field to interpolating between data points regarding soil
physical properties of large fields. Knowledge of soil variability can be used
to determine the number of soil samples needed to have results within a range
of true mean value of any given soil property. The inter-relationship between
various soil properties is useful in deciding what soil paramaters are needed
to be evaluated. The geostatistical techniques are helpful to interpret the
results of a limited number of analyses and.extrapolatebeyond the samplin~ area.
,
• • •
Table I
v ... LU.$ Of' faTIMATED MU)'.'S, STA:-.:DARD DEVIATI0?'-1S. A:-.:n COEHIC"lf.;'TS OF VARI.\TIO:,..: f-OR TES Soll PROPERTIE.')
Parameter
Lmr rari(ltion
I. Bulk deri:.ity (g cm~)
"' Water content f" ,,l a1 zero tension
1cm) cm~I
Medium rariati(ln
3. Sand sill day
e;)
4.0.1/JSbar
e., water content. gig)
0.2 bar (cm1.crn~)
2.2 bar (cm3;cm1)
15 bar (g g)
High rariation
5. Saturated hydraulic conductivity
(cm/hr)
Saturated hydraulic conductivity
(cm:day)
Saturated hydraulic conductivity as
(in.Jhr)
6. Unsaturated hydraulic conductivity
(cm:dayl (90°.0 and 60~0 of
saturation J
7. Apparent diffusion coefficient
(cm2.,day)
8. Pore water velocity (cm/day} (from
water and solute)
9. Electrical conductivity in µmho/cm
for I: I extract and saturation extract
IO. Log: of scaling coefficient (no units)
Mean
1.3
1.4
1.5
40.45
4;
53 28 19
59 29 12
26 27 47
'4 30 45
27 9.5
23 7.5
~ 32
32
34
4.5
14
20
35
0.62
0.63;
0.0026
4.9/0.12
370
44/40
3200/
3100
-0.136
After Warrick & Niel sen, 1980.
S1andard Coefficient of
deviation variation r· n)
0.09 6.9
0.095 6.8
0.11 i.3
4.5 4.8 I) II,
4.8 10
15 9.1;6.8 28 32 36
12 J 816.4 37 62 53
11 6 8 42 22 I 7
'!4-8.·I0 58 27. 22
5.4.3.1 20 33
9.2 3.8 40 51
5.4 17
7.7 24
4.1 12
1.4 31
26 190
22 110
30 86
0.64 100
1.75/ 280/420
0.oJI
8.110.47 I 70/400
(2.4)(10)' (6.5)(10)"
7300/4400 ( I. 7)( IO)'
( I.I )(10)'
8100/3900 250/130
0.512 380
Source
Gum:1:i t 19-~ J. 5 combined dep1hs on 64 cores.
:\rizl,na . ..,,ith 15 hectare). contained 5 series.
each a .. ,~pie torriflu\·en1:·
J'\ieben ,·r a:.11973). combined data for 6 depth).
California. Panoche. 20 sites within 150 ha
thad additional replicates).
Cassel and Bauer ( 19751 30-60 cm depth. North
Dakota. '-1addock sandy loam within 1.3 ha.
1'ielsen "' a:" .. 30 cm depth ~md combined depths
Cam,;:oron 119-SI. 15-30 cm depth Saskatchewan.
Bainsville . .:.::, m"
Gumaa. 30 .:m. 64 si1e~
Gum:.1a. 5 depth~. at 64 sites
:,..;;e]s,;:on ,,, ai .. 30-45 cm dep1hs
J'\ielsen t't 11! .. 1.: combined depths
Gumaa. 30 ,:m dep1h
Gumaa. 5 cc,mbined deplhs
J'\ieben t't ,:! .. 30 cm depth
J'\ielsen et al .. combined depths
Cameron; I ~-30 cm depth
Cassel and Bauer. 30-60 cm depth
Gumaa. 5 cC1mbined depths on 64 cores
!'1:ielsen 1•1.;/.. 30 cm depth
!'1:ielsen t•r ui .. combined depths
Willardson and Hurst (1965). Calif.. 0-90 cm
depth. Gila-Vinton. 330 values. scattered area.
;\ielsen er ,ii .. 30 cm depth
;\ielsen er ,1! .. combined depths
Biggar and ~ielsen 0976). all depths. 150
hectare Panoche site.
Biggar and ~ielsen. all depths.
Wagenet and Jurinak (1978). 7.5-15 cm depth.
L:1ah. Mancos Shale. within 777 km2•
Warrick t·r .il. (1977). Panoche combined depths.
From ~ielsen et al .. above.
. \ ' '· '•·, -'sTATCtA~ORATOR~·oF PuBue HEA l. .. . . DIVISION OF HEAL TH SEAVICE1!91'
N.C. DEPART.MENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
P.O. BOX 2ao4·7 '-'"306 N. WILMINGTON ST .• RALEI-ClH 27611 .. · -~-~ . .. . . ·. . ~
~ORG_A~lc CHEMICAL ANAL vsEs :..:.:Pl.113Lic WATER svs .-~IV\,.uG
~ . . ~ Complete All Items Ablive·Heavy"Line "' -, (See Instructions on Reverse Side)·.. :,<ft,J' 'SI:-¥> • lltAsTt ~\-,,
Name of £it12.../ G"f I<. k; ,J 7< ~ S ~ System: -----------~---------,
Ty of System:
( Community ,,/
Address: 'R. -f-/ /b,,r/ /'7-lc 3
L e ( 1'171 J. ----'-----------ZIP,,
County: "/?f2-<1 ;v5 .,._,, 'c f:....
Report To: '1}; (! ;r1
. 4.ddress: ---------------------<
------------ZIP--------<
felephone Number: ____ )_--0.-----------i
:ollected By: ----'ft::_~;l____'.cL-cA_~~-:'.:::~=---------1
( Non-Community
Source o Water:
( ) . ... ( );
Type of Sample:
( ·) Raw
Typ'e of Treatment:
( )
( )
I l
( )
Both
Purchased
House Tap
Well Tap
Treated
Lime
Soda Ash
Polyphosphate
Water Softener
Other 7c.7c)-.&3 ,2.;3c) ( ) late Collected: ________ Time: .L _ __;::..._ _ _.::,"-'"'f-----+-------\------------
. tS 1· p· cs. 1JJP.,,.... .ocat1on o amp rng omt:
Address where sample was collected)
lemart: ~ --;# / If 2-/ / J /Jc.f/2.v/,.,,._,.,, S ,n e /I c .k, -eA r . e-fc_.
;tate Drinking Water Parameters (Required)
Results
.\rsenic mg/(
,.
( )
vi--
Private
Special
WATER SYSTEM I.D. NUMBER (C Y FROM MAILING LABEL)
□□-□□T 00
o·ptional Parameters (List as neededd'
. ~-f,e.,/e.,..,,,.,.. )t.. •J?.-<c1.:.. ft. 7 · Results
3arium ,mg/I
-~ercury
litrate (as N)
;elenium
ilver
H
langanese
rlS Form 2887 7/79
Jboratory
mg/I
mg/I
mg/I
mg/I
mg/I
mg/I
mg/I
mg I 2
units
mg/I· 2
,)et.f l·
Date Reported! ?bi &3 ~eported By 7') 7; Jo/Id , I I_ J,i,_~.
011::rr< ... , 14'lo7JUL.IB Laboratory Number __ . _'·c.., --'-' __________ ___;;c..;Lc....· '--"-"'-J __ _
Mildred A. Kerbaugh
Director
• • • • Ille 111-------------....... -R_on-ol-d -H.-Le-vin-e,-M-.D-.,-M-.P_H ___ _ n y STATE HEALTH DIRECTOR
DIVISION OF HEALTH SERVICES
P.O. Box 2091
Raleigh, N.C. 27602-2091
July 27, 1983
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Hole II 1
Terry F. Dover, Eastern Area Supervisor
Solid & Hazardous Waste Management Branch
i~Raymond L. Church, Waste Management Specialist
C Solid & Hazardous Waste Management Branch
Connnents ref. auger borings made 7/20/83
Earl Gurkin residence
Rt. 1, Box 191-B
Leland, N. C. 27451
Sandy Creek Acres -Maco
Terminated at 4.4'
White sand -no indication of oil, etc.
Hole# 1-A Topsoil to 0.6'
Septage sludge 0.6' -5' terminate@ 5'
Gas -100%
Hole# 2 Topsoil to 0.6'
Blue heavy clay O. 6' - 4 ·. 3'
Has gasoline odor
Terminated at 4.3'
* Sample #1 in 100 ml organic bottle
Gas 100%
Hole# 3 Course yellow sand to 1.0'
Fine white sand 1.0' -3.0'
Terminated at 3.0'
Hole II 4
No gas found
Brownish sand at surface to 0.3' w/pieces of plastic visible
Dark soil to 1.3'
1.3' -3.4' sandy clay
Below 3.4' fine sand
No gas detected
.,.
.James B. Hunt, Jr/ °'oroh T Morrow MD MPH STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURC:ES -. ' . ' ... GOVERNOR SECRET ARY
Memorandum
Page 2
•
July 27, 1983
Hole II 5
Hole II 6
Hole II 7
Hole II 8
Topsoil to 0.6'
Yellow course sand 0.6' -4'
White sand 4' -4.4'
Terminated@ 4.4'
No gas detected
Dark soil to 1.0'
Septage sludge 1.0' -5.0'
Water table@ 5.0'
Terminated 5.0'
Gas 100%
Topsoil to 0.8'
Matted hairlike material·at 0.8' to 1.0'
Yellow clay-like sand 1.0' -4.0'
White sand 4.0'
Terminated 4.0'
Gas 5%
Topsoil to 1. 0'
•
Dark organic type soil w/plastic 1.0' -1.8'
White find sand 1.8' -3.0'
Hole II 9
Terminated@ 3.0'
Gas 100%
Brown topsoil to 1.6'
Dark organic 1.6' -3.6' w/petroleum odor
Vegetation found at 3.6'
oily soil 3.0' -4.0'
Gray sand 4' and below
Terminated 4'
Gas 100%
Hole# 10 Yellow sand to 4'
White.sand 4'-5'
Terminated at 5'
No gas detected
Hole II 11 Yellow sandy clay to• 3 :o'
Terminated at 3.0'
No gas detected
Hole# 12 Topsoil to 1.6'
Septic sludge 1.6' -2.0'
Brownish-gray soil 2.0' -3.0'
Dark gray 3.0' -6.0'
Terminated at 6.0'
Gas 70%
Memorandum
Page 3
July 27, 1983
• •
Hole# 13 Gray-brown soil w/slight septage odor at 1.1'
Yellow course sand below
Terminated 3.0'
No gas detected
Hole# 14 Yellowish sand to 3.0'
Terminated@ 3.0'
Gas 10%
Hole 11 .. 15 Brown soil·to LO'
Light gray fine sand to 2.0' w/petroleum odor
Terminated 3.0'
Gas 100%
Hole# 16 Topsoil to 0.6'
Gray soil 0.6' -1.2'
Dark brown soil 1.2' -3'
White sand w/petroleum odor at 3.0' -4.0'
Oily sand at 4.0' -6.0'
Still finding oily sand when reached limit of auger depth at 6.0'
Gas 15%
Hole II 17 Gray to white sand at 4.0'
Gas 5%
Hole# 18 Brownish soil to 1.0'
Ric\ddish-brown soil 1. 0' 3. 0'
Gray sand below 3.0'
* Sample #2. in 100 ml glass organic bottle
Gas 50%
Hole II 19 Brown to grayish-brown soil at 3. 0'
Terminated at 3.0'
Gas 20%
Hole# 20 Oily sand 1.0' -2.0'
Hard pan 2.0' -3.6'
White sand below 3.6'
Gas 20%
Hole# 21 Dark brown w/petroleum smell 0.6' -2.6'
Yellow-brownish sand below 2.6'
Gas 100%
Hole# 22 Dark gray soil w/petroleum smell 1.6' -3.0'
Grayish-brown soil 3.0' -5.0'
Gray clay at 5.0' and below
Gas 100%
Hole# 23 Brown sand w/petroleum smell 1.0' -2.0'
Gumbo clay 2.0' -4.0'
Terminated@ 4.0'
Gas 100%
Memorandum
Page 4
July 27, 1983
•
Monitoring well approx. 10' deep, l½" galvanized,pumped at 11:30 a.m.
by Mike Marsh, NRCD, collected samples--organic & coliform gas--at
4p.m.,20%
RLC:ct
--~: ,,...... .... ,_:--.r._........4 _, ,,.... ..... _...,,; __ ~-.--t -, : . " ~ .... ;i!f..,.,·~s;-e1: \,.
. .·:.··{ - . -~-• J_•'l '>
80D5· . 1:,
-~1"
• Mg/L J, ~ (
COD
,i1g/L
Coliform
MF Fecal
/100 ml
. Collfonn
MF TOtal
flDO ml
Coliform
Tube Fecal
/10D ml
WATER QUALITY
' LABORATORY REPORT
Coliform
Tube Total noo ml
Total
:-lg/L
f_:_,-_. _;:.~",:~;~, 1·~:---~~·1 ----~ ----~ ___ ·-_ __J ____ _J
'. pH ~ • ~ . ;, . tJ }" '-'·Acidity tO :-,,
7
, , 1 RH 4.5 . , pH 8.3 pll 8,3
UnltS ~ i M9/L-':'-"t_'·:~ Mg/l . -:Mg/L
'a_,-~ . ---{.-:_~ (•i;.:···.r, ·-~!--~t~j-• __ · __ .'-'~-'
Alkalinity to-. pH 4. 5
Mg/L
Ars"enit _: i ::ch-lor~phyfi1"a·: Ch-loroPh.Yll;_~ / PheOphYtin a ' Color (true) ~ Uni ts' : ' YTf'1chi-om.itk ·:: corrected\·. .:;.·, ·:\
. )Jg/L '. ic';· ;,)Jg/L L · ·• : , ·}Jg/L '. ' pg/L .. ~.:..1...,, ··.-· -l-• .-.'_ -.-. •• j ..,
Chloride
Mg/L
L
Ch-romium
He"xi!valent
JJ<j/L ·,. ·• 'Ii:''''"'-/'.. ! 'i '/ .,, . -1· -! ,·_•., . .i-,,,;,._.·_'"'·" _-$., ~-.:-. :· .' -~---..J _____ __J :.
Phe"fi~--;~--·:{~. R;siri?'~cid :; ,:,_s·ulfate.;_· ·; Stilfide~ ,; . ..,Soap · -~-
µg/~. · '.: . '._, Mg/0 l-' ,°' Mg/L· • , ( Mg/L
t 19"1·-/.: ",',
; ' NH3-• a~s j r1f'i · ~ ,S~ ~-.. _ .
Mg/L, Mg/L _ 1 .
.. I ·:..1, 'I;·· -N92 + il03 .ORTHO .., w P04~· 1ls
.:_,Mg/L Mg/L
: i' •
. Be:i,
<; i; _-JJg{L.
6
" ·•• .. 1 d ~"·-·~~~-I·,,._-~,~~~ ~:_., ,, I
'.1g
Mg/L'
8
• f
"
Mn
pg/L • -
C • I
REMARKS .. · .N p .
;\ 'OM.-2R 7•7'1
Na!'--
,. Mg/L
J.,
.PE!Ji:icide~,)
,. I , .
, ..
p'.
Specific i
Conductance
)JMHO~ /cm
.-P' Tot.il as
Mg/L
,fa·
Mg/L
1,
NI
;JJg/L
' ,·
' :
' ·,;> ~
p
. ,j
'Cd
·, µg/L .,
Pb
µg/L
· ... 7f.i9
:".;.
9
Cyanide
Mg/L
5
Co ;
µg/1!
7
Sb
JJg/L
9
Residue
Volatile
Mg/l
Fluoride
Mg/L
Cr, Total
µg/L
Sn
)Jg/L
.: .'.~ 1_;/~~~;f;::.#t✓ .izt;.:.~(.
;~.:.::_ ·: "l .,. :•••• ••·i,,
Fixed
Mg/L
LAB NO. ___ _..!......:,:::a:.1 ...!__'-"-::::::;~,!.'I
I ,•_,. ---,/ j; // ! 'r· -Date Rp't
Data Entry By,_.:./.,_,.:.'•.:.1!.._'..,;·•"'-· _Ck--,!-''-""-·~~-
/ .. <,./
Suspended
Mg/L
Residue
Volatile
ilg/L
Fixed
Mg/L
I
Fo"rmaldehyde Grease & Oils Hardness
MBA'. ___ ,
Mg/L Mg/L Mg/L Mg/L
Cu Fe Hg li
µg/L )Jg/l µg/L )Jg/L
V Zn TO!'.
)Jg/L )Jg/L ' Mg/L
-,-·-·-~·-----FORM' NO_,,.• q • ...-,,_~--~ ' 0 ~TATE OF NORTI-1 CAROLINA LJ
OE" MENT OF NATURAL AND ECONOMIC RESObr<CES
County {!,ol,l/10 IYU'.2
~Ive~ B~s1,(1/)j-:ir:;'. ~/-f1?..-
. . -. ·~.' .. •' ' . '. .
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANlll;EMENT
--.._ ' .·. . . .
R 't--'r. ·unlt •. , ,{), f;/X/''t'f:;11 S £. FO P o Field Office . --·
Co 11 ector-. -~fJ~-~Vc;.j~J~_""L,"' I"'. fhW-=,' "-·•=--·:.,•·_C-,.~~-:_i _:.__
BOo tans~-"· -c: :.~~-•• >{-· ::-ii ,.:':. . -~
s\e-~ ~---~(~' .... ,_· -~'-··._ .. 7· :"~ ----"--·c;· ... -_ .. .,::"~ .. _-,:::,,)"'1'~---~'-j---. .,,· ,·:·c'-;-_; ..:; __ ·~_-_-', ~-~:..:·,-.,-~-,,> ··?,.-~.,.-~ '1;'1;...·-.,._,...,-,:,,_.. _, ·;-._ .-.:c~·;l?!_·, >r..:-.,.
; -., .f. • _; -~ :::_ ·rt;-~·:-~i .. «·.-.
Sampling location ~·_,.AJ.,,_,_·.,/rr.,· _,, __ ,_,"_,;:_· _::_ __ ?,,_-..:'4-:,__ ____ -_,1l'...!c0::--c_ ______ _
Qtl--,;pilL
Ch 1Cl~irl~~~d_' ~_:-· :;i,.,;:,, . .: ._:; /'fi·, · ·::~~ -~ .. : __ i ,• .. : ... :, .· . .:, ' ·,!-·' ,, ~
S_ta. N~ .• : ., . ::;_~_'}_rs:~~~~;<o}~~:;:,f~~-~ii~~-1.}~/'it~; j'.Ti~?t;o
. ' t-·'
S3mp1i0g LOcatiOn
X .. f,rc;!m rL bank ·
r ors·
:OCT 2 'f'\~
LAB NO
s
Depth,. __ •·
;.j .3 .. J ' =:::--r::,::-~-------,T,-.-,::-::--,1,=:ci--..l.._ __ -+.=c-==b---_j Streani Color Silt or Sediment Aquatic Vegetation
Susp. Severity Sed. Severity Identity Suport Medium Severity
1s.c._ __ _L__~_.J._ __ -1. ___ _j_ __ __1 ___ __J
Ag Silver Sb -Antimony
Al Aluminum Sn -Tin
B, -Barium V Vanadium
Be -Beryllium
Ca -Ca lei Ul!l
Zn Zinc • Cd -Cadmium TOC -Total Organic Carbon
Co -Cobalt
Cr. Total -Chromium
Cu -Copper
Fe -I .-on lU ! I/..
Hg Mercury
Li Lithiuni
Mg -Magnesium
. Mn -Managanese
Ho -Molybdenum
.Ila·_ 'Sodium
)Ac:1~1tl1tf Pp' a~r.-;:?·; ., r• ;·· >··sLtf~¥ :: ·-~-,'Ce_· ·'•:"~,t~ -~,~ .!" • ~ t
r_;,;;, .~,~f, 'l_~ r:. A;_ ,;-;k":a,,<'1 ,ti~t::'y"_:to:-• ,:P,;;M-;:~_8;,~3~---"-~,l"•:,.. ___ :!.~~--11;-,~;j, j'S~uZ:]'!f:7Jli5:_~'-7: -:...:!_,.~"';; ."~,;,'f: "r."; ~17. --l",',.:._..:"'-~,.::·\.''. ·":yc_,.,-.f-c-,'-o.,-4_.,,: .ti_',--''"_--~. ';;'7~-r--• --; .c(~..,:'":J.-,.c:.,~--C....:.,---_:;,-c--h;":'+-;i:~;::;
Ni -Nickel' ~-•. ·'l-',Alkll_inity•:iO:.-pH,_.4;:-5'.M ."·~ .~ ..... ~~,: "' ;~. ,··spec1dc,~cb'~dictari~i-l-.,_,~-·:·•'. . ' --. . ~, -,-. . .
.... , ,, :•,._~_.-_.,,:..f ~:;.: · • .1.\~."-·\·'ii:{;1· , ,
,
\, .' ·f '•.::i ,. Pb -Lead
,.:.~·~ ...... ,...~ ~•..,• .... .
Groundwater Section ( ·
CENTRAL LABORATORY REPOR'.. '·
Laboratory Number
_,,e Callee ted l I -I , 7 / -Time.~Ae:::o:..-~1:1.l...... ___ Well No •_........;C..=-=C.~--J,_._3.....,·,_...f':±'-'--'o""'-------------
Description of Sampling Point. __ ........;TO'--"':...P.:..__.;:L"'.""--'-"--'--'1..._N="-'~'----------------------
· collected B :
D Alkalinity (As CaCO )
~. to pH 8.3 ••••••• ]._· ______ _
to pH 4.5 ••••••••• ______ _
mg/1
mg/1
[J] Aluminum. •••••••••••• ______ __, •
µg/1
____ __.I Arsenic .•... ~·.~.· .• \ ••. ______ _ g/1·
.._I __ _,I Bicarbona~e ••..• · .-~. ~ • ______ _.;; mg/1·
.... I __ ..,I BOD, 5-Day ••••••• ·· •• , • ______ _ mg/1 j
·I_ --~I Carbonate ..•.• ~-.-~ •• ·.~-------mg/1
_ J __ ~! Ca~bon Dio~ide, •••• ; • ______ _ mg/1 · D Chloride .••• e ••••.••• • ._·· ______ _ , ~" . :•
mg/1
..___ _ __.! Coliform (Total MF).•-------' . /lOOml
[==:J Cop_per •• , •••• , •• ., ••• _. ______ _ g/1
,__ _ __.I Cyanide •..•••• ~--.· •• · •• : ______ ---' ·. mg/1
,._ _ __.! Dissolved Solids. :·· •.• : ______ ----' mg/1 ·
.__ _ __.I Fluoride. •.••••••••• :·:--______ _ mg/1
..___ _ ___,! Hardn_:ss as C~C03: ••• _'·-------" mg/1 C=:J Hardness, . . ·. '·. ::_:.
Non Carbonate. •• ta ______ _
, .
• • a .. mg/1 D Iron. ••• ; ••• ~. ·.; ••• ; , ______ __,
.. ·'• ,)"
µg/1
Jig/1
g/1
I:: ==::ILead ............... · ................... ~_,_'---"------" -.L~l . · _,. _ . Lithium. • .••.••.••. • ....• ______ _ ,~~,Ma .... . _ nganese. •••• ,; •••. • •• ______ _ g/1
µg/1 I I Mercury · .. • . . ...................... ______ ~
FOR INTERLA.B USE.
Samples ·ru ----Log ent.· --.,---.Data ent. ----ck., __ _
Nitrogen r-:-=:-
Kjeldahl ............ ; ____ --"mg/1 l_L.
Nitrate & Nitrite. ••• · < D.!J-· mg/1 ~-1-...1 H-!. .,:Z.3 ._..., .
pH Value(When analyzed., · ·,-· ·
Phenol, •••••••••••••••• •-~l9~P~ __ µ,g/l L
Phosphorus, Total ••• , ••• ,__<-_.:..;;0...,.5'--_.....;mg/1. [2
Potassium. •••• ; ••••••• ; • ------'µg/1. L
C Specific Conductance
(micromhos-at 25°C) ••••• _____ _
Silica ••• ~ •••••••• •·• •••• _____ .....;mg/1 C
Sodium, ••••••••••••••• ; • _____ µ_g/1 _' C
Sulfate ••••••••.•••••••.• · _____ ,.cmg/1 L
Zinc~· ••••••• ~ ............. ______ lJ,g/1 1
·Remarks:
,o C---< 10 m,/1 rn
SITO GHOUlmWATrn
•
October 29, 1976
Commanding Of:f'icer
CG Marine Safety Of:f'ice
P.O. P.ox 343
Wilmington, N. C. 28401
Subject: Environmental Assessment ·Request
Dear Sir:
Your letter ~t~d 15 Octobe; i976, reference (a) 40 CFR
1510.22(1) and reference (b) 1510.34(d) and amendments, ite.m (c)
1510.42 Phase.II.and Phase IV, this is to adv:l,se that this agency
performs environmental assessments in conjunction with the activated
Regional Response Team (RRT) .in.accordance with references (a), (b),
and (c)" above, or an special request by the State or local governmenta.
In the pa.st, we _have not performed Coastal Zane assessments to
determine· when· medium or .minor. spill cleanu;p was completed. Should
you. elect to activate the RilT and involve the State of North Carolina
in the final eval:u.a.tion for cleanup completeness, I will. a end our
assessment unit to assist as requested in the fourt~ paragraph of
your letter, · ·
Chief,
be: Mr. Ken Biglane/Washington
Sincerely,
Al J. Smith
Environmental Emergencies Branch .. ' Enforcement Divis~on
v· Tyndall Lewis/State of North Carolina
AJSmith/fs/5096/10-29-76
.\
., ·oEPARTMENT OF TRANSPO-flON
UNITED STATES COAST uUARD
MAH.ING ADD~ES5
Commanding Officer
CG Marine Safety Office_
P. 0. Box 343
Wilmington, N. C. ~8401
16475
15 October 1976
From: CO Marine Safety Office, Wilmington, North Carolina
To: Director, EPA Region IV, Atlanta, Georgia
Subj: Environmental Assessment; request for
Ref: (a) My Polreps, Case P-53-76, Rattlesnake Branch,
Brunswick County, North Carolina
(b) 40 CFR 1510.22(k)
1. Reference (a) concerns tbe spill of an estimated 10,000 ·
gacl. lons of various grades of oil. into the Chinnis and Rattlesnake
E=asnches of Hood Creek near Maco, North Carolina. The original
cl.ean-up was suspended on 23 August 1976.
2. On J.4 October 1976, Case P-53-76 was reopened after discoveries
of significant quantities of residual oil in puddles on and soaked
in:c the adjoining shoreline of Rattlesnake Creek property owned by
Ernest Owens, Federal Paperboard and Corbett Lumber Company.
3. :=:-esidual clean-up of these areas is presently being accomplished,
4. It is requested that an environmental assessment be made in accor-
dar-.c" with reference (b) to determine the extent of residual clean-up
tha: sbould be carried out.
. ~ / ;!f !l,4'
)./. le. Hl~T
{)ly direction
. I
'· t-,--:;7-·~-::~-;-·--· .. -:-·.:~ ........ -;-·---
,,I•', ( .,, ~-:· :, .. -.:7_····-'! ... r..,,,...r., ;--r>•~-:~:'l;'i _ _;,.:.~,:~ ;._,..i.~r:;~ ·., {-~1" ~-•-. c-···-.,
'··
'• . ', .. ,
' ' • 191 '7 OCT 2(J 1
~hrl:e of ~or±4 <a:arolimr
RUFUS L. EDMISTEN
ATTORNEY GENERAL
~cparlmcnl of :!lustier
P. 0, BOX 629
RALEIGH
27602
7 October 1977
MEMO TO: M. W. Puette
FROM: JoAnne S. Routh(\~~ 1----------------v / RE: ( State v Otto Skip'er,
~ 77CVS 212 5 (0 76-124)
OTTO SKIPP~/
Morris Packing Company cw 77-08)
On July"-f..., 1977 J nt by Default was entered in favor of the State and against defendant Skipper for $2,500.00. Execution on the judgment was requested on August 10, 1977, and on September 9 the execution was returned with a notation that Skipper had no property on which the Brunswick County Sheriff could levy.
MORRIS PACKING COMPANY
Pursuant to my letter requesting payment of the $900.00 civil penalty, Mr. Bill Hatley, former manager, called to advise that the plant has been closed for over four months and that the com-pany is out of business and in foreclosure. Would you please have your field personnel verify this information and advise me of their findings? I will take no further action until I hear from you.
/dw
C.,(_,
hJC:,Lt,; ) Cn ch~
\t\, I tlc\J
1lt.1•1•-"-------•-R-ona-ld-H. -Lev-ine,-M-.D.,-M.P-.H.-n T STATE HEALTH DIRECTOR
DIVISION OF HEALTH SERVICES
P.O. Box 2091
Raleigh, N.C. 27602-2091
July 26, 1983
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Terry F. Dover, Eastern Area Supervisor
Solid & Hazardous Waste Management Branch
121--f;-Raymond L-Church, Waste Management Specialist
Solid & Hazardous Waste Management Branch
Earl Gurkin Property
Sandy Creek Estate
Lots 85 & 86
Maco --off Hwy-74-76
Address: Rt. 1, Box 191-B
Leland, N. C. 27451
On Monday, July 11, 1983, I was contacted by Ed Beck, NRCD in regard to a
call he had received from a Mr. Earl Gurkin. Mr. Gurkin had stated that
he had uncovered creosote, oil, and septage sludge in his front yard while
excavating an area where grass wouldn't grow.
Ed and I made arrangements to meet on site that afternoon at 1 p.m. Ed and
I along with with Mike Marsh, NRCD, met Mr. Gurkin on his property and
observed the soil which had been excavated. The soil had a strong creosote
odor and a dark brown-to-black color. There was also evidence of septage
sludge including several prophylactics mixed in the soil. A walk over the
property found what appeared to be hardened #6 fuel oil in several areas
of the yard. In some areas, especially near the property boundary between
lots 85 and 86, oil was surfacing and puddling in areas of approximately one
square foot.
Mike Marsh took samples from the potable water well which is located approxi-
mately 40 feet from the soil spoil area. I obtained two samples; one from
the spoil pile which I labeled "creosote" sample and the other from material
augered from a hole 20 feet from the well which I labeled "septage sludge"
sample.
Mr. Gurkin told us that he had lived at this residence for approximately one
year and had not encountered any problems prior to this date. He was asked
if he had any water problems and responded by showing me the interior of his
toilet. It had a slimy growth on the valves and appurtenances and a distinct
sheen on the surface of the water. I told him that it appeared to be sulfate-
reducing bacteria and advised him on how to acidify and chlorinate his well.
He was advised not to drink or cook with his water until we had lab results
on the water samples. Mike, Ed, and I left with an understanding that we
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES' . o,cow, .. , .. · Jame~ B. Hunt, Jr/ <o,oh T M MD Mp H
GOVERNOR SECRET ARY
Memorandum
Page 2
July 26, 1983
•
would return with Rick Shiver NRCD who had information regarding a series
of old pits once used for disposal of oil and septage ·sludges in this
location. (See attachment. #1.)
On Thursday, July 14, 1983, I met with Ed Beck, Rick Shiver, John Crowder
(Brunswick County Health.Department) and Mr. Gurkin on the Gurkin property.
We discussed the past disposal activities on the property and tried to
reestablish the layout of the disposal lagoons and old road bed. Rick
Shiver was unable to determine exactly where the lagoons were located but
felt that they were in the area of Mr. Gurkin's front yard. Mr. Gurkin had
chlorinated and acid-treated his well on Monday night so no samples were
taken. He had determined that the depth of his well was 22 feet and that.
it had been grouted. He had also located an old pipe which we determined
was an old monitoring well. In order to by-pass his well he had run a water
hose across the road to his neighbor's house, Mr. Earnest Grainger, and was
using water from that well. Everyone left with the understanding that
another visit would be made on Wednesday, July 20, 1983. In the meantime,
Mr. Gurkin was instructed to use his well to water his lawn and to pump it
for several hours each day.
Wednesday, July 20, I met Mike Marsh and Mr. Gurkin on the property. A
cutting torch was used to cut off the old monitoring well in order to obtain
samples. Mike provided a gasoline-powered centrifugal pump with which to
pump water from the monitoring well. The well was approximately 10 feet
and provided approximately 1 gallon/minute. The water temperature was 24°c,
conductivity 190 and pH 5.91. Samples were taken by both Mike and me. I
collected two, one-liter bottles and a coliform sample from the monitoring
well. Mr. Gurkin's well was also sampled using the existing pump and the
same type samples were taken.
Mr. Earnest Grainger's well was also sampled for coliform and organics and
the following field parameters were obtained:
pH 7.02, .conductivity 440, temp. 20°c
Mike left and I continued my investigation .by augering holes on.a grid system
and using the Gas-Tech.gas meter to take readings in the augered holes. (See
attachment #2.) John Crowder assisted with the augering having arrived at
approximately 2 p.m. Two additional soil samples were taken on this date--
one in the front of the house (see map 1) and one behind the house (see map
1). The samples were mailed via courier that same date.
RLC:ct
DIVISION OF HEALTH SERVICES
P.O. Box 2091
Raleigh, N.C. 27602-2091
MEMORANDUM
TO: 0. W. Strickland, Head
July 26, 1983
Solid & Hazardous Waste Management Branch
FROM: '(f,/? Terry F. Dover, Eastern Area Supervisor
v Solid & Hazardous Waste Management Branch
Ronald H. Levine, M.D., M.P.H.
STATE HEALTH DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: Earl Gurkin property and Sandy Creek Acres Subdivision,
Brunswick County, off US 74-76 near N. C. 87 cutoff
Mr. Ray Church, Waste Management Specialist, received a call from the Division
of Environmental Management, Wilmington office, on July 11, 1983, concerning
a complaint received by the Division of Environmental Management from Mr. Gurkin.
He had excavated an area on his property and had found oily-residues and other
unknown substances. Mr. Church visited the site with Division of Environmental
Management officials later in the day of July 11. Mr. Gurkin had several areas
on his property that did not grow any grass, and auger borings indicated strong
petroleum and creosote odors. DEM collected water samples from Mr. Gurkin's
well and Mr. Church collected two soil samples.
Investigation by Mr. Church uncovered information in DEM's files of a past
regulatory action on this property. Disposal of septage, oil spill residues,
tank bottoms, and creosote occurred between 1969 and 1976 in four surface
impoundments. At that time, the property was owned by the estate of George H.
Skipper. Disposal of previously stated materials was carried out by Mr. Otto
Skipper and Mr. Wade Skipper, the 1a·tter being associated with Potter Septic
Tank Service, Wilmington, N. C.
In August of 1976, a major oil spill discharged into Rattlesnake Branch near
Maco. A dike to one of the surface impoundments ruptured.releasing a spill
of approximately 20,000 gallons. DEM and the Coast Guard responded. Large
amounts of oil were removed from the surface impoundments and sent to Fort
Bragg for energy recovery. Some 150 loads of soil contaminated residues were
landfilled in the Brunswick County Leland site (we have no records indicating
any knowledge of this disposal in the Leland landfill). Some materials were
left in the impoundment and the impoundments were closed on site. Our agency
had no knowledge of these occurrences and the North Carolina recordation law
was in effect at this time which would have recorded any past disposal practices.
Jomes B. Hunt, Jr/ <:.oroh T Morrow, M.D., M P.H. STATE Of NORTH CAROLINA GOVERNOR DEPARTMENT Of HUMAN RESOURCES -. SECRET ARY
Memorandum
<:age 2
July 26, 1983
t •
Mr. Gurkin's mobile home sits apparently in the middle of the old surface
impoundments. His well probably is sited into one of the old lagoons.
There are two other residences with wells located within 500 feet of the site.
Our ana:\,ysis of samples ind~cate the high presence of phenols.
It is my recommendation that a CERCLA (Superfund) notification be made to
the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency in Atlanta immediately. A full
evaluation should be made of the disposal site to determine the potential
threat to the residences in the area.
TFD:ct
Enc.: Correspondence, maps from DEM files
DIVISION OF HEALTH SERVICES
P.O. Box 2091
Raleigh, N.C. 27602-2091
Mr. Wayne Mathis, Head
Site Screening and Engineering Section
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
345 Courtland St.
Atlanta, Georgia 30365
Dear Mr. Mathis:
• Ronald H. Levine, M.D., M.P.H.
STATE HEALTH DIRECTOR
July 25, 1983
This letter confirms the conversation between Terry Dover of my staff
and Greg Fraley on July 22, 1983. Mr. Dover made a formal request for a
site evaluation of property in Sandy Creek Acres Subdivision, Brunswick
County, off U.S. 74-76 near Maco, North Carolina. Mr. Earl Gurkin owns
a lot in the subdivision. His home appears to be located between four
surface impoundments closed in 1976. His private well probably is sited
through one of the impoundments. There are two other homes with wells
within 500 ft. of his lot.
The surface impoundments were operated between 1969 and 1976 and
received oil spill residues, tank bottoms, and other unknown substances.
They were operated by Mr. Otto Skipper and Mr. Wade Skipper, the latter
associated with Potter Septic Tank Service in Wilmington, North Carolina.
It is our feeling that the closed impoundments pose a potential threat
to the residences in the area, and we request your assistance at the earliest
possible date.
OWS:ct
cc: Ray Church
Chuck Wakild
John Crowder
George Moein
Sincerely,
/J ~) /Jr'eltJ/! ~ w. sl#c~Jt, Head
Solid & Hazardous Waste Management Branch
Environmental Health Section
Jome~ B. Hunt, Jr/ C:..orah T M /' D "pH STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES -. occow. " · '" · ·
GOVERNOR SECRET ARY
• :B'tunj,wick County
cJ/eafth r:bepa'ttment
<Yo,t D/fia :Box S6
'Bofivia, cfV o,th Cawfina 2S422
[phone]
• ~~-
.~'flltJI' Co.
_,ft.~ . ~
! I, '\:
--=""
July 18, 1983
Wilbur Mclamb
Mclamb Realty
P.O. Box 8
Little River, SC 29566
Dear Sir:
This letter is to follow-up our conversation regarding property in Sandy
Creek Acres.
In 1976 a series of oil pits and a septage pit were discovered in the
area of what is now the southeastern side of Sandy Creek Acres in Maco. During
this time these pits were to be cleaned-up by the fonner property owner and/or
by the people or company responsible for the pits. Recently, Ray Church,
investigating a complaint observed some oily substance on the property which is
now owned by Earl Gurkins. After an evaluation by Mr. Church, it was evident
that all the oil and septage waste had not been cleaned up totally and that
this waste was discovered not 3 feet from Mr. Gurkins' well.
After discussing this over with Mr. Stephen Martin, Health Director, we
have decided that in order to protect the general public's health in that area,
our office will reserve the right not to issue any additional Improvements Pennits
or Completion Permits in Sandy Creek Acres until such time that there is sufficient
doclJllentation showing that there is not additional waste oil or septage on any
particular lot. Our primary area of concern will be around the Southeastern
Section of Part I of your subdivision.
As far as Mr. Gurkins is concerned, the Department of Environmental Management
NRCD and the Solid and Hazardous Waste Branch, Division of Health Services along
with our office will be continuing the investigation to determine the extent of
the waste that has not been removed.
If you have any further questions, please feel free to call.
SincerelyD. .Jo.Al'~~4-•
JDC/eyg
cc: Ray Church
Ed Beck, DEM
Ronald Jernigan, R.S., Sanitarian
Charlie Jackson, District Sanitarian Stephen S. M~rtin, Health Director
Crowder, Ill, R.S ..
mental Health Supervisor
•
SODYECO INC.
POST OFFICE BOX 669246. CHARLOTTE. NORTH CAROLINA 28266·9246
Mr. Thomas W. Devine
Air and Hazardous Materials Division
U. S. EPA
345 Courtland St., N. E.
Atlanta, GA 30365
Dear Mr. Devine:
Thank you for your letter of March 14, 1983.
•
TELEPHONE
I\) f (.,
p. 'f ~ {, J ,,
(704) 827·9651
April 13, 1983
Your letter contains an apparent typographical error in indicating that your Environmental Services Division Report No. 82-149, dated November, 1982, was provided to us in February 1982. We received the report from EPA on February 23, 1983.
Before responding to your _requests, please allow us to briefly review the events which led to the discovery of the small landfill referred to in our letter to you of February 22, 1983.
After notifying EPA, the
adjacent landfills (Site
to an EPA approved site.
under CERCLA.
State· and the county, we removed the contents of two A), upgradient of well WQ6, during February-March 1981,
This action was taken prior to any reporting requirement
Our analysis of a water sample taken from WQ6 on February 25, 1981 indicated less than 10 ppb organic solvents at WQ6. That well was sampled by EPA Region IV Environmental Services Division on June 24, 1982, when taking samples for the above Report No. 82-149. During the sampling, EPA.informed us that we would be furnished the results of the sampling as soon as they were available.
Our first indication that anything was amiss at WQ6 came during the period of our meetings at EPA Atlanta on November 17-18, 1982, via an unofficial comment by one of your technical staff. Upon our return to Sodyeco we began our own studies to identify problems, if any, at WQ6 and during November-December, 1982, we confirmed elevated levels of organic materials in WQ6, over our February 1981 sampling. In January, 1983, we engaged Law Engineering Testing Co. to locate the source of that contamination. Based on their tests, the apparent source was located, and you were notified by our letter of February 22, 1983.
On February 23, 1983, we received from EPA the November, 1982 Report No. 82-149, which we ·had requested several times. • ..
The newly found landfill was removed to an EPA approved site during the week of March 6, 1983. That landfill is indicated as Site Bon drawing No. 3396,·attached . • •
• •
Mr. Thomas W. Devine
April 13, 1983
Page 2
In your letter you requested a chemical profile for the recently excavated drums
(Site B), and for the waste in the drums excavated in February-March, 1981 (Site A).
All of the materials in Sites A and B were exclusively plant production and laboratory
wastes generated at this facility. Based on past manufacturing practices, interviews
with older and retired employees, and observations made during excavation, we believe
that chlorobenzene, o-dichlorobenzene, and alkyl benzenes (xylene and toluene) were
present in Sites A and B. Also, we found a few gallons of acrylonitrile at Site B,
which was confirmed by analysis; we did not note any acrylonitrile at Site A.
You requested information on remedial action plans we implemented or intend to
implement with respect to buried hazardous wastes on our property. These sites
are Superfund Sites I, II and III (Drawing No. 3396), reported under the 103(c)
notification and shown on the attached drawing. As indicated above, Sites A and B
have already been removed. (Sites IV, V and VI were also listed, in an abundance ' of caution, under CERCLA. Site IV landfill was active until January 25, 1983 and
is being closed under RCRA. Site Vis still active under RCRA and the PCB in Site
VI has been removed.)
Our remedial action plan is essentially the same as that presen:ted in earlier meetings·
with EPA. It is our intention to protect the environment and public health. If
these Superfund sites are found to be leaking organic contaminants in the future and
presenting a threat to public health or the environment, we will first take. steps
to contain them, and if that fails we will remove as necessary. Our past ?ctions
prove that we have adopted and are following that program and policy.
The following are the remedial actions that have been taken by us to date with
respect to Superfund sites.
I
1. After detecting groundwater contamination attributed to Site A,
' I we removed Site A at a cost of about $240,000. Solvent concentration
in Plant Well No. 3, where the contamination was initially observed,
decreased from 0.5 ppm total organics in September 1980 to below
detectable limits in September 1981. EPA Report No. 82-149 also
indicates to us that there is no residual contamination from Site A,
except possibly at WQ6.
2. In 1982, we installed additional monitoring wells to determine that
Sites I, II and III were contained. These wells were located down . ' gradient from Sites I and II (WQ SA and 26), and a horizontal drain
was installed beneath Site III. A water level well was installed
southeast of Site III to assure that the contents of Site III are
above the groundwater table. Our analyses of WQSA and WQ26 in
March 1983, and analysis of SWQS (WQSA) in EPA Report No, 82-149,
demonstrate that Sites I and II are contained. The lateral drain
under Site III was dry, and no chemicals were detected in the soil
removed during drilling. We have continued to observe the lateral
drain under Site III. It continues to indicate no release of
materials from Site III . • •
Mr. Thomas W. Devine
April 13, 1983
Page 3
• •
3. To assist us in searching for the source of contamination of WQ6,
we installed new wells WQ27, 28, 29 and JO at locations near WQ6
suggested by a consulting engineering firm during February 1983.
4. As indicated above, Site B was recently discovered and removed at
a total cost of about $90,000. Site B, including soil removed,
had final dimensions of about 55' long x 25' wide x 13' deep.
5. We have installed several water level wells and a water quality
well north of Site I and have instituted a study to determine that
none of the groundwater under Sites I and iI flows north.
6. While the following does not relate specifically to a Superfund
site, within the past two years we have expended about $925,000
additional on preventing groundwater contamination and spill
control projects, such as upgrading sewer line junction boxes,
concreting truck unloading facilities, installing catch pans
under railroad unloading sites, upgrading dikes around tank farms, etc.
Our proposed actions were listed at page 13·-of-our ·February 2-5.,· 1983 comments to EPA
concerning this site being listed on the National Priority List .. A copy of that
page is attached for y'our convenient reference.
You also indicated that EPA has not yet received the important information requested
in Mr. Fraley's letter to Mr. Smoak of November 24, 1982. The primary reason we
have not responded to Mr. Fraley's letter is that nearly all·of the existing data
he requested in that letter had already been furnished by us to EPA when he wrote
the letter. In addition, we agreed with EPA during our meeting of October 29, 1982
that we would receive arid study the EPA report from the June 1982 sampling program
at Sodyeco, before undertaking any further monitoring except the Site III lateral
drain, a new well south of Site III and a new well south of Site II, which we have
done and reported to EPA, and determine the direction of groundwater flow north of
Site I which we are working. on. As indicated above, we were not furnished that
EPA report until February 23, 1983.
Nevertheless, we are again furnishing in attachments the information requested in
Mr. Fraley's letter, updated and,to the extent we have it. These include:
1. Groundwater Analysis Results 9/80 -3/83.
2. Quarterly Monitoring Results from RCRA wells.
3. Site Drawings:
a) GW direction and elevations, site locations and RCRA facility,
Drawing No. 3396.
b) Drinking water well locations, Drawing No. 3397.
4. Waste characterization -Landfills and Surf ace· Impoundments.
5. Driller Well Logs . • •
Mr. Thomas W. Devine
April 13, 1983
Page 4
• •
With respect to Mr. Fraley's suggestion that 8 new or redrilled monitoring wells
would provide useful information to support any forthcoming feasibility study, it
would appear that the data in EPA Report No. 82-149 taken in combination with the
wells we have recently installed on advice of our engineers indicates that the
request for these 8 additional wells should be reevaluated.
With respect to your observation that Sodyeco is number 125 out of 418 on the
Proposed National Priority List, we suggest that this ranking is largely a reflection
of the inaccuracies inherent in the MITRE scoring protocols rather than an indication
of hazards to human health and the environment at the Sodyeco site. In our comments
to EPA on the proposed NPL, we requested that Sodyecd be removed, and trust that
the information you have received since submitting the MITRE score to EPA Washington
in August, 1982 will enable EPA to not place Sodyeco on the final NPL list.
Very truly yours,
Manager.Envi!onmental Services
EJE:dlh
Attachments
• •
. ,. • •
PROPOSED ACTIONS
Sodyeco proposes to provide or perform the following:
1. Continue to monitor the downgradient wells from
Sites I and II and the horizontal drain beneath Site
No. III.
2. As a precautionary measure, upgrade the cap at Site
III to provide additional protection against any
water seeping through the landfill.
3. Complete spill control program.
4. Install phenolic compound pretreatment facilities.
5. Install ortho-dichlorobenzene recovery facilities.
6. Remove the landfill at IIQ6 and determine if addi-
tional remedial action is necessary to mitigate the '
impact of the groundwater plume.
7. In conjunction with the Part 'B' permitting process
for the facility, Sodyeco will continue to address
the groundwater concerns at the site .
• -13-•
t .. • \ . ~ .-~~:~ts·~•-/~
-.}: . .__ .. __ ,_
• r.t'..zJ;4 :'it-
. . j' ~fi~--1'£;te.~umP~ ··. I
ar"e\u~ted by iEP A . .·· \ . . . . . ByNASHHERNbON said R. Paul Wilms, enviornmen-·. . sr.a1t\wr1,er.. . . , . tal management assistant director A list of 167 possible hazardous of the N.C. Department of Natural waste sites, inclu,ding more than Resources and Community Devel-· 100 that were unknown to state au-opment. . · thorities before a 1980 federal law "But with what we know right . required wa·ste dumps to be re-. ·now we don't have· any informa-ported, was released Monday by tion 'that gives us any undue con.:·.·· state health officials. · cern "he said. ,"The locations of: these . sites Th~ list was turned over to the range from the mountains ,to· the.·. state this year, Levine said. It was , co~st · a~d ._-inclu~~ ., _industr_ial __ : compiled by the.EPA in r~sponse plants, .military facil1hes; mumc1-· to the federal Comprehensive En-pal and county landfills and aban-.· vironmental Response, Compensa-doned garbage dumps," Dr. Ron · tion · ·and Liability Act of 1980, H. Levine, ·state health director, which gave waste producers until said at a news conference. last June ti, identify their poten-State· and federal Environ_men-. tially harmful waste dumps.. . · ta! Protection Agency off1c1als . The Jaw is commonly called the said they· did· not know. whether. "superfund". .because it created _a . there were health or env!l'onmen-$1.6 billion fund to clean up toXJc ta! problems at any of the loca-waste sites. wiieri'. liability is un-tions or how serious such problems known or · dubious. The· fund is could be. ,. i. · . · . . . . · • based on fees paid. by chemical The siies.'iire in 49 of the state's . and oil companies. · . : 100 counties; six are in Wake.· Sites to be investigated first will 0.W. Strickland, head of the sol-. be determined by the type and vol-.. id and haiardous waste branch of ume of waste, distance from popu-the Department · of Human . Re-lated areas and possibility of fire sources, estimated that authorities or other hazards, Levine said. had been aware of "about 25 per-·. EPA inspectors will investigate · cent" of the sites before the list the z; military waste sites on the .
1
was compiled: · , list and any sites the slate re-Levin said many sites may have quests .. N .C. Department of been reported by mistake or may Human Resources and . Natural I not contain hazardous materials, Resources inspectors will examine while.others may pose no health or the others. environmental threat. A prelimi-The state had been aware of only n·ary review .. of the. list, he said, · three of six Wake County sites be-showed .'-'more than 50 such sites.".· fore receiving the list, state offi-·. fall into those categories. . cials said in interviews. The new . He said state and federal inspec-. locations are: . tors would examine the locations -■ An unknown quantity of. un• by next summer to determine.. known substances buried by Bur• w~ether they should be cleaned up. lington Industries at its Wake Fin-or monitored. ishing Plant on U.S. I North be-. "If we had any indication this tween 1967 and 1970. A Burlington morning. (of a serious. problem), · we'd be out there instead of here," Se,EPA USTS,pagel2C
. 'i
""'"b; C1roiln1 G11vanlrlnv Corp.: A~
c1lcium hvdroxicle 1!udg1, m.1111.
NII.fl -COUntv l•ndlill, SPrinv HOIM, metn'fl..
ISO-bulvl•kflOM; Unican 5.Kurlly SYU""I. Rocl,;v Moun!. nkkle 1IU0ge. ,. •
Joi-Hll'IOY•r -County. landllll. '-sllH,
OMT; abandoneO Dow Chemical Pl1nl, ethyl
bromlOe, ,...,., '22, lelrahvdrotur1n; H&rc;ollna, Wilmington. ""° llhn. o,"llllniu. m<!IIII. acid•;
ldHI Onie lnduslrl" Plant, Cnlle H,vne,
brick1 Soulhffn Wood PIN!monl Co., Wllmll\O·
ton. creoo.o1e, oel'ltacnloro<>l'>«IOI, cOPPer chron,. le ar~nic 1lu®e1; Eslech G.nffal CMmlcal C.orP.. Wllmlnolon, p.aPff w111n; Container ·
Procuch Coro .• Witminvton. 1>1in! drums: C.ou,.. tv •nd cltv landfills, Carolina Beach, unknown;
Corn Inv Glau Work 1, Wilmlnvton, oainl can,. to:..·
,,...,..,,; •vlN>e; o,amonc, Sl'lamroc~. Cntle
H8Ynt,, cnrome sludpe; Nor1heesl Chemlc111 Co.,
Cu"" Fur Town11'1ip, v,11n.oc,,um pen!pxide; C.H·
lie H11v"" Ouaecv, C•stle Hayne, chrome. Or1nN -Un1wers,ry of North C,11roltna, Cha11el HUI, two siln. m,..,...ous lab WHIM, pnticidfl,
he•Y¥ """•'•• PC8s: Gener,111 E1e-c1ric Co., ltN!-bane. rmc, chromate and ph011>1'1a1es.
Pa"°" -Eaton Con• .• Roxbeo'O, ac,ch. Cilltnlic $Oda, mo,lal1.
Pitt -David Starlinv oroper1v, Farmville,
le.ad, mo,rcurv, chrome; Unidenllti~ site on N.C.
11 near Ayden, pesticides; County landfill,
Greenville, r...o situ. chemic•I Plan! fire rni•
di,n, t.eavv mo,l11hJ (Uy land!1U, Gr""'1YIUe,
heaY\' melal1; City Ulllity ·Dept., Greenville, hc!il!YY<netab •.
AiJndiollOII -High Point Furniture tndU'Slrl"
lne .. Hiot> Point, .olvenh; Municipal landflll,
.lt.st>eboro. t>eovv melals.
Ak;l'l..-ld -County land!ill, Rocl:l"IJhlrn,
\IIIOOd, dirt, cardbOard. ,
A11Wan -O-ns-1111nol1, Spencer, meta11,
County lllndllll, Salisbury, 11$be$1~ le.cl; Proc-
tor Cl'lemical Co., Salisbury, Textile wntes.
· S.mPIOfl -BH,unl! Corp .. Clin!on, organics.
kotllnd -REA Magr,et Wire Co., Lourinburo. ·
en11m~l1, copper; Helena Chemical Co .. Uuri,.. bur;i. i>esticiaes. .
Slanly -Ceina Solite CorP,-AQU.oc:l11le. Not•
wood, re-cvcle<! .olvenh, ·
Stoi<n -R,J. Revnoldl TObllcco Co., ell, dh,•
tolwe<l leed, metals.
Swain -Counlv landfill, Brnon City, slUOge,
Tranulvenia -Olin Corp., PiSllllh Fo,esl. lly
nh, paper; Du Pont, 8rev11rd, cadmium cnlo-rlde, hvelrofluoric acid .
. Union -Ellon COl'P., Monroe. cerdbOard;
Countv lar,cl!ill, MonrO<', slud11e. Waki,-l(o"""rs Co .• Morrisville, pentacl'lloro-
pt,enol; Mllllinekrodl, Raleigh, $Olvents. aciC11
and bases; Eut C•rolina Hee! Tre•I ~rvice.
Raleioh, sodium nan!de salh.'sod,um and CIICi•
um carbon.Ille; Burlington Industries, Wake Fin,
lshing Plant, cr.emical unknown;, Cooper lndut.-
triH, Lu1kir. Pl•nt. Ape•, various cr.em°"'ls. mo,lab; N.C. State Uni-,.,nlty, lab cr.emlcals.
W•vrw -,Llvewire Eleelric Co .• Goldsbo,o,
chloran•I~ h\l'Clrocarb:ln1, arsenic; Count, llnd-
1111, GolCllbOro. alol>hall, time, fiber11l11u.
WUk,u -Radiation Phvsiu Consult11nt1. Purleor, toluene; Counh tJr.Jtl:l, Rondo, urea
lormaldenvde, oolvvinvl a,c.e!ate; Burlington
Furniture HQme Chlllr Plant, Ronda, "''"' s•-·
Mlllta,y 1ttn -Wostes ..;.,,e ·unu>eclfle-ci. but
wneraH, include oplosiwe m11terials. oWcials
said. TM'l"e are 12 1iln in Craven County at Mo-rine Cor1>1, Air Station, Ct,erry Point. twa siln in
Cumberland County al Fon Br,1111g and Pope Air
Force Bue. 12 sites in Onslow County 111 Marine
CorPS 6ase, Camp Leieune and Marine Corps Air
Station, New River, Jac~sonville, illnd a site a!
at>al'IOOI\~ Dow Cl>emical Plant in New_ Hanover.
• Date : __ J_a_n_u_a_r-'y_2_6_.,_1_9_B_2_
County: __ .J:1=..i..1:==~-----------------------
. Notifier's name and address:_Ji....J!...-'lJitu:.:C,S-----,-----------
P a Box 33429 Charlotte NC 2B233 •
Contact's name: _____ E~-....... J~, ....... E~r~r~i~e~s,_~(~1~0~4ul_~e~2~1=-~4~3~5~1-~Maw..r~t.in1.1...aMai:ar~i~·e~t~t~s~.-------
Si_~e name and address: Martin Marietta Corp. /Sodeyco Div. ,
•
~; 27, West, Charlotte, NC 2B214
Site location: ___ ~H::....~-~2~7....::W~e~st::__:_ _________________ _
Type of waste:_....::O~r~g~a~n~i~c~s~•....::I=n=o=r£g=a=n=i=c=s_A~-=c=id=s=------------------
What process generated the waste? __________________ _
. 3 . Volume of waste: 5,319,000 ft ---'----'---------------------------
t-1 et hod of storage or disposal: Burial on-site, Impoundment
Site 1l.istory: Martin Marietta Corporation (Sodeyco Division) manufactures
dyes, organic pigments, textile chemicals, herbicides and.miscellaneous.organic
chemicals. _Past disposal activity includes on-site burial of drums of ;,aste
and treatment and storage in surface impoundments. The ground;,ater on this
site appears to.be significantly contaminated ;,ith various organic chemicals.
Sodyeco has initiated a ground;,ater monitoring program to identify existing problems.
OEM. EPA , .
*The pr,ececling information is based on preliminary data supplied by
the.Environmental Protection Agency, and not on detailed site . • l investigations.
• •
MORE INFORMATION AVAILABLE
SEE FI LE
,
•
,
•
..
..
" "
• 9 ■ • •
-------------------------------------------------------------------,~
•v1
PAGEi 31 •
__ N_O_T_I_S_R_E_PO_R_T_1_4 _____________________ L=Is=1~·1~,~G~B~Y~·,·~;.~c~1~L~r~1-~Y-----------------R~E~P~O~R"T;-iD'"'A'°TaiE;.;:'-,1~0'"1"'2~0~,"87I--7
----------------------------~RE~'v~-~lO~N~l,_0~4,_~~~·T~A~T~E~:-"N~C _____________________________ a~
NOTiflCA1'ION
I NO
------------
NCSOOOOO!U45
SITE NAME
'lTE STR'E
SITE: Cll'Y
SITE cou:,n
iW'l'IFlER NA1•Jt:
NOTiflE:R Sl'!iEET
liOTirlEl\ Cl'1'Y
(CO~TACT NA~E/1'ITLE)
STATE ZIP
NOTifIER STATUS
(PRES OWN PAST O~N
PRES OP, PAST OP
TRANSPORTER,
VOLUN1EER)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MARTIN MARIETTA COI\P/SODYEC □ DIV
HIGHWAY 27, ~EST
CHARLOTTE 28214
MECKLEiiC)UKG
NCD001810365
R, H, ANKERS
P. U, BOX 33429
CHARLOTTE l,C 28233
(ECCLES, E,J,, MGR, -~~V .S~RV ")
(704•827•4351)
PRES OP
RELEASES TO THE ENVIROMMENT: SUSPECTED LIKELY DATES Of WASTE HANDLING: 1?37 TO 1981 ------------------
WASTE AMOUNT: 5,319,000 cu f1' AREA: 9 ACRES MAP PRESENT! YES FORM TYPE: 8900•1
------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
L>NDfILL
HlPOUrJDMEN'f
DRLi~ B~LO~ G~OUNO
O~GANICS
INORGANICS
ACIDS
CHEMICALS GENERAL
•
I.
(
., ---------------------------------------------------------------------
•
~:. :>:r·~•\ ·~i;~~,.:;~:i!(.•i;i::~~-t /~.l•I,:~;. }'~ !,r :;! 1
.(, 'r: ~ Tar He-el Editors Speak:
~r:.'\.7. ·-:, . •;' '~:.
•
..,.
CHARLOTTE'. (AP/:.--', Deadl'y° ·.sion two years ago for no ap~ar.ent
chemicals have leaked from a•Western · reason. She said she thinks thatHlie .
. Mecklenburg County chemical.·com~ water was responsible._ She-andi.iher
. panY:,'into, several -business: and husband now drink only bottlr.~d water:-
, residential water wellS, and more tests-. . "_I told my husband I'm just Jik~
m~y:he· !!Cedf:d befor~ th~ full extent C'lf somebody has J)oisoned me,":shC:,said.
contamination is known, state officials Kenneth Jarmolow, a spokes'mi:in,for
say".:: '~ . . J, .... Martin-~arietta Corp.; Sodveco's
Hesid~nts of five houses owned by.the.· parent companv, said that the chefuical
company, Sodyeco, have been orde'n?d leaks have been stopped anddllaf1fie
to move because of the c01ltamill8ted -company has spent $5 million,ltO• pre-
water in their wells. i, vent. recurrences 1?1..
Arld Sodyeco, which has Hesa1dthattheleaksposenottfreat·
acknow_ledged responsibility for it~e to the company's 700 employees or to
contamination, has bought a· gasoline the three occupied homes and)itwo
station. a house and offered to buy businesses still near the plan\::: .a .,
three businesses and two other hoUSc::s The chemicals, chlorobenzi:nel"!apd
in the affected area. 1· dichlorobenzine, · apparently I@ked
The company also bought and cloSt:d from a dump owned by the ,~gmpany ·
down a local bar that had a high level.of and from a railroad 1:idinr· where
contamination _in its wateir. chemicals were spilled while being.
People "Who still l_iv_e irl._tht; area say-.. 12.@.!&. _' . .; I.fl. '•.
that thev are worried about the effect The company's plant is IO miles 18Pst
of the' Containination on their health of CJiarlotte, adjacent to the cat.aY.:ba
and property. River. I ests of water samples from•tbe
Irene Youngblood,. whose husband river a Is o show . tr a c ,, 5,j a f
has worked for Sodyeco for 19 years, contamination. but the Environme"nt.al sv!,~~ ;~~e~{~ de~res-See Chemicals, Page z •
b-1-YJ --"---1r ,. -A .. ,:,''<'.·······,;-·!C''·''' ,-.
Chemicals l
.1 Turn-Up
In ; Wells'"_ I
;. ~:n;inued From Page -1 .-\
Pr~tection Agency said 'that
t.bL..£.£ntaminahon 1s ;npl
~t.···;:
Jarmolow said1hat the COni·
pany, regrets that it -~o'!.-
, laminated the wells of nearby
residents. "We have tampered
with their property, If. we
could ,lake it' all back,:we
would. '·l · ~-
B"t. Jarlnolow said that-the
purch'ase · of :tthe houses '._and
businesses -1 except for: the.
bar. "':'t• was BOt related to:the
pollution,
· He said tliat the company
had: tried for. several years to
buy'iiii properties as part o_f an
expan~ion plan, . '
A g~ound-water expert from
the,t,,,-N.C. •Division. of
Env1fonmental Management
said, that so tBr the cherrucal
has seeped 575 ~eathJhe,.
surfa_i;e, He warned that: the
chemical could · spread lar\fftr
into,dhe ground•water
formabon, whlcli ts 800 ftet
deep and extends ror SeV~ral
miles. ,.
the leaks were discovered
last September after Sodyeco
employees complained that the
· plant s. drmk1ng water la!Jl~
bad:" A t~st of·w3ter from its.
37,-foot-deep well turned· up
five chemicals that shouldn't
have been U:iere. . . "'ftO o[ ·OiC. chemicals were
potent1a ly toxic · tney .tan
cause.Gamage lo the central
nervous systerfi7lf1ffgtrdoses.
Theoichlorobenzeneloundin
wells serv1n1ca--rooo-store"WaS"
JOO percent . above the EPA
limll. ·ThT\ .tevet . Ot
chlorobenzene_-in another well
\ wa's(Z· jliitl:eilf-over E~A'S
I Ii .
\ --:Jarmolow said the company
originally believed that
nothing hazardous was bu~1ed
in the dump because no hazr•
dous chemicals .. :Were listed on
company record~_.
Arter the contamination was
discovereL-!aal September,
company investigators ~ug
into the dump and found 25
barrels containing 55 ga1lons
each of chlorobenzene,
dichlorobenzene and other
chemicals.
Some of the steel drums had
rusted and their contents had
drained into the ground,
orficials said.
I
f
I
L -
) MAP TAKEN FROM
, . 2.0AC..:I::
·'co MAP OF SANDY CREEK
ACRES
1:--------=3~6?-C
,------
MAP FOR
EARL GURKIN, JR
NORTHWEST TOWNSHIP BRUNSWICK· COUNTY, N. 0.
DRAWN MARCH 17, I 983 Sc'ALE i" • 60'
I} /,,f 'J t' ~ 6,,,.,_:;;,..,, G, /..,CA -r, ,,..., !>
-h .sc,+/c.., JIM MY F. CAIN
R. L. S. -1< 7 c4 < c:. ;;
7-:i v-8 3
I
I
.. I
MAP TAKEN FROM REC( ·:o MAP OF SANDY CREEK • . ACRES
I
---
MAP FOR
EARL GURKIN, JR
NORTHWEST TOWNSHIP BRUNSWICK· COUNTY, N. 0.
DRAWN MARCH 17, /983 Sc'ALE !",, 60'
,41,/ ') ~ ,._ 601Z-::;:,-, C,, ,L,c.,,4 -r, ,,,., ~
-h .sc,-,/c-JIMMY F. CAIN
R. l. s. ~~ c..<.. ,c_ C .,(
7-:2 v-8 3
I
f
.., "' -"i ~~
~ 11,__ .... -.
~
SANDY
., )---M-A_P_T,_;i_X._E:_N_F._R_O_M_R_-f.i.._.·,.~\:O MAP OF SANDY CREEK
• ACR£S
G11-RD Ct,J
2.0AC . .i:
MAP FOR
EARL GURl(!t~
-
In urr.
-
NORTHWEST TOWNSHIP BRUNSWICK· COUNTY, N. 0.
Sc'ALE /"., 60' DRAWN MARCH 17, /983
/I 1-1 ') e IL 6012-;:;=,-J C,, /_,CA 7,' .,..., :,
+,, _sc,+/,:_, JIMMY F. CAIN
R. l. S. '1<"7 CJ(;...,_ C: -<
7-:i v-8 3
•' ,.,
' .~ .. : .. :·
I
1
---
2.oAc...:1:
®
@t4AC..:t
FOR
L /! O'L r°'I J,>l//1\ I IQ L;-£-;n i t.JUrTf\ll v, vn.
~
~ 0 ~ .,
I
NORTHWEST TOWNSHIP BRUNSWICK· COUNTY, N. 0.
Sc'ALE I"., 60' DRAWN MARCH 17, 1983
JIM MY F. CAIN
R. L. S.
I
'·. r. ,;.,,le,,, . 0 --~ •• ~-. . ,,i,·i]-:,_ • -~ ~ . -·• 0 !:!. 5' C 0~~. •-• ,. ::i • ::i00111 ... "' ..,.., te :S~5::::i:::=::; ... t'< · ... :::o"'o "' -· ":;o····· ,...,,_. ::i . -S::: ~ ; ~ ~-C ~"' .,, C n ;i: ?'.",:-. I.__ iii;'· .• ,., ... r:;-· ,.;;;· ... .,,::,::r. ::a.,-fffl"\"'l" 5 ~ ~ a.: g ~ ~ ....... [.. 0 > ,:: ,.,.,, _:-'.~ ~ =-3 ::i...,l:"'"' ,.,,,.,. z--·· ~-.:-;~ 3 · o g~o::,;; !::: ;'~ i>_;·::::-~:~: r ;; g: ~i-:3 ~ i.:; ~ff~-~:;-_ 5'. !'Oii,°':::lll~ ::r "':,;-.. !""';.·~-•~/•• ::,;-::i;.111::i"... ,..;-;i;i;;.. -r:"· ~. "'Q~' 5 ~ ~ _ ;~---i·~_._·. .. .... _. ,, .• :::::E.., ~--"0 ... ici.;: .. ·~-it~-~ !~~; j"' ~ !_/ ~::·/~--~ .-.i~: ·-r-~~-::-1 ~r '.":.'.·,:. , <.;-: "" _l,~~ "'I_ ... _, = 00 • "t!.,;.: -:'-. ·1-. ' . ·llj -~ .. ... "' -,, ,; ;· :=. 0. 0 3 ::, <::I' "' ::: ~-:r:' .,· ~ ;:;1j;;,.o:i,::;;.-0;.,,!!..g;;;~.-0·'.::>•>· In ~,_~ :E ;:;=:i ~"'8.. '=::, !" "'"';;, ;'. ,:, ...... ~-~:~-.:.) ~'''·t:.; '':. v. [.'.t-~~08'<· ~a. 3::>· \..Jlf .. ':} · -· -oa"•· "" ;: ,: s· . :.n·s ::i "' "' g ... o._. ,.. -· J:" ... 8~a;-gi. 5 ~ '~.,_ ' 77"' ' ' . n II> ,.. i.......J lo i 3 ;;;;.:. • ~•g \..e/'-a:s,:. ,_:_;. o~;' ~--' -~ -.8 . ~ Ill:$: ::: ~ Ill "' 3 _c • ~ ·, ;;lo ~;; ~ [ ~'E.,, 111 ....... , __ ~::<: • : ~ • : § ~ ~ ~P-~:; J (:F <ti -, :::, '< ::, -"' . ra Ill,--.•:,,, •·. , ,, II) ::i 0. ::i "' '" ' . ~~E~:~~_. ~ \:::.t 0-· . .-_; 'C II) -C> :e O ;:!. -, -'.\}" • C> ll'l O 3 < Ill n = • ~•• ~-.' :; :t ; ~ i!I~ ~ ,.?t=-;-,-, 1~::= '?g II) ~::!. ,._ -•Ot.> "' :e< ~ 1: g. § :,!" ~~ ~; ·: .. .4. -; ::, .... • \. 1111" •• , ~-,,,o. r., :::r o:E ~ :~i~ljc,~!\ift,·~~i;l~~=,?{Ji' -;:~§ . .,3°6~ ~ §con,::ig ... :.~--:. .......-11 '' -!I) ...... ~ ::::r;g.2 -,ororo g-n,og-:::~::1··~ HI;: f :: ! f l ; ! }f;,icg~t,: :.;:;:.:"'.·; ;;._!I) 0 :::r~[""-":-~ ~°:;sr, ::,.,.. i ag'i-.... '--.·. -~ • 3,-,. 3 an., • .,,.·~··• f ~· ~ -g-~;_, :! ;;; "' g "' nt"l; .~-, ·.,. ,:::r·cr::i•. · ra> IN° o .,.__ • '.;.'<'<·:. ~ ~ g 3-:,/:. . : : r:, ~ ;:;: ' "' !I) i::: :e !I). t.>• •• /fll!li..~'-~ ~-il-i"' ~ ~ f; ::, . . '-.-1;_\\ :.,=,.,,· C"').,,cc :::r /8ti.."':•: .. :.o;;.... :::re>E_ =!: r., \.-' -· ~] . g ~ 15-~;:; @: : 1--1 ........ 0 .,!1)0 ~ ........ '< -· ... t.>::::i., "'-. : ~F"'3~~ ~ ::,' ~ 0 t.>~::, ~ Q "' ::i.e. ... , ;,,, l'fll!!lt,,,.. ::i---o. _-,,-.-:,:o~· --:i.o \..Ill"-·· t.> <: 0 <: 0 -r:,::, 0 C>., ~ ::::.;;;;;· -~.,~.,~::i .cg ·. ~ p~g~~~;"~cre~~.,;l ii-. O,.. io o~.,, .!...£ ;;_~ --~-"' ..... _..::J" -3n,CTO.-_,..,..C.,-, ( ) ;.: 3 o.C/'12 ~ ~[-=g-§.~ e ... !;•<:?_3 g_ __ c.~.,, ~"O., ;;.r., .--!:!--'<'< c.:i:,:::n, < ~;:;:-o· 3 r----: rn,,,,:::rtt>'<o-ot.>. ,,,;; .. -· ja:iai ~~;;~sgg::el-~~'g~e ~ '<I'!> c--... '<"' :,C.-,O-. • .... o-.:.;_;S::"~= !l)g.~:::§ rt{)-.. d~~c.~;l::r§ 2~3S:o \.JJ'-! :~~~-~}~i ii!1i" ~-.. · ?~==· =~~ 8'<"'-E . "'-:::;:::: ·;;;g.~-o.~;'S-c, ~~i: :~t~~~?~-~ ~ :::,t";o. f"l-•:i.,_~-~ Q (;;"-, ~ ' -, ;' ~. g_ i5 !r'Cl ;;°•::T._ . I ..-C:-i O ~ o r.:~ ,.;o-:::i:.. "':::r:::i:;:::, -"' ~ c.~;,:; _:f;;c.ciSQ· ;.9:· ,,__.... gg ;:& f::: g~ ~:::, ~.f ~ ~--:'-<. :::rs;s, .... .,o c.=:. TP'I ~ 5 ~ :::r a;·r.5·3 ;·;; .... s. '\J,'..J 7~--=~ :;r~cr-a~r;, .g2, \:~ ···•~ '•~;\ ~ ~~r:~f4i~ 0: ::,:,"<~::% ·-..• ,,. tr:•~ . ~"' -i i.· ~_/► .. , 13. , . __Jj1_,, ~: ~ .··. ~--·-·-.1 -,-.:. ~c ·~ ~4m ~ ~ . ~~~'.".'--. ~-., ,. [!'r6~ f <~{:~~ .· ,, ~ ;;· ~ ... u, ,. t?·ffi• .. ~ ~ --~ 4f:~• '~ -· - . . . I U.S. Starula,-d l':u-,ede,l ' , It Is the Jut tw~f~ls .:..:_ chlo · zt.ne -that EPJ:' . rnOSt concerned about. Both cause central nj;'i°u.s last.em damage at 'higfi d05es ACCQ Ing to-~ · Sodyeco hlred;:1--t:-.-t:" .. n-~:.::;..:., •. ----. "TliF~ Di· Robert Neal di-: rutor.o ~ Vederbilt Univer11.;. :l--·,. lY School. of '.Medlcloe··center I~(, :z:;.--;;"!'.•Toxlcology In· Nashville. .Tenn.;, ~z..,,t.Wsaid levels of ttie chemicals lri.two t:;~,,/.t-:pr1valejtlieilti ,exceeded the EPA'&· '·maXifflu'ffl:.:safe~ drinking water concentrations:. ':'.1•· '. • .•.. -.1.Tb,e_.,dichl~l'obenz:ene in• th~. ..:.--:'..:.r~. welts_::; whlch, • ."aerve: Mack'•-:-Bar, and· Richard's Food: Store.• wU JOO% above the EPA limK Neal said. The levels actually were , 1_63% above the limi~ according : to Sodyeco·, figureg_ · . · ... I The maximum level in those / two well, was· .604 mllligrams per liter compared w!th a safe level of .230 milligrams per liter, Neal68.ld. . . The company aJso drilled a new • 575-foot well on the Mack's Bar propeny and found up to .23.f milligrams per _Jlter of chloroben-zene and .453 milligrams-per liter of'dl~hlorobenzene .. ;. ·· i Neal sald lt'was "extremely un• :·HkelY that any 8dYCrSP. health et-... fects were experienced by either plant· workers or residents, but tha~ DO adrruate general study Of th;;ss16C effects of the chem!•. c.a!1las6een done.· . . .. :.:. . , :-ln.::mi£tesf"w&JI near the dump site, Sod eco reported; dichloro, . benzene reac e . m1 1gra 11 per liter, the highest )eve] iound in any of the tesu. >: Boulcd Water Used ... :··:The highest ~onc~ntration· of, the second chemical, chluroben-· z ne, was . m1 1grams · per Ji er n a company tes we . e Water at Richards Food Store regi,tered .712 .mllligralTls per liter,' Ne.al reported. '42% over the EPA safe limit of .500 milligrams-per liter. . . · After the contamination was .discovered; Sodyeco abandoned its ·i Own well and had bottled-water . biought In until it· completed a· new water treatment. plant OcL: U · that" uses Cata_wba River. Water. _-... _.. , The company __ also·.ordered ten-1 ·7--·-. ban' Niter Sodyeco Installed. He usr.s the water to make ice for his customers . · .. Sodyeco, he ·aays,· ""told me my water was good." · · · · . Told Waldrop had. removed his filter, Jarmolow said be wun't concerned because the concentra-tions we're" so low.no bann would be done:., ... : .. --.;~:··.:.; _· , .. :",t, Jarmolow ,&afd the: leaks .pose tt.JlJt_t:a_t:tocthe:1Jeatttr::ur::~ co's 700 employees.or theriie homes and two businesses still OC• ~fa~~!!E.~-~~~:.: .~~-~ear .. !P~. -m said-Sody"eCO'has· bad· no· complaints of adverse symptoms . , , from Its. employeei;: . and bas had · .. only one complaint fmm I u::sJ· dent. Mrs Youogb!ooct-:-~ ... :.: . _ • But the· II S Envlrnnment;a] · -Prptectioo Agency (FDA) says IQn,?-terrn health effects from the 5Qd~eco spfll, including POisl1ife carc1nogemc hazards, are un-known. _ . . --tn'1I January r~rinrt on tbe Inci-dent, the EPA said Sodyeco "sug. gests that no harm to health OC• curred because of the short time of: chemical exposure. However• the (Sodyeco) report fails to take into, account· that synergistic ac. tiol1 . , • may have occurred." .§m· er Ism Is when two or more c em1ca s react so t e1r com 10 effect is greater than the sum of thelt eparate e?fects. · . Dr. Chns Khanna, an EPA toxl-COloglst 10· Washington who is the federal government's. expert in water. contamination, said he doubted anyone· would suffer from low, short-term cooceotra-. tions of one chemical, even chlo-robenzeoe ~r, d_ichl~_r_obe~~~~ :t-.. Gauging Effect,, ~ But be. warned 'the~e ', vial .. DO way to make , any 85Se5Smeni of the health effects or more lhan~ onC chemical." ":These chemicals shouldn't be Jn the water," Khanna said. ,, ... Nobody can predict for sure what's safe and what's not sate. Cenaln people wouldn't be at-· fected nnd some ,othe..·people would." 1· :•. • i:.1 •. 1 .... _. A groundwater eXJ)ert With tbe N.C. Division of Environmental Manii.gement &aid his office Is con-sidering fUrther investigation or the pcmibillty that•the contami-nation may reach beyond Jts pre.s-ent known limits. Groundwater formations in this afea run as dairassOO-teet and Shetal 000@ long, he said. · ,, JarmoloW said the .company hro)(e DO law and VOiUHtm11y re:, J)OT{ed the problem to authonfies. Fei!erai law reqwre~ such reports. : !rfm::ks rf1me50~e Ii~~ Se . r_4 .er_ · enie!Qyees compla.im:d..the...pJants dri~ng water tasted bad. ~e-~e:.warer.Wliich came fr.:run..:.&::.J.7.S-...fooBteep welL and turned· UP..:l_ive chemicals that abouldn't have been there.; .. ·.,~ Sodyeco ofr1clals susptC:ted otb.e(Tfya wens also might bear. fected. They . tested wafer from "t:ba6e l8 wellS op to 1,000 ieet from the two pollution sources.-ana drilled test wells at .va~us paints og Sodyeco property r D· cent!lllim, .. of one nr mare of.llle chefnical compounds ethylben-; zene. toluene, xyieoes, chloroben-j zerre-ancrtttchlornt>enzeue wer~, found m every weU._ I
•
Diamond Shamrock
November 6, 1980
Mr. C. Richard Doby, Sr.
District Sanitarian
•
Process Chemicals Division
North Carolina Department of Human Resources
Westem Regional Office
Building 3
Black Mountain, North Carolina 28711
Dear Mr. Doby:
In response to your inquiry regarding Diamond Shamrock's use of waste
disposal sites in North Carolina, I have been able to confi:im our use of
two sites. We submitted info:nnation conceming C. A. Hughes, North Belmont,
N. C., and :Martin-Marietta, 11325 Texland Boulevard, Charlotte, N. C., to
Congressman Eckhardt on June 27, 1979. A copy of that information is
attached.
I have also attached a copy of a letter sent to Martin-Marietta that
more· clearly describes the waste that may have been involved at their
site.
If you require any additional information regarding this matter, please
advise.
RDB/fg
Encls.
CC: R. Armstrong
C. Maguire
Sincerely,
DI.AM:JND SHAMROCK CORPORATION
PROCESS Q-IEMICALS DIVISION
Qc,1~./3~ut!(,/4
Richard D. Borzelli
Plant Manager
Diamond Shamro~k Corporation P.O. Box 7044, Charlotte. North Caroli~a 28217 Pho:ie: 704 583-2500
Mr. Horace S. Willson
Martin Marietta Aggregates
P.O. Box 30013
Raleigh, North Carolina 27612
Dear Mr. Willson:
•
To answer your request for information on the disposal of waste oils at your Arrowhead Quarry for dust control I questioned· a number of employees at our Charlotte Plant. This material was of a non-hazardous nature and consisted of such :oils as mineral, coconut, cottonseed and castor oils and some natural animal fats.
I called the Mecklenburg County Health Department and their records show permits issued to James. Haste Oil Co. to dispose of this material for our company. A permit issued on 8/31 /76, and one on 6/20/77, each for 2000 ga 11 ons, indicate. the oil was taken to their storage facility on Dalton Avenue. It is possible that one or both of these shipments then ended up at your quarry. You may want to contact the James Waste Oil Co. for further information.
Sincerely,
DIAMOND SHAMROCK CORPORATION
------., .,•.·-·· -.-.
Robert F. Armstrong
Environmental Chemist
RFA:.sh
.. bee: R. Cline
W. Gay
A. Gregori c/MF
tO ;;,;Rj dgeway:-,
Cc:-:;:i:::.ny Name; J)j a.,,.,, 0 ..-, "' sJ., Cl,...,, r" O Ci:=_
f:/\ili ty N2':e: C..hc::..,,. /ofFe. Pl c..,., t-•.
Ni"Jhe of Site: c., A. H1.A'9he,;,, C.o,
Address of Site:
no. street: -
city state zip co::ie
Na.ire of 0...-ner (,;hile used by facility): So..,..., e.. --~---'--'---=-------
.Address:
no. stree.:
city state zip code
·,
.CUITent: 0..ner (if different from above): ------------
.Address:
no. st:reet ·
city st:ate zip cooe
1. Location (l= the property on which facility is located; 2= off-site) ..... tZ! (10)
2 O~-nership at tire of use (l= cc:;;p2ny an-rership; 2=private but not
"' . coIT9any a~-nership) 3=p6lic crn-nership; 9=don 't kna,,) ..............•..•.•• I 2) (11)
3. Current status (l= closed; 2= still in use; 9=dan 't know) ••••••••••••••• W (12)
_ · IF CLOSED, specify year closed ...........................• 19j7!{,:,f (13-14)
4. Year first used for process ,,.;aste from this .facility ...... ~ ......••. 19J71~1 (15-16)
5. Year last: used for process .,.aste from t.his facility (enter "79" if
st:ill in use) ... :· ......•............................................ 1911.l.2 (17-18)
6. Total 2.iJ1otmt of process ,.-aste from this facilit): dis:iosed at: site:
USE TO"iS OXLY IF POSSIBLE: 'thousand gallons ~-~:t.i~~:t.c. ... I 1 J J J I I JZI (19-26)
Right justify -response hundred t=s .................. 1 1 J 1 J I I f (2i-33;
7. Specify type(s) of disposal rre~:C~dus~i~ty~r~ ~d-~~ti1,er1m~JiJ I I I I C34
·
41
:
is still in use (l=currently in use; 2:no longer in use; 3=never used;
8.
9=don 't: know)
landfill, :mano industrial ~-a.ste .•••••••••
landfill, mixed industrial ;;aste •...•..••
landfill, OTu,"'7:7.ed ·~·aste ...........•.•....
landfill, =icinal refuse co-diSDosed .••
pi ts/poncs/lagoms ............. _-_ .......•
deep well i,7j ection .................... : .
land fa~g ................ , ....•.•.....
incL7eration ............................ .
treatrent (eg. neut:rali~in2) · • • • • • • • • • • · · •
reprocessi..7g/recycling .................•.
ow'-ier (s:iecify) ___________ .
Users of this site (l=t.his facilit;·; i=t.riis ::acilit:)" aa otner cc:::pany
facilities only; 3=t.riis coq:iany co7C ot.,iers; S=don 't Jc:cr,,,·) •..•••••••••••
~ ( 42)
W (43)
L:LJ (44)
L:tJ (45)
l9J (46)
L:LJ {47)
l9J ( 48)
1£1 (49)
-15.J (50)
1.:LJ (51)
~ (52)
b2J (53)
9.
... ·--·------.
Co;;ocments (or characteristics) of process ~-aste rrom this facility
disposed at site: (l=present in ~·a.ste; 2=not present in waste;
9=don It kno..r)
FILL IN EVERY BLOCK SPACE
Acid solutions, with pH<3 ...••..•......••.•..........•............•.•..•• 12:1 (10)
pickling liquor .•....•.••.•..•••..••.•.•...•.•.•.•.......•••.••.••.• lk.l (11)
metal plating ~-aste •.•••.•.. .-.••..••.••..•..•••••...........••••••• ~ ~ (12)
circuit etchings ••..•........•.••. · •...•••.•.•••.••.....•.... · .•••..•• I t.J (13)
inorganic acid manufacture •...•..••..•.......•........•..•......•..• ~ (14)
organic acid manufacture .••.••.•••••••....•.••••.••...•..•....••..•• ~ (15)
Base solutions, with pH>lZ ................................... ~ ..•.•••.. It-) (16)
caustic soda r.ianufa.cture .•....•.••.•.......•.•.•..•.....•...•••••••. l&J (17)
nylon and similar polymer generation ..•.. ~ .......................... I t-1 (18}_
scnibber residual •...•.•.......•.••••.•...••.•••..•.•••..•.••••••••• L&l (19)
Heavy metals & trace metals (banded organically & inorganically) ...••..• LU (20)
arsenic, selenium, antimony •......••........•.•..••..........••..••. L&J (21)
merarry ....••....... , ...•.•........•.......•.....•................•. t&J (ZZ)
iron, n-.2I1.gmese, magnesium •............. ; ........................... l;t.J (23)
zinc, cad,-;uum, copper, chrwiun (trivalent) .....•••......••.......•. L.;J (24)
chromium (hexavalent) ..... ~ ................•...•.••....•.......•.••.. IZ-l (ZS)
lead •..........•..................••..........••.••..........•...••• t_gJ (26)
Radioactive residues, >:i0pico curiesfl;Tam ...........•...........•...... l2J (27)
uranium residuals & residuals for Ui:-6 recyclirig ..•............ , .. -..• lZ<I (28)
lathanide series elements 211d rare earth salts •..•...........••.•... ~ (29)
phosphate slag .•..................•........• : ..•.••.......•.....•• _. •• ~ (30)
t.horit .. ,in ••• a • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1.±J ( 31)
radium ............................ _._ ....•.......•.......•......•...•.• t.&] (32)
other alpha, beta & ga.m.a emitters .•................................ lld (33)
Organics .........•..... '. ...........................••.. · ........•.......•• llJ ( 34)
insecticides & intermediates ; ..••............•...••............•.•••. !Z-1 (35)
herbicides & inter,eciiates •.......•........•.•.....•................ ~ (36)
fungicides & :intermeciiates ....................•.......•........•..•. l_;d (37)
rodenticides & interr..ediates ..••..•..........•..••.•................ ~ (38)
halogenated alipha!ics ...............•.........•.•........•..•..•... 1.2.J (39)
halogenated aromatics ..•......•••.••..•.....•.••..•...•...........••• lZ.I ( 40)
acrylates & latex e::rulsions ...•...••.... .-.•..••............•......•• 1..6'.1 ( 4lj
PCE/PBB 's ......... -.· ...... , ................... -....................... 11:J ( 42)
amides, amines, imides . · ........•..•.....•. · ••.•...•.......•.......•.. w ( 43)
pla.stizers ........................................................... · t.Z..J (44)
resins ...•...•.............•.....••..•....•.....•••..•....•....•.••.. tz.l ( 4 S)
ela.stomers ...•.................................................•..••. ~ (46)
solvents polar (except ~-ater) ...............•...•...........•.••.•. 1.t..! (47)
carbonte1:rachloride ....•.......................•......•.......•..... !.t-1 C 48)
trichloroet.hylene .......... -.... , ..........•....••.......•.......••. ~ ( 49)
other solvents nonpolar ............................................ I Zl (SO)
sol vents halogenai:e1 ali:;:,:12. tic ..............................•......... t_y ( 51)
solvents halogenated 2.rm.atic .......•.....•...••.•....•..........••• 8 (52)
oils arnl oil slt.ciges .......... , .............•....................•.. W (53)
est.er::; ~-ic. et..;ers ........... · .. · .................•......••...•.....••• ~ (54:
2.lcohols ........ · .................................................... I 2...) css:
• 0 • • h · c· ,. .
. •·.e~cr;e::::.: :=..:.-::.e .yces ................................................... lZ.J ::. ..... .
c:..ic-xL-:s .........•............... , ................................... lZJ cs,:
In~-~-.,,; cs 'ss·
~•o"-'·• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •. • • • • • • •. • • • • • • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • lZJ'
l
(.:;,O sats ............................................................... 1.2J.--
;:-r=rcc;;~c..."l.S ............................................ . I ·"-I ,·.· f. r . . . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . -...
>~ SC •••••• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ............ • ........ • -•••••••
,~,,,.,
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • .. • • lt:::J \ ..... -
:: °;-:£ :77"2::::-..::: i C 2.l ·--:2...s t t: S ••••••••••••.•.
..... -.;-:-"\:s ~ T"'.; r---'lont.s •.•.•••••••••••••• ~;;.}y5:s.:-c:·r~ yz._--:2..:.:L-:.~ }:•::= .. :i;;•__:-:-,. }"=
...........................
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ll.J ,_::-t
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . @ . . •
·c"'·-• I" l ... ----------•-_! ........................... ...:.::J c-
' -' !.....: .. :.: ..
9.
. '
Co;;.:iooents (or characteri~tics) of process ~.aste from this facility
disposed at site: (!=present in waste; 2=not present in waste;
9:don It kno,i)
FILL IN EVERY BLOCK SPACE
Acid solutions, with p!-i<3 .......•.....•.....•................ ; ........•.. l_gJ (10)
pickling liquor .........•.......•....•.•...•.............•...•••.••• ~ (11)
metal plating ~-aste ................•...•.•................•••••....• l,g_J (12)
circuit etc..1.ings ..•..........•......•.••..•..............•.•..•.••.• W (13)
inorganic acid ma."!ufacture ....•..•••....•....•.•.....•.•.••.••.••••• l&I (14)
organic acid I!'.anu£acture •........••...••.•••..•.............•.•.•.•• lZ..l (15)
Base solutions, _with pH>l2 .........•.•...••..••..•...••.•.•.••.•..•••.. ~ (16)
caustic soda manu£2.:::ture .........................•.......•...••..••. t.,gJ (17)
nylon and s~lar polymer generation ............................•••. W (18)
. scnJbber res:i.dual ................................................••• l&.l (19)
Heavy metals & trace me1:als (bonded organically & ino,ga..-u.cally) ....•.•. W (20)
arsenic, selenium, antimony ...•......•.•.........................••. l_gJ (21)
rr.ercury ...........................................................•• lZJ (22)
iron, rr..2..T1g2nese, magneshn .......................................... l&.l (23)
zinc, c.a.rl1;u1,;,-n, copper, diro::-J.m (trivalent) ......................... !.2.1 (24)
chromium (hexavalent) ..........•..............•..........•.......... lZJ (25)
· lead ........•........... _. .................................•.....••.. ~ (26)
Radioactive residues, >3C?ico curiesfgram .............................. t_gJ (27)
uranium residuals & residt.:2.ls for UF5 recycli..'1g .................. · ... W (28)
lath2J1.ici.e series elements 2.;,d rare earth salts ...................... ~ (29)
phospl-..ate slag ..•.............••............. : •............•...... _ ••. ~ (30)
thorium ... , •.•••...•........•.....•....•..•...•...•...........•...•. W (31)
radium .................................................. _, ....•....•.
other alpha, beta & ga:.:na ES"d. tters ........•....................•....
0:-ganic.s .........•...•......•.......•..•...••..•.......••.....•..........
insecticides & interaediates ..........•........... · ........•...••.....
herbicides & inter.uediates ............•.........................•••.
fungicides & inteni!:!diates ................................•.....•••.
rodenticides & intermediates ....................................... .
halogenated aliphatics ............................................•.
arem.a tics .........•...•...•................•.•....•..••.
latex e:rulsion.s ...•....••.....•.......•......•••..... : •• halogen2ted
acrylates &
PCB/PBB's ................................................................................................
1kJ (32J
~ (33) w (3(
~ (35:
(.,gJ (36:
W (37:
tgJ (3s:
~ (39:
f.gJ (40:
1Z,J (41:
1.z I C 4 2
·de · · · · c·-· ami "'5, =nes, J..TIUoes ...............•.•......•....•.. • ..••....•.... W "'T:,
plastizers ......•....................••.•••...............•......••. -1.ZJ ( 44
resins ........ • • • .. • • • • • • • · · • · · · · · · · · · • · · · · · · · · · · • · · · · · · · • • · · · · · · · · ·
elastc:ners .................................................•........
solvents polar ~:xcept ~-a.ter) ............................•......••.
carb::intet,achJ.or:i.ae ............................................•....
trichloroet.riyle;,e .................•......................•.......•••
ot"-ier sol vents nonpolar ...........................................•
solvents haloge!1ate::. alip::c.tic .....................................•.
sol ve!1t.S haloger.z :e:. G:-C:T12 tic .................................................. .
oils c . .T1d oil sldges .......... , .................................... .
esters 2..:-id eu,ers ........................ ~ ................................................ .
LfJ (45
LZJ (46
W (47
1.kJ (48
1.ZJ (49
W (50
t.,gJ (51
~ (52
W (53
W (54
c.}cohols .......... · ...................... -................... -... -............. UJ (53
•_, ·.-::: -_. ~. -•• -~ ,c. c.-J_ C ~ ·.-.• y ,_· ,, __ c I -, ' (-:, ~
-------• • ·.• ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• L=..J '
c.ioxi.i~s ............................................. · .............. ~ l5,
. . .. . . . .. . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . .
~li SC ..... · ... -•.• -• ~ ...... • • • · • • • • • • • • • • · • • • • • • • · · • • ·
D:-13.~;.=..-:e·..:-:ical ,.:as-:.es
:.._-: ,· '"':.S t ....... ; ,:-,c.,,...,1:5
.........................
. -...... -............ .
_,11 ... .!....J. L;~-.:.:>'~l• •:~ ........................ ,.,,,,.
c:.:.:=J.y:=:s (P.~. \·c...-:2....:::.t-.-:~ ~:=·-~----. p~1-., .. :. . .-,-·)
.---. -.-..
I ? 1 / C: '; ......... l.=.J ~----
.. . . .. .. .. .. . ..
.........
(-c :, .
(6(
(6]
.I
, REGION SITE NUMBER (lo bo uslQ
,~•~--~-~---~_--_P_._~ ________ ·_P_o_T-~•~·~1~-~_s_~-~-~_;_R_'~-~-u-~_;_;_~-~-~-s1_T_E ____ a__j_JY" __ ~•-d_b_,~J_9 __ 9~~-I __ ~
GEHt:RA"L IHSTRIJCTIOHS: Corr:pl-=:te s~ctians I end III through XV of this farm as completely as possible. T"n~n use the infarma•
tion on this form tc, develop a Tentat:ve Dispositicn (Section II). File this Corm in its entirety in the regional Ha.:11rdous ilr'aste Log
File. ·Be sure to inchde all a;ipropriate Su;,plement:il Reports in the file. Submit a copy of the forms to: U.S. Er.,~ron::1ental P:o•
~tian Agency; Site Tracking System; Hazardous Waste Enforcement Tack Force (EN-335X 401 M St., SW; Washir.T.on, DC 20460.
I. SITE IDEHTIFICATION
A. SITE NAME . 8. STREET {or other Jdontllior) J77 ,4/' ~ -171 A.r; elf,,_ A I I I f!,/.,j
c. CITY k/4/k F. COUNT
mdU
;z. TELEPHONE NUM&-R
/ 0 //2.IC.✓ t';'l'V ~
ad,•lb k1uw u M ri/5p,:,.,,J &£.le.
J. YPE OF OWN~ASH}jt1/ V □ I. FEDERAL O 2. ST~TE · 0 3. COUNTY □ S. PRIVATE
A. ESTIMATE DATE OF T~NTATIVE
OISPOSITION (mo.,.day, &; yr.).
0 REPARERINFORMATION
II. TENTATIVE OISPOSITIOH (complete this section lest)
8. APPARENT 51;:RIOUSN!:::SS OF PROBLEM
0 1. HIGH □ 2. MEDIUM 8 3. LOW
2. TELEPHONE NUMBER
III. INSPECTION INFORMATION
A. PRINCIPAL INSPECTOR :NFORMATlON
D ~-NONE
3. OATE (mo,, dtiy,&.yr,)
I
I / TITLE
Lg',.t.,.f-,,ue./~·,Mc-l~, - - -
C. SIT::: REPRESENTATIVES INT::'.RVIEWED (cryrpoto/e officials. w:ukars., resldenta)
1 ~ NAME
j ??1ekul.Yd1;1111isColtJ1,',;
l(icki d D. /3 ,, ell,:.
EPA Fo,,-:i T2070-3 (i0-79)
Z. TITLE 6 TELEPHONE NO,
4. TF.LEPHONE I' o.(oroa COdtJ & no,)
3. TELEPHON!:: NO.
a. AODRE$5
Continu~d From Front
.• INSPECTION IN FORMATION (continued) ~---... o. GENERATOR INFOR.\U,TION (9ource_, of\.\. )
T. NAME 2-TELEPHONE NO. •-A DOR E'.55 4.WASTE TYPE GENERA.TEO
.
E. TRANSPORTER/HAULER INFORMATION ,. NAME ·2. TELEPHONE NO. ' .. A.OORESS 4.WA.STETYPETRANSPORTEO
'
. -
",': . -. , .. ;
)fa -i"~ .. ~~ ,~· '• .... . .. .
' ., •,, ·!::
F. IF WASTE IS PROCESSED ON SITE ANO ALSO SHIPPED TO OTHER SITES, IDENTIFY OFF-SITE FACILITIES USED FOR DIS?OSAL. 1. NAME ·' 2. TELEPHONE NO, 3. ADDRESS
:> ' ' .
G, DATE OF INSPECTION H. TIME OF .IN~·P.ECT'.01
,. ACCESS GAINED SY:(crr,dentiaJ_, mu.,t be shown in all ca-,ea) . _._(mo,,¢ay,d, yr,). □ I. PERMISSION □ 2. WARRANT \'.
J. WEATHER (di,.,crlbo)
•
IV. SAMPLING INFORMATION
A. Mark 'X' for the types of sumple3, taken and indicate whe:-e they have been sent e.g •• ·regional lab, other EPA lab, controctor,
' etc. -end estimate whe~ the results will be available. .,
2. SAMPLE ~-[?ATE 1-SAMPLE TYF'E TAKEN 3.SAMPLE ,SENT TO: ; RESULTS (mark'X') .· AVAILA.9LE
a,.CROUNOWA.TER
b. SURFACE WATE:R
.. c. WASTE
d. AIR .
. .. RUNOF"F
"
r. SPILL
;,,
g. SOIL
h. VECET,\1'10N
l. 0 THS~(::p~cdy)
i I
"· Fli:::LO M ::0: .A.3U RE:U=-.'i TS T;. ~ E.'I ("•J•, radi::><lcti;•ity, o:,:p!osi•.,i:y, Pl-I, a,rc,J.
I. TY?E 2, LOC~IION 0\=" MEJ.C>URClAENTS .J.RESULTs • ;.
~L.
~-·'
;
~ J
--
I '
Cnntinue,J From Paf}e ? -• • IV. SAMPLING INFORMATION (continued)
C. PHOTOS
I. TVs:>E OF" PHOTOS \ '• PHOTOS ON CUSTODY OF,
Do. GROUND Db. AERIAL
o. SITt;. MA?PEO?
D YES. SPECIFY LOCATION OF MAPS: ·;::
E. COORDINATES
I. L.i. TITUDE (dea,-min,-u:,c,) I '· LONGOTUOE (deg.0 min.•,oc.)
V. SITE INFORMATION
A. SITE STATUS
0 1. ACTIVE (Those inductriul or 0 2, INACTIVE (Those □ 3~ OTHER(specify): muniuip.:,l sito!I which nre bein,1 used sites which no Ion,aer receive (Thoae sites that inc:lude .,uch incidents tik11t ''micfniJht dumpin,Q" for waste treatment, storoQo, or dispoBal wastes,) where no reJutor or c:ontinuin.Q use ol the aito tor wa.,te di:sposal on a continuina bDsis. even if infre• . -hos occurrr,d,). quently.)
B.,IS GENC:RATOR_ON SITE? . -. 0 1. NO ,O z. YES(speci/y fl"':"!"rator's tour-diair SlC Code): ___
! \ I ' C. AR!::A OF SITE (in ncre:.) D. ARE THERE BU IL.DINGS ON THE SITE? ! □ I. NO 0 2. YES(8pecily): ! • .. VJ. CHARACTERIZAT!ON OF SITE ACTIVITY
Indic.'.lte the major site activity(ies) and details relating to each activity by marking 'X' in the appropriate boxes. ·x x· x· x· A. TRANSPORTER -8.STORER f-C.TREATER f-D. OISPOS!:::R i •
j1.RA1L 1. PILE 1.FILTRATION t. LANDFILL
··-a.SHOP 2.SURFACE IMPO'JND•,1~NT 2.JNCLNERATION 2. LANDFARM
• 3. Bld".CE:: 3, DAUl.,..S 3. VOLUME RE:OUCTION 3, OPEN OUM?
.i, TRUCK .i. "":"AN!<. ABOVE GRO'JNO 4. RECYCLING/RECOVERY 4. SURFACE l:,,APOUND.,..~N T
~-PIPELINE S. TANK. BELOW GROUND 5. C H'.::.M./PHYS./TREA TMENT 5.MIONIGHT OU!-.4?1NG
6. OTHER(Speci!y): 6. OTHER(apecl/y): 6. B10LOG1CAL TREATMENT 6. INCINERA,T10N -f-
7. WASTE OIL REPROCES!!ilNG 7. UNOERGMOUNO 1NJ'E:CTION
·-· a.SOLVENT RECOVERY !I. 0 TH ER (specify): ..
9. 0 THER(specffy): ' -
J ..
' E.. SUP?LEMENIAL RErG~TS: '-~ !he ti!C' :'.alls within· any of the categories listed below, Supp!et:"lental Reports must be co:n;>leted. Indicate whlch Sup;>lom11ntnt Reports ycu hJve fil!e~ out and attached to this !or •• ·
□ I. STORAGE oz. INCINERATION D 3. LANDFILL □ SURFACE 4• IMPOUNDMENT □ S. DEEP WELL
□ •• CHE.M/910/ 0 7. LANDFARM 0 8. OPEN DUMP □ 9. TRANSPORTER □ 10. R~CYCLOR/R'.:.CLAIMER PHYS TREATMENT
VU. WASTE RELATED INFORMATION
A. 'F.ASTE TY?E
D 1. LIQUID 0 2. SOLID 0 3. SLUDGE 0 4. GAS
B. WA$TE CHARACTERiSTI~:;
□ 1. CORROSIVE □ z. IG1~ITABLE □ 3. RADIOACTIVE □ 4. HIGHLY VOLATILE □ 5. TOXIC □ S. RE.\CTIVE □ 7. INERT □ B. FLA?,,IMABLE
.
~ 9. OTHER(ap-,co/,J·
ASTC CA fEGORIES
A:-e rcc"JN.S ol wa1tcs ll~n:..l,.bl.:' Sp1:c1!:, Ite,~s such ris manifests, inventories. etc." below.
EPA Form T207'J-J (10-7?) PAG=,,3 OF 10
on ,nut: d F o Front ' m .. VJ.TE RELATED INFORMATION (conr;nued). . . .
2. Esci.mate the amount (specify unit ofm~ )o! waste by category; mar;.c 'X' to indicate . ich wast~s n,e present. .. SLUDGE b, OIL c. SOLVENTS d. CHEMICALS .. SOLIOS r. OTHER AMOUNT AMOUNT AMOUNT AMOUNT AMOUNT A"'1QUNT
UNIT. OF MEASURE UNIT OF MEASURE UNIT OF MEASURE UNIT OF MEASUR!::'. UNIT OF MEASURE UNIT OF ME4SU"l~
·x x· ·x· x· X ·x -PAINT, '-OILY -[IJ HALOGENATED '-'" ACIDS -Ill FLYASH "-:i> LA9ORATOAY. Ill PIGMENTS (I l WASTES SOLVENTS PHAAMACEUT. .. METALS -'-21 O THER(apttci/y): 121 NON•HALOGNTO. PICKLING IZ) SLUDC.ES SOLVENTS l.?) LIQUOR~ 121 ASBESTOS 121 HOSPITAL
, ....
131 POTW L-.1(31 0 TH ER (spocily): 13) CAUSTICS I I MILLING/MINE CJl R~O1O.tr,C":'"1VE · . 3. TAILINGS .. . .. , . ·: .. .. ~ _:; ALUMINUM
141 FERROUS SMELT ... _ _._:·.-( , (4l SLUO GE 141 PESTICIDES ING WASTES (4IMUNICl?AL ... ~:}I} . . {:I) OTHEH(Spttc/ly):
151 NON-FERROUS 1:1) OTHER(SpttcilyJ: :-,~ •·(" L-l:1) DYES/INKS •· ~ }J~t-. SML TG. WAST ES
A~ t0I OTHER(.spttcify): . -> ' _IOI CYANIDE I-.': . -. ,, ..
' .. ' .. ' .. ·, " . (7) PHENOLS·
\ . '~-..
'. -·1;!~:;_ ...• . , ... .. . ... . \_ •· .. . ,:;_~· (8) HALOGENS ' \ ;-_,
... i;)> Pea •·: .. --·
,. .. ... .. ..
. •. ' ;,: . O0)M!::TALS . . ~--.. .. . .
.. .. !11) OTHER(Spotc//y) . ~ ·' ..
I
o. LIST.~UBSTANCES OF" GREATEST CONCERN WHICH ARE ON THE SITE (place in descending o;dcr of hazard)
2. FORM 3. TOXICITY
(mark 'X') (r.t11rk •X') .. 1. SUBSTANCE P.so· b. c. VA .. b. C, d, 4. CAS NUMBER 5, AMOUNT 6. UtllT c,o LIQ. POR HIGH MED. LOW NONI
•. '.' : ..
:
.,
: -:,
.,
.
.
J ..
VIII. HAZARD DESCRIPTION
' FIELD EVALUATION HAZARD Di::SCRlPTION: Place on ·x· in the box. to :r.c!icate .that the listed haz.ird exists. Describe t:1.-;;::
hazard ir: the space provill::::<l.
j .. □ A. HUMAN HEALTH HAZARDS -i ,.
Continued From PagtJ 4 ·
Vlll. HAZARD DESCRIPTION (continued) o· 0. tJON·WORKEA INJURY/EXPOSU
□ C. WORKER INJURY/EXPOSURE
□ D. CONTAMINATION OF WATER SUPPLY,
E. CONTAMINATION OF FOOD CHAIN
□ F. CONTAMINATION OF GROUND WATER
□ G. CO~JTAMlNATION OF SURFACE WATER
=PA Form T2070·3 (10·79) ?AGE 5 OF 10 Con:i.-Hte' On Rcv~r<;;•:
Contin.i:ed F'rnm Front
0-H. DAMAGE TO FLORA/FAUNA
0 I. FISH KILL
□ J. CONTAMINATION OF AIR
0 K. NOTICEABLE ODORS
•-□ L. CO:-.ITAMINAT10N OF SOIL
:t :□• M;1i~ROPERTY DAMAGE ,, ,. ,,.
I!. HAZARD DESCRIPTION (conanued)
PAGE 6 OF 10
COnti'r1ued From P,'1ge 6
VITI. HAZARD DESCRIPTION contin'Jed
0 N. FIRE OR EXPLOSION
Do. SPILLS/LEAKING CONTAINERS/RUNOFF/STANDING LIQUID
D P. SEWER, STORM DRAIN PROBLEMS
CJ Q. EROSION PROBLEMS
CJ R. INADEQUATE SECURITY
~ S. INCOMPATIBLE WASTES
EP..\ Farm T2070-J (10•79) PAGE 7 OF 10
□ T. MIDNIGHT DUMPING
-A, LOCATION OF ?OPULATION
I.IN R£S!DEN_TIAL AREAS
.. 2 IN c::~.if.,E:RC1AL
.OR ;;~·J'.JSTRIAL Afi'::AS
IN ?U0~lCLY
•3 .TRAV!:::LLEO AREAS
4, PU<!L.IC USE AREAS
(p1'1:,'(.'i, scf:00(3, etc,)
• •
VIII. HAZARD OESCRIP_TION tcontinucdJ
IX. POPULATION DIRECTLY AFFECTED BY SITE
B. APPROX. NO.
OF PEOPLE AFFECTED
C. APPROX. NO. OF PEOPLE
AFFECTED WITHIN
UNIT AREA
O. APPROX. NO.
OF BUILDINGS
AFFECTED
·'
E. DIST.l.NCE
TO 51--;-E
cs;:,-:ciiy :::iirs)
l· _A.·CE:PTH TO GROUND'HATC.R(i;p:,ci/y unit)
X. WATER AND HYDROLOGICAL DATA
B. OlR:!CTIO~l OF FLOW c. GF!OUNDWATc:.R use. IN Vl':it;(TY
D. POTc.NTl~L YIELD OF AQUl~ER E. DlSTAtlCE TO DRINKING WA-.-EP. SUPPLY
(s;u,ci!y unit of mt,t1S11re) F. OlRECTION TD DRINKING w:...TER SUf"-'PLY
1
"~;2ype, OF OR:NKING ",HATER SUPPLY
.· ; 1:1. ~lON-CO'.>,iMUNITY -', ,,.,.__ < l S CONNECTtON5-D 2, COMMUNITY ($;,ec,ty rown). > I 5 co:,.;NECTIONS ---------------------------~-----· ~J ":"cJ.-3, SURFACE WATE~ □
-C PA.F-orm T207C-J (10-79) PAGE 3 OF 10
. -:,.~•:.:, .. ,.;:~
• Con:in:ied From Pade 8
I . X. WATER A.HD HYDROLOGICAL DATA (continued)
LIST ALL DRINKING WATER WELLS WITHIN A 1/4 MILE RADIUS OF SITE . .. , .
NON-COM-C0MMUN4 1. WELL 2. DEPTH 3. LOCATION MUNI TY ITV (spacity unit) (proximity to population/ bulldln,i11) (m•rk 'X') (rn•tk 'X'J
' -·•
.. ... ..
: -,
.;'. ~~;:". . . .. __ , .. ... . .... ·•· •· -· -..
. : ·••'" ... . .
l.:RECElVING WATER
'·· NAME . ' l: 2. SEWERS D 3. STREAMS/RIVERS .. , ... --: .. ,· .. : .. . . . .-
4, i.:.AKESIRESERVOIFU D !I. OTHER(apacllr): ~ -----------------------ci. sPEC1FvUsE ANo cLAss1Fl'CAT10N oFREcEIVINc.WATER"i"'··
:-: . . ' ... •' : .-....
.. ··.-, . .
'. :·
XI. SOIL AHO VEGITATIOH DATA
LOCATION OF SITE. IS IN:
□ A, KNOWN FAULT ZONE □ B. KARST ZONE □ c. 100 YEAR ~LOOO PLAIN D ~-WETLAND '. .,· .. ,. . _, .~ E. A REGULATED FLOODWA'( □ F. CRITICAL HABITAT □ G.RECHARGE ZONE OR SOLE SOURCE AQUIFER •'
Xll. TYPE OF GEOLOGICAL MATERIAL OBSERVED
Mar:t 'X' to indicate the type(s) of geological material observed and specify where necessary, the component parts.
'X 'X X' I-A.C.VERBURDEN ~ B. BEDROCK (spttclly below) ~ C. OTHER (11pttelfy below) -
1. SA.NO .. -·
2. CLAY
i 3. GRAVEL -. .. .
Xlll. SOIL PERMEABILITY
D A. UNKNO"~~ □ B. VERY HIGH (100,000 to 1~00 cm/'.lec.) □ C. HIGH (1000 to 10 r;.m/11ec,) 0 a·. MOOERATE (10 to .1 r:.m/sttr:.,) □ E. LOW (.1 to .001 cm/ser;..J □ F. VERY LOW (.001 to .00001 cm/s&c,)
G. Re.CHARGE AREA
C LYES o,. NO 3. CO~MENTS:
~-CISCHA~GE AREA
C I. YES LJ 2, NO 3. COMMENTS:
I. SLOPE
1. ESTIM.\TE "'• OF SLOPE I 2. SPECIFY DIRECTION OF SLOPF.. CONDITION OF SLOPE. ETC.
J. OTHER GEOLOGICAL DATA
. • .. PAGE 9 OF 10 Conttn:1e On Re:.t::rs~
ConUnued Fro-:n Front
-XIV. PERMIT IN FORMATION , -;·1.
List all applicable permits held by the site provide the related information,
' ..
F. IN CO~PLIANC~ o. DATE E. EXPIRATION (r.rar.f( 'X'J A. PERMIT TYPE B, ISSUING c. PER:..41T ISSUED DATE (e,a,,RCRA,Stact1,NPDES,etc,) AGENCY NUMBER (mo,,dtty,&.yr,) (mo.,day,&yr,) '. ,, J. UN•
YES NO K!'.IOWN • .
• .
. .
.
.
.. ..
<·' .. .. . ~-~· ·-..
xv. PAST REGULATORY OR ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS □ NONE □ YES (eumrnerize In thlr,i spttct1) . .. . -· ;·· .. ..
' \ .. , .. , ' . .. ... ::; . ... ..... . .
' .•··. . '·
,.· .. ..
•.· . ...... ... ... . .. . ,. . .. •. .. ', .. .. ·, ' '! .• -~' < •• ... ... .. -..
•• ..
.. .. ,. -' .. '' ... ,.·
'' .
.. ... .. . ,, ,, .,
·\ . • .. ...
' • .
.. . ,
. .. . ,
..
NOTE: Based on the information in Sections III through xv, fill out the Tentative Disposition (Section ll) information on the first p<=1ge of this form.
PAGE 10 OF 10
I
• •
JAME.9 a. HUNT. JR.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
Division of Health Services
HUGH H. TILSON. M.D.
OOYUl:NO• Clllll:CTOll
SARAH T, MOR .. OW. M,D •. M.~.H.
a1:c11n.-.1n• WESTERN REGIONAL OFFICE
'
BUILDING 3
BLACK MOUNTAIN. N.C. 28711
October 10, 1980
Mr. Richard D. Borzelli, Plant Manager
Diamond Shamrock Corporation
Proc,ess Chemicals Division
P. O. Box 7044
Charlotte, N.C. 28217
Dear Mr. Borzelli;
This office is cooperating 111ith the U. S. Environmental
Protection Agency in identifying potential hazardous 111aste
disposal sites that 111ere previously listed on the EPA's
Eckhardt Report of Potential Hazardous Waste Sites. Diamond
Shamrock Corporation in Arro111111ood Park is not listed as a
potential site; ho111ever, the report indicated that Diamond
Shamrock used facilities of C. A. Hughes, North .Be'lmont ,N.C.
and Martin-Marietta, 11325 Texland Boulevard, Char latte, N.C.
for the disposal of potential hazardous 111aste.
For your inf or mat ion, I have attached a copy of the Site
Inspection Report to be .submitted from each site listed on the
Eckhardt Report. I 111ill submit a completed copy of this
report to the Raleigh off ice regarding a potential Martin-
Marietta site and the C.A. Hughes site.
I 111ould appreciate your company's cooperation in helping
us determine the facts on these sites. Basically, 111e need to
kno111 if Diamond Shamrock used the potential s-ites mentioned
on the Eckhardt Report. Secondly, 111e need to kno111 111hat types
of 111aste 111ere disposed at these sites. Finally, 111e 111ould like
to kno111 111hen and ho111 much 111aste 111as disposed.
1-lr. Richard D.&rzelli
October 10, 19"f//!
Page 2 •
Your cooperation in this matter will be greatly
appreciated and if I can be of assistance, please advise.
CRD/mr
Enclosures
cc: Mr. 0. W. Strickland
Mr. Julian Foscue
Mr. John Gibons ·
Si nc ere l y,
c. R~~)~I/JtJt·
C. Richard Doby, Sr. .
District Sanitarian
~£!:-F..; .. _""(" .. T~ PO~TIAL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITE •
REGION SJTE NUML'E~ (lob•••-
• llnod b.r H qJ e,--~.,1._.-i_-m· . ...e1 ~.;.,· ~:.: 1.: .. IDENTIFI ION AND PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT IV IC?Ctd ~OTE: Thle fonn Je cor::ipleted for each potential hazardous waste site to help set priorities for site inspection. The infonnation aub::::i.ltted on this form le baaed on available records and may be updated on subsequent forms as a result or additional inquiries __ :_•nd on-aUe inspecUona.
... :: , .... ---'-'G~HERAL IHSTRUCTIOHS, Complete Sectlona I end [II throuiib X aa completely aa possible before Section II (Preliminary A eaea.:nenf). ·Pile thh for.n in the Re:rional Hu:af'"!l.ou5 Weste Loi File and submit o copy to: U.S. Environ-:nental Protec~ion Agency; Sito Tr■ck.1.ng Syatem; Huardou• Waste Enforcement Task Force (£N-J]S); 401 !i,1 St .• SW; Washington. DC :?0460.
I. SITE ID.EHTIFICA TIOH -A. SITE ~'.'7 1 -·· !
·) ,-:()·ill'"' '
1/?'·fiA ·11/· / I / 1-lt.--4 ;,.·;~J!)/.-tl ::_: _/
B. STREET;(Or other identifier). .. Q _ II 7~"_s-'7 ?~VLI/ AiO 1---1?:J
C. CIT~_f/, (/ ( o. STA~E IE. ZIP CODE F, COUNTY NAME _. '/\ i-Z-L O !i ( . ) ( 9' ,<-.--
G. OWN ER/OPERATOR (It known)
1 •• ✓.-::EPHONE NUMBER
1, NAME
"5/,/11!1t11rk/ -i)/ /.i-/!1 £' /\,' ,) ;:;:,✓-'/]. ):;~:~7t~'t:L£io/J(;'r7.c-)
H. TYPE OF OWNERSHIP (
~~IVATE
, ·,o'l-:J ;;-Y· ZS-(/0 01. FEOERAL C•-STATE 03-COUNTY n. MUN!CIPAL G6 UNKNOW'J
I, SITE DESCRIPTIOtl
/ /1c,·,1,,\
J. HOW IOENTLFIED (J,11;, cltlzen'a complainu, OSHA citations, etc,) K. DATE IDENTIFIED [:c/( >Zr;J (mo,, day, & yr,) . .
L, PRINCIPAL. STATE CONTACT
1. NAME -·:t3 I/. L._ 1J1c· ri /-/,\ t.'.. ... _
i 2, ~~LEPHONE NUMBER .,,.....
-}---; '"';;-::}....f I Y
ll.1 PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT (complete rh;s section last) -e •• -•• I _CPARE,n SERIOUSNESS OF PROBLEM
' -L)1. HIGH □2. MEDIUM o,. LOW □• NONE ~KNOWN
B, RECOMMENDATION
0 I. NO ACTION NEEDED (no h11nrd). 0 2, IMMEDIATE SITE INSPECTION NEEOEO_ •· TENTAT VELY SC:HE:)ULEO FOR:
[l],<s;TE INSPECTION f\lEEOED •• TENTAT1Vl:.L\ ~CHEOUL.EO FOR: •-WILL BE PERFORMED av:
b. WILL bE PERr"ORMED ev:
0 4. SITE INSPECTION NEEDED (low priority)
C. PREPARER INFORMATION
I. NAME /., 1 ·• TELEPHONE NUMOEA I ··;7 i1Ji]·2'••! I.. ,~-!{ ,. I -· ("", (· ij 1,, L ) -✓, -;;---, ( I J ' ..
, III. SITE INFORMATION
A. SITE STATUS
~/4~CTIVE (Tho•e 0 1. \ACTIVE (Tho•• lnduetrlal or hi 3. 0TH ER (11pecily): municipal •lttt• which aro belnt2 1.111ed e• which no loni:e, ,ece/ve O.!ie siteB lhtH include :1uc;h incidenll!I like "mldnlQhl dumpln(:'' whftr• lot w••te tri,11nn .. nt, •torat2e, or dl•poaal "R"lllllOl!I,). no re,Zuler o, continuin,2 use o! tht1 alte for w•ste dl•po••I ha• occurred,) on• contlrruln,: b.•l•, eron Jf:Jnlr•-qu-.itly,)
8. IS GENERATOR ON SITE7
·1 :r~:;: , _,.
t. . ., CT•-NO □ 2, YES (•Peclfy ,2enei-1J1or'• lout-d/12/t SIC Cod•): ~ ,, / : .• •. .
C. AREA OF SITE (In ocre.) 0, IF APPARENT SERIOUSNESS OF SITE IS HIGH, SPECIFY COCROINAIES 1·, t. LATITUOE (de/2.-mJn,-eoc.J I'· LONC'1 uoE (d•a--min.-,.<•)
E. ARE THERE BUILDINGS ON THE SITE? . 01. NO D 2. YES (•P•clly):
T2070-2 (10-79) Lur,111111•· f)u h,·v,·r:,,·
/4 Frnnr ·--,/ ✓ ~CHARACTERIZATION OF SITE ACTIVITY
/{he m:ijor silc :ictivi1y(i1•!-.} :rn ts relatinR to t';lCh ;11:tivity b}' mArking •x• llf'IHOprialr hoxrs,
/ X X x·
/ A, TRANSPORTER ...... B. STO~ER -C. TREAiER -0. DISPOSER
;. , ,. RAIL. I, PILE ,. FILTRA TIO"I ,. LANO FILL
' , ... p •· Suhr:ACE IVPOU:-,i C•,l E"" T ,. INCltlE:R& T•n~l ,. L.I.NOFAPU
'. 0AAC.E I'. O~UMS ,. VVL.U-..1t.· l< t· :.;,1..,;: 1· .. :-,... i•. \)PL"° .">'.JMI""' .. TRuc K 4.. TANK. A BOVE GROUND .. REC Y C L.ING/R CC OVERY .. SURFACE IMPOUNOMENT
~-PIPE:..•N~ ,. T4NK, BELOW GRO: . .:NO , . CHE"-'.,P ... YS. Tl•E"-T"-•~~•17 '. Ml!;,tJIGHT 0U~-4P!-.:G
,. OT...,ER (spec:if►·J: f,. OTHER (:-.peei/y,: '. BIOLOC.'C,:,. L. i ~ [.:. TM,C: •, f ' j• .. !~lC!HE:~A':"lON --~-,. WASTE OIL RE_PROCES51NG UNOEFIGROUNO IN.JEC TION
'. SOLVENT RECOVERY ~-OTHER (•p•cily): .. OTt-lER (speeify): -
E, SPECIFY DETAILS OF SITE ACTIVITIES AS NEEDED
;\ .. / 5,.{:<.(({~cf ;-:>/·,'5t:'.cl-
-
V. WASTE RELATED IHFORMATIOH
A. WASTE TYPE
CJ• UNKNOWN □2. LIQUID Ql. SOLID .~LU OGE Qs. GAS
8. WASTE CHA.RACTERISTlCS
Ot. UNKNOWN o,. CORROSIVE o,. IGNITABLE □• RADIOACTIVE □• HIGHLY VOLATILE
~OXIC □1 REACTIVE □• INERT □• FLAMMABLE
010. OTHER (.speeily):
C. WASTE CATEGORIES
t. Ar'e rt!'cord s of wastes availablt!'? Specify items such as r.ianifeats, inventories, ete. below. ...
C
2 .. Estimate the amount(specify unit of measure)o( waste by category; mark 'X' tO indiC<tte which wastes a,c present.
a.SLUDGE b. OIL c, SOLVENTS d. CHEMICALS e. SOLIDS f. OTHER
AMOUNT AMOUNT AMOUNT AMOUNT" AMOUNT AMOUNT
r,' · l · Cc r .b~-. ..:· C -) __ i
L -· .
UNIT OF MEASURE UNIT OF MEASURE UNIT OF ME.,.SURE UNIT OF "4EASURE UNIT OF MEASURE UNIT OF MEASURE
ti ,(' ~· ,A /...L.•''' '
x· (!)PAINT, x· (\-J 6iLV ·x· ll!MALOGENATEO ·x· ·x ·x· II):;~~~::~~~;. -PIGMENTS
,....... V WASTES -SOLVEN'!"S -Ill ACIOS -(1) FLVASH -
~/
121METALS r""--\2J0THER(.Specify): (21NON•HALOGNTO 121 PICKLING 121 ASBESTOS !2)HOSPITAL
SLUDGES SOLVEN'°'S LIQUORS
13> POTW -!31 0THER(Speci/y): !3lCAUSTICS !3!M1LLING/ 13) RAOIOACTIVE MINE TAILINGS
C4) ALUMINUM 14.l PESTLCIOES 1'1 :i~~g_u!ASTES C41"-"'UNICIPAL
SLUDGE .
,....... tSI OTHER(■Pecily): !SIOYES/INKS I SJ ~i~;~::'!~~~S r-\!)) OTHER(apecHyJ:
161 OT HER(.specify):
tel CYANIDE -
{7)PHENOLS
18! HALOGENS
till PCB .cii,
!IOIMl;:TALS
_ (111 OTHER(lfp.,cltyJ
' EPA Form T.:070•2110•79) PAGE20F4
~m ,..,,,,.,, .. ~
•/ V. WASTE RELATED INFORMATION (-:ontiniwd
/~~B_STANCES OF CR~ATEST CO N W)-IICH MAY BE ON THE SITE (pl•c:u in do~ Q order ol h•i•rd). :
I I
L
:;;::4, ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OR NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION OF SITUATION KNOWN OR REPORTED TO EXIST AT THE SITE,
VI. HAZARD DESCRIPTIOH
8. c. POTEN• O,DATE OF A. TYPE OF HAZARD TIAL ALLEGED INCIDENT E. REMARKS HAZARD INCIDENT (mo.,day,J·r,)
(mark 'X') (tnetk 'X')
I. NO HAZARD · .. •.·· .. ·• ·:.:, ;,._ ..
2. HUMAN HEALTH
•• NON•WORKER
INJURYIEXl=>OSUR E
4, WORKER INJURY
•• C:.ON T AMIN A TION
OF WATER SUPPLY
' .. CONTAMINATION
OF FOOD CHAIN
7 • g~NCTRAOM~~~;,.;~~ER
•• CONTAMINATION
OF SURFACE WATER
OAMA.GE TO
:..ORA/FAUNA
..
, .. FIS)-! KILL
"· CONTAMINATION
OF AIR
12, NOTICEABLE ODORS
1:,. CO~TAt,,HNATION OF SOIL
14. PROPERTY DAMAGE
1 ~. FIRE OR EXPLOSION
"· SPILLS/LEAKING CONTAINERS/ RUNOFF/STANDING LIQUIDS
"· SEWER, STORM
CRAIN PROBLEMS
1 ti. EROSION PROBLEMS
... INADEC?UATE SECURITY
20, INCOt.4PATIBLC WASTES
21. MIDNIGHT DUMPING
-.. 2·:.::-;: CHEA (specify):
EPA form T2070-2 (I 0-79) PAGE30F4 Continue On Reverse
---·· -
;
LF,ont.
. .( VII. PERMIT INFORMATION
TE ALL APPLICABLE PERMITS HELO BY THE SITE.
I NPOES PERMIT 02 SPCC PLAN [l,. STATE PE.~MlTl:;pecilyJ: -·--··. --· ' ' ,:.. :. ~: =:•,': -·· ' C ••, • -~:: :.;_, .. ' £ :. :;::.._;,. -; .:.i;;,;:.,.:,;,-~::; . --
U 7 RCRA STORER □•· RCRA TREATER CJ 9 RCRA OISPOSEA ,
=i 10. OTHER (.,;prciiy): ..
3. 1N C0M?L1A.NC(?
0 t. YES □ 2. NO o,. UNKNOWN
.. WITH RESPECT TO (11~1 re,:ulation neme &. number): -· VIII. PAST REGULATORY ACTIONS
□ A.NONE □ 8. YES (.summ,11rize below)
IX. INSPECTION ACTIVITY '"ast o, on·Ooin•>
□ A.NONE □ B. YES (complete luu11.s 1,2,3, & 4 below)
2 DATE 01=" ' PERFORMED
I.TYPE OF-ACTIV1TY PA.ST ACTION BY: ,C. DESCRIPTION
(mo., day, & yr,) (EPA/ State)
X. REMEDIAL ACTIVITY (past or on-going)
□ A. NOt~ E □ B. YES (complete Jrem.s 1, 2, 3, &. 4 bclo\&')
2.0ATE OF 3, PERFORMED
1. TYPE OF' ACTIVITY PAST ACTION BY: 4. DESCRIPTION
(mo,. doy, & yr,) (EPA/Stllte-)
NOTE: Based on the information in Sections Ill through X ' fill out the Prel_iminary Assessment (Section ll)
information on the first page of this form.
PAGE 4 OF 4
SITE: NUMBER 1994 PAGE 1 FOR THIS SITE
MARTIN-MARIETTA AGGREGATES, AR
11325 TEXLAND BLVD
CHARLOTTE,NC X----
COHPANY: COMPANY-FACILITY HUMBER 13036
DIAMOND SHAMROCK CORP.
PROCESS CHEMICALS DIV.
CHARLOTTE PLANT
11101 1-/ESTIIIGHOUSE BLVD.
CHARLOTTE,NC 28217
COMPOSITION OF 1-/ASTE:
ORGAHl
FIRST YEAR USED: 1976
LAST YEAR USED: 1976
ORGAN20
HUtIDRED TONS:
THOUSAND CUBIC YDS.:
THOUSAND GALLONS: 6
LEGEND: IF LISTED, THEH PRESENT rt; MASTED. IF HOT LISTED, THEN ITEH HOT PRESEHT, HOT KHOI-IH IF PRESEHT, OR DATA MISSIHG.
'-
•
•
•
•
•
e
e
•
•
e
•
•
•
e
•
•
•
• SITE: NUMBER 1994 PAGE l FOR THIS SITE
MARTIN-MARIETTA AGGREGATES, AR
11325 TEXLAtlO BLVD
CHARLOTTE,NC X----
COMPANY: COMPANY-FACILITY NUMBER 13036
DIAMOND SHAMROCK CORP.
PROCESS CHEMICALS DIV.
CHARLOTTE PLANT
11101 ~ESTINGHOUSE BLVD.
CHARLOTTE,NC 28217
COMPOSITION OF WASTE:
ORGANl
•
FIRST YEAR USED: 1976
LAST YEAR USED: 1976
ORGAN20
HUNDRED TONS:
THOUSAND CUBIC YDS.:
THOUSAND GALLONS: 6
LEGEND: IF LISTED, THEN PRESENT I~ MASTED. IF NOT LISTED, THEN ITEM NOT PRESENT, NOT KNOWN IF PRESENT, OR DATA MISSING.
<..
e • •
••
•
e ..
•
•
•
•
• ··• •
•
•
•
•
•
September 2, 1976
M E M O R A N D U M ----------
To: M. W. Puette, Assistant Director
Administration and Enforcement
From: L. P. Benton, Jr., Chief Or'g:7:1, S'g~sd t,v
Water Quality Section
Subject: Oil Spill, Skipper Disposal Pit
Brunswick County
Attached please find a copy of subject oil spill report.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to
contact me.
DLG:cb
cc: ~ Robert Carter
V'SEFO
M. W. Puette.
U. S. Coast Guard, Wilmington, N. C.
Groundwater Sec ti on-
-------------------------------------
Field Office Recommendation: {)_/J
The oil spill occurring on the property of the Skipper Family Estate on
August 5, 1976, was due to the leaching of oil from a disposal pit. This
disposal pit had been used since 1969 for the improper disposal of oil from
other spills.
Due to the facts that (1) approximately 20,000 gallons of oil spilled into
approximately 2.5 miles of classified waters, and (2) prior to the August 5, 1976,
spill, the Southeatern Field Office informed Mr. Wade Skipper that disposal of
oil in open pits was illegal (and thus the August 5, 1976, spill could have been
averted), it is recommended that a civil penalty of $5,000 be assessed against
the liable party.
RECOr+iENDATION OF HEAD, WATER QUALITY OPERATIONS BRANCH:
Head, Water Quality Operations Branch, concurs 1n the appropriateness of the reconmended civil penalty.
ROBERT A. CARTER
Robert A. C&rter
.-.
• OIL DISC:-1,';Rr.E l!NEST!G/,TIO!l.::
-------------·--------~ ---------
,tigati,7g Official ____ _Davj_d_h._,_ Goss_e!t_ ____________________ Oate of Report 9/2/76
Id Office Southeastern _____________ r.;,te of Oisch.Jrge 8/5/76 _____ _
.,cation of S;:,ill knterprise(if any) stre<;t, city, cour,ty)
_A~J~~~~ to U.S. Highway 74-76 near Maco, North..Garo.lina_._Date of ln,;estigation_!}_[?!_7_6 __
· Brunsw1 ck County
If ciny coa,;:,any involved is a subsidiary of another company, give pa,ent co;opany's nar.;e a~d
address Not Applicable
---------mer time ot sp111 1 s unknown; reportecf-tolJ:S-.1::-J;--:-On August 5, 1976--;-
T i n,c s;:, i 11 occur rc:d __ il.L . .l.:J.uDL!PL.JJW1-_________________ _
1. Al 1 party(s) involved and ,aitnesses (na.ne, addrc:ss and employer)
A. Mr. Otto Skipper, owner, Hanover Septic Tank Company
5711 Oleander Drive, Wilmington, N. C.; Home address: Rt. 1, Box 223, Leland, N. C:
B. ____________________________________
_
c. ___________________ _
{Attach additional sheet if necessary)
I I. Notice
A. Date and time notice received by ONER August 5, 1976; 5:45 p.m.
B. From (name, address, representing) United States Coast Guard. Wilmington. • ..Jt...C..._
C. If pcrson(s) named in 11. B. IJOT the party(s) involved, Investigating Official shou
trace the complete chain of notice back to the first person_reporting discharge
0.
including names, addresses, and times of notice The United States Coast Guard
rfil:~ived an ananymo11s calJ at 3·10 p.m. on 8/5/76 that ''.black .. aiL'.'~s flowing_in ___ _
Rattlesnake Branch at the bridge on North Carolina S,R . .l419 .• ___ lbe_..Coast G11ara coo-..
tacted ONER Southeastern Field Office at 5·45 p.m., 8/5/76. __ Mr...J)on.....G!.\ll~ci
Developer Representative, S~FO, received the call and immeditle}xs_on_tacte.d. . .Ml:.__l;,:nda
br~i~~e R~~~~~~~)E~i~~,t~~ ~ao\erfyQug~}JrYe¥ecti§g and reported the spill., f $0, 1vhich
--------------------------
[. \Jhen party(s) involved beca;:ie a,-,are of discl.:a,·ge __ Mr: SkiPP!!r was not
aware of the oil spill until he was notified by the United_ States Coast Guard on
Au~U£L5.~_l9z..6, _______________ ------·----------------------------·---------
A.
B.
,
' • •
Ty;,e of c,il s:iill0d Black oil, weight unknown, characteristics of No. 6 -----·---
k,ount c;p; ;-Jed Approximately 20,000·gallons
C. Al 1 ,-:atcr; affected (r,cre cr.:r, o~" cat"gory may apply)
I
C12,;sification
Ar.iount of oil
Rc:aching · ~!aters
Area and Distance
Affected ---' -----·-···
Dry ditch
Swamp
Intermittent
Stream
(l) Chinnis Branch C-Swampwater · Approximately 20,000 0.6 iniles--
(2) Rattlesnake C-Swampwater gallons reached Chinnis approximate
--Br a11cl1 --------Bl"aRCR a Rd Rattl esnake-----ty--t-.-9-m:i-l,
Stream
River
Lake
Ocean
Other
Branch
D. Water Quality Standards viol2:2d. Yes X No (If yes, attach Section ----
from \.'ater Quality Violation b•,estigation Form).
E. Public and private property affacted The oil disposal area and Chfnnis and
Rattlesnake Branches were the only properties affected
F. Fish and wildlife affected None noted --------------------------
G. Ground Water affected (also, attach Ground Water Section's comments) ------
See attached corrrnents
--------------------------------------
IV. Detailed description of oil disc~.arge (including actions of all parties and complete
chronology of events, ir,cluding a description of the ca~ of the spi 11)
Upon rec~iving notification of· the spill Mr. Tyndall Lewis, Regional Engineer,
Southeastern Field_Office, and Mr. David Gossett, Chemical Analyst II, also of the
Southeastern Field_ Office proceeded to the site to conduct an investigation. They
arrived at approximately 8:00 p.m. on August 5, 1976. Upon arrival the investigators
met withM.r. Bill Prosser and Mr. Tom McEllen, of the United States Coast Guard and
M:..:._~~~Da~.!..:_-~~~..:.._Durant Company,who was called upon by the Coast Guard .to contain
the spill. Mssrs. Prosser and McEllen stated that a pit containing oil (PIT A) located
-----·----·-·-----------·-
on the property of the Skipper Family Estate had broken,. resulting in an oil spill in
Ra~~~~-~~-~~-~-Br~~~-~-· ~~~~aD~a~~~~ ,~0 ~;J pfcett\.~/) necessary)
(Continued on attached sheet)·
• •
Section IV -Continued
The writer returned to the spill site the following morning accompanied
by Mr. Rick Shiver, Regional Hydrologist, Southeastern Field Office. The writer
met with Mr. Wade Skipper, owner of Potter Septic Tank Company (refer to section
VI) and the brother of Mr. Otto Skipper. Mr. Wade Skipper was in the process of
repairing the broken oil pit dike with a backhoe to stop further leakage (see
Picture C). An examination of the dike showed that the leakage was caused by a
channelization effect of the oil through the dike at the base of a tree stump.
Mr. Wade Skipper and Mr. Otto Skipper were questioned by the investigator as
to where the oil in the pit had come from, and both denied knowing of its
orgin. For a number of years both men have been involved in oil spill clean-up
operations and in the cleaning·of oil storage tanks in the area. The writer
assumed that Pit A and other pits B,C, and D (see drawing and pictures) located
in the vicinity of the spill were being used to dispose of the oil. On August 13,
1976, in the attached signed statement (labeled as Letter A) Mr. Otto Skipper
admitted that since 1969 he had been using the pits for the disposal of oil
from previous spills.
{\. If r,,otor v..::hicle involv::d, v:os a citation
r or ,-:hat? .. _____ Not_ applicable _____________ ...... .
8. lf m".::chanical failure or r::alf~ncticn involved, h'.:JS it fro1"71 j;,1prc;·1er •-~Ji11:··c_·,;-:n,:e
or operation? {If either, 1-1hat _evid.::nce do you have of this?)_ Not ap_pjicabl_e ___ _
V. Contain1nent and Removal
A. Detailed description of action taken by each party Upon learning of the oil
..filUll on August 5, 1976, the llnHed states Coast Guard contacted Mr. Cam Davis Qi-
0. E. Durant Cnmpaey to provide cootaiomeot of the spill Mr, Oavis and--lri-s----
employees immediately constructed filter fence boom -i
and at the bridge on State Road 1419. (See attached Drawing A and pictures.)
The next morning, August 61 1976 1 Mr. Davis continued the containment booms
A & Band constructed containment boom C (see attached Drawing A). __ Al_s_o_on __ _
_ August 6, 1976, Mr. Otto Skipper began pumping out the remainder of the oil in
Pit A (See attached Drawing A and pictures). Approximately 20,000 gallons of
oil was recovered from Pit A during August 6-9·; The oil was transferred to tank
trucks leased from Asphalt Petroleum Company,-Wilmington, North Caro 1 i na, and was
(Attach additional sheets if neccssaryf (Continued)
. Containment was initiated on August 5, 1976, and removal is
Date and t,me __ cont.inu.irig....on...he date of this report ------------------
c. \-/as action taken on parties o·.-m initiative or upon ONER di rcctive7' Action was
taken upon directive of the United States Coast Guard and ONER ·-
D. \.las action taken effective? yes ---'----------
----------
E. Funds expended
( 1 )
(2)
(3)
Party(s) Approximately $24,000 from August 5, 1976 -Au9ust 16,_ l9i'6 _____ _
State or Federal State~ Investigation and report preparation -$300.00
Other
Federal -not available onaate or report ··
---------------------
• •
Section V -Continued
transported to Fort Bragg Military Reservation, Fayetteville. The oil recovered
from the three remaining pits on the.Skipper property, as well, as that recovered
from the receiving stream, was taken to Fayetteville. Following the containment
of the spill on August 5th and 6th, Mr. Cam Davis, at the request of the US Coast
Guard, continued to conduct and organize cleanup operations. Mr. Davis was later
hired by Mr. Skipper to conduct the total cleanup. Upon completion of the oil
recovery at Pit A, Mr. Davis contracted J. R .. Heath Construction Company, Leland,
N. C., to remove the oil sludge from the bottom of the pit and to remove the oil
sludge and oil stained dirt located in Area E (see drawing A and pictures) directly
behind Pit A. Approximately 150 dump truck loads of oil sludge and oil stained
dirt was excavated and transferred to the Brunswick County Landfill.for final
disposal. This operation began August 9, 1976, and was completed on August 13,
1976. On August 7, 1976, Mr. Davis began removing the oil which had gathered
behind containment booms A, B, and C (see attached Drawing A and pictures).
Heavy rains fell on August 7, 1976, which caused large quantities of oil to flush out
of the areas between Pit A and State Road 1419. As a result, Mr. Davis, the US Coast
Guard, and ONER decided not to send employees of Mr. Davis into the swamp to sweep
out the oil. It was detennined there was no effective way to remove the oil fr.om
the swamp due to the clinging of the oil to vegetation and natural barriers.
Mr. Davis continued cleanup operations consisting of maintaining the containment
booms and removing oil from behind the booms until 12:00 noon August 16, 1976.
At this time he halted cleanup operations due to his doubt that Mr. Skipper could
afford the cost of the cleanup. The United States Coast Guard irrmediately rehired
Mr. Davis to continue cleanup operations. These operations have consisted of
removing oil which collected behind the containment booms once or twice a day until
August 27 at which time the cleanup was completed.
During the investigation of the oil spill which was caused by the failure of
the dike of Pit A, three other pits (see D~awing A, and pictures) labeled B, C,
and D were also observed to contain oil. Pit B had a slight amount of seepage
into Area E (see Drawing A) and into Chinnis Branch. Pit C contained thick
oil sludge which could not be pumped so the sludge was mixed with sand and
buried on site. Pit D contained several thousand gallons of black oil which was
pumped into a tank truck. The sludge which remained was mixed with sand and
buried on site.
i i
l ·;
I I i t '. l
f
J ·
I I
r ' '
! ,,
'· '
A.
B.
See
Is r.srty(s)' required ,o be re;istcred? No
If so, is it? (include regis:~3~ion nu~ber if knc>':m) Not applicable
c. If carrier involv~d, inclu~e !~cation of oil stora~e facil ities_~N~o~t~a~p~p~l~i~c~a~b~l~e.
Vil I. Documentation
IX.
A. Att3ch statements of al 1 pare: es and 1·:i tnesses (see Statement of I-Ii tness form)
s. /\ttad1 sketch of scene of dis::'carge including direction and distance of oil flm,.
C. Attach map of the· area
D. Attach photographs or slirles
E. Attach \,/ater Quality Sta,7dar::s violated (if applicable)
F. Attach Ground \fater Section's co=ents (if applicable)
Enforcerr.ent cpinion ai1d rcc0i;->,;1,;::;;,:'.~~ion of investigator (sub;i1itted on separate form.
Include statements as to coop~ra:ion of parties, gravity, extenuating and mitigating
circumstonc!2s).
Signature of Investigating Official
Date September 2, J~9~7;6 ____ _
•
VI. History of previous oil spills
During the cleanup ope,rations from a previous oil spill caused by the overturning
of an Amarada Hess tank truck on May 14, 1976, Mr. Wade Skipper, owner of Potter
Septic Company was contracted to assist in the cleanup by using his septic tank
trucks to pump oil from the highway ditches. Mr. Skipper was supposed to have taken
the pumped oil to the Amarada Hess terminal, but it was learned from one of his
employees that the oil was being disposed of in a pit at Maco, North Carolina.
On May 19, 1976, the writer accompanied by Mr. Lawr~nce McCandless, United States
Coast Guard, and Mr. Rick Shiver, Regional Hydrologist, SEFO, inspected the subject
disposal pit. The pit had a length of approximately 60 feet, a width of approximately
20 feet and a depth of 3 to 4 feet, and contained in excess of 2,000 to 3,000 gallons
of black oil. Mr. Skipper was advised of North Carolina General Statute Chapter
143 Article 53 "Oil Pollution Control" and was requested to pump the oil from the
pit, dispose of it properly and cover the pit with soil. Mr. Skipper conducted the
cleanup after receiving a letter from Mr. Tyndall Lewis, Regional Engineer, dated
May 19, 1976, in which Mr. Skipper was advised that appropriate cleanup actions
should be irrrnediately initiated. A copy of the letter is attached and is labeled
as Letter B. This pit which was being used by Mr. Skipper to dispose of waste oil
was located approximately four tenths of a mile from the pit which caused the
spill on August 5, 1976 (see attached Drawing B), but Mr. Skipper never mentioned
the existence of the other pits.
I MEMO RA )i. Q.]! !i ------'
To: Lee Laymon
From: Rick Shiver R c;. S
Subject: Oil Spill near Maco, N. C.
August 20, 197.
Please find enclosed two GW-46 forms which were completed after the field
investigation of an oil disposal site near Maco, Brunswick County, North Carolina.
When accidentally spilled on· land and cleaned up irrvnediately, Number six
Fuel Oil normally does not significantly threaten the quality of water in the
aquifer(s), since high viscosity oil does not readily infiltrate through the
soil. However, I ani less certain of the impact on the aquifer(s) when Number
six Fuel Oil is contained in unlined lagoons over long periods of time. Especially
when the fluid heads are comparatively high.
It is possible oil contained in disposal lagoons near Maco (see GW-46) may
threaten the quality of water in the water table aquifer and/or underlying Cre-
taceous Aquifer System. Most of the oil has been removed and disposed elsewhere,
but the oil has been in the lagoons since 1969 at heads of oil which vary from
less than one foot to eight feet. It is not unlikely oil or soluble components
of oil have leached into the aquifer(s) beneath the unlined lagoons.
It is my recommendation someone (preferably the party responsible for the
spill) construct three monitor wells suitable for monitoring of oil contaminants
peripheral to the sites where oil was disposed.
Since the only source of potable water for any user in the Maco area comes
from the water table aquifer and upper unit Cretaceous Aquifer System, I do not
believe this recommendation is out of order.
I refer this matter to you for consideration.
RS: ls
cc: L.A. Register
David Gossett_.-
I
-'(/ ,tP
• GROUND WATER DIVISION.
OFFICE Of WATER AND AIR RESOURCES
DEPARTMENT Of NATURAL AND ECONOMIC RESOURCES
RECORD OF GROUND WATER POLLUTION SOURCE
I
RECORD BY:_..c.17.~;,____::,___~ ___________ DATE r? -,C-, W.D. PERM,IT NO._-=._--=-
T OWN: _)"--'J!'......!., .... ~c...~o~. ~_\:,::AJ::c:...L(;::C..· ..:::s~,.__~o~F ________ co UN TY : 1-:3, \°L.U N <;.! \f\..j f L (_L_
I
LOCATION (SKETCH ON BACK): (_(._ -3::) C) -' 3 4 \ 7 0 C-;r I ; I /
7 'O o 9 1 0 · 1,,.-ac__ kc c t; D 2--,
OWNER(S) OF FACILITY OR INSTALLATION: POTTe:\L1S 'c:,E.Pn C 16:N L
I . . I
TYPE SOURCE: (LAND FILL, LAGOON, ETC)b/",G-0(:)NS. Ll"-<ND ()t<;\::>OSA(,,..... ' CHARACTER AND QUANTITY of PoLLUTANTs: NO. c. oLL / o, k. · sL-u DG-e:
DESCRIPi10N oF FACILITY (SKETCH oN BACK): 1D1SPOSA-b 1-A<:JooNS· -
' r., 0, .i G H 1--y P. L--L \ C? LJ c.. A 1 ~ · 1 t::~ £ 1-t IY? E · c s e: B::
QiMEN<;IQN'>) ANO <.JNl=\NPf)', CON,A.IN 01!..-AND ' ' QI(..... <;.t-uDG r-' 01·(.... (.C....UDG.C::-1'L..~o QI> C?Q<, r=-Q \)11 ,,_ec.:rL..Y -K
HYDROGEOLOGIC CONDITIONS AT SITE: n..r;=:c ~-0 r-:-N ce OA:11>-. :-. Cc,. -';;,3,.
e, I , Qr l />-,.-f-\N /'--<: 1 P (,) · tk h l..-F-,h-Q u l 1-C:..---1.::) I
POLLUTION CONFIRMED BY ANALYSIS? __ -_____ DATE ___ __;ANALYST; ____ _
MONITORING FACILITIES lNSTALLED: __ ------~----------'------
SAMPLI NG SCHEDULE: _______________________ _,__ ____ _
NEAREST STREAM: __,(......,.l-...1J...:.I..._N-'-'N~.:...l _S.,___,__Q.,_..._Q~.'-'-b~N..-=.-"'(.......,_t+-'-_· DI ST ANC E_'.::cU=...:\.::/=....:.'-· ____ _
• • I
NEAREST WATER SUPPLY WELL:_N!...2~Q.L..!.:t--..~1~F=. ____ ...:....:._,DISTANCE _____ -'i ____ _
Al~ALYSES AND OTHER DATA. AVAILABLE: \"1.PC 0>J-J---\>"f-.....1!",{':?t, -1 C"); '\N(;)C...
Sr.A.A r.,r r:=:-', H r'>L)t... f) n p. c:. E 1--.t ,-,-n r.:: r.> A,, PD CL Ni---1"" L'-1' s ( <;.
' REMARKS: 0 \ L-/ 01 L-S \_ () o·& r;:::. EI n..~ T D 1 ·c;, f)oc; P--D I , · -,
I I
c)N <.,rr-\Ci(nc;, C-L--PkN-C)P {NlT1A-1G:i):
( ' . • I
1 ,'.....I ~ ::= r_ A.NC) <:_ '\; N \ t k~'\... Y l-A: N I) \~ILL.. , 0 l L /->-.c D [) (? ,',,:\'!'; ,o n._c=-1-...JO. <,., r:=;)r::-,_ 01 l-. C?), NoT' 6L-k
'
S•-U DG-E [L..SC.oVG: 1'2-SD. r-r,.oJ-....\ s r,e • : I
FORM GW-46
I '.'<. 0 '.'-,( .. '-:-:":' -~ 'J ... S, U \'~ ';: ,'-.c c.,__ S, ------------------
l[
,_.,.,_""7'
I .J-
j
) _____ _ ~ -
• ~ :~
... ~
:!
i ,·;
\ '-···
' '.
' -'
I
I / J
(jJ
i
' _,. ,· I
~
,· !
i -
I J: I ~
_:,,. :{
.J
;l"
" .J r-
If\
:r:
0
f
.7 ,-
<i' -
' '
C)
1J i
\
I
"j :
Qi
fl r: I c·
-;1
0 ].--:----
t/'-
0
C g
IT7
' -'
,.
' ! !'
! I
I i .I
I ;
' ' V'
i
~
-/
i, I
pl ' ,.
: '
'.
,.
I
I
. ' i I
' . t !, <P
I I
' . .J . r-,: ,:
'
' ' I.
'I
, .. • • A Proposal to the
Water Resources Research Institute
For Research Entitled·
I
I
I Attachment
I,
ASSESSMENT OF THE MOVEMENT OF POLLUTANTS THROUGH
SOILS NEAR WASTE DISPOSAL SITES
Dr. Aziz Amoozegar-Fard, Principal Investigator Department of Soil Science vestigator
North Carolina State Unfversity, Raleigh epar men. a 01 c1ence North Carolina State University, Raleis
I
' Dr. Francis A. Dig_iano,I Co-Investigator Department of Environmental Sciences and Engineering I University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill :
Dr. R.H. Miller, Head Department of Soil Science · North Carolina State University, Raleigh ' I
I I
i
I
'.
TITLE: • • Assessment of the Movement of Pollutants Through Soils Near 1.,~ste
Disposal Sites
INTRODUCTION: I
Contaminatio~ of ground water aquifers is perhaps the most serials problem I
Huisingh and Hatley (1983)11have for North Carolina from hazardous wastes.
' I identified 2,000 potential problem waste disposal sites in North Carol.ina
which contain taxi~ substances.
I
Many of these sites lie directly aboJ~ or
I close to ground water aquifers which are the primary sources of drinking water.
I Since a large numtier of North Carol iniansdepend on ground water for their drinking
water supply, and 'the potential for contamination of the ground wate), is obvious I
it is important that more informati~n about this problem be obtained 1s soon as 1-· possible. Considering the number of landfills, surf~ce impoundmenti, storage I
I compounds and spillage areas in North Carolina (see Huisingh and Hatley, 1983)
' ' I the potential for soil, ground water and surface water contamination w~ll
remain with us forithe foreseeable future.
I In most instances, a toxic substance must pass throuah the foil b,fore
I
' coming into contact with an aquifer. The physical and chemical properties of
a particular soil and the spatial relationships of these properties in 1
1
the
field, therefore, wil 1 determine the rate of movement of a hazardous substance
I and the magnitude of the resultant contamination. Around properly desi1gned
I I landfills and storage facilities, consideration of the soil type present may ' !
not be necessary. ~owever, landfills are susceptible to leakage due tel im-, I .Proper design and use (e.g. storage of non-compatible substances), or age.
I Knowledge of the surrounding soil physical and chemical properties is-:
I an integral part of·the data base from which corrective strategy co11 ld be
I formulated.
i I
I
' !
I
i
I
1. , • • • -2-
OBJECTIVES:
' I 1. Characterize the chemical and physical properties of the soil
I profile that are !important in determining the movement of pollutants \in the
I vicinity of waste; disposal sites. (Emphasis will be from the soil surface I
extended to the sFturated zone of the ground water).
I
I
' 2. Quantify: the role of saprol ite in the movement of water and pollu-
1
'! tants through Piedmont soils. '
I STATUS OF KNOWLEDGE:
I ' Our knowledge about the behavior of various pollutants in the soil under
. ' field conditions i,s limited. In general, the polluting constituents ~nter ! soil the soil profile at the point of discharge and travel through various.,i.horizons
' I (via unsaturated f,low) until encountering the ground ,1ater aquifer. Once in I
contact with the aquifer, the quality of ' I gradiant can be determined by installing
\
the ground water and hydrauli,c
i observation (or sampling) welils
I
and
piezometers. On the other hand, the direction and magnitude of the mo'.rment
' ' of water and/or pollutants under unsaturated flow conditions is much more
I
I
' difficult to asses~.
i An effective assessment of the extent of ground water pollution cannot
be performed by monitoring the ground water alone. Reuter et al. (1983) reached '
I ' this conclusion dur1ing an emergency hydrologic evaluation of a chemical waste : . I dump site. Their ptocedure included soil sampling and installation of\moni-
toring wells. It was clear that by the time the polluting constituent :had
entered the ground Later, the soil above and adjacent to the dump site J,as
I heavily contaminate~. Thus any cleaning process which focused solely or the
'· •
ground water would probably fail
• -3-
I
I
' I ' I because of a continuous release of the
pollutants from t~e contaminated soil into the ground water. I Therefore, it
is necessary to monitor the soil below a waste disposal site (such as a
I
landfill or retention pond) or spillage areas.
I Porous cup s~mplers have been used to sample soil water under un+
saturated conditidns (Krone et al., 1952). Recently, Riekerk and Mor~is
(1983) introduced •!a constant tension soil water sampler suitable for Jail
I I water monitoring d.t remote locations. The results obtained with lysirrieters,
I however, are a function of a variety of variables which often complicate : I interpretation of ~he data (Barbarick et al., 1979; Cochran et al., 1970;
i Haines et al., 1982; Hansen and Harris, 1975). A partial listing of the I factors that influ~nce the perfonnance of porous cup samplers includes;:
a) nonuniformity in application of water to soil surface
b) differences in soil moisture retention and flow properties
for individual strata
c) irregulari!ty in soil strata
d)
e)
difference's in samp 1 er intake rate
I plugging of sampler pores
f) adsorption
1
or release of solutes by sampler material
time required to obtain sufficient sample for analyses g)
h)
I
type of vacuum system
I I Many of these facto~s can be controlled by proper screening of sampler ~aterials
and careful selection of the study site, but variability in the actual Joil I I
water input and
I soil. Therefore, the only viable option in dete,nnining
volume sampled will '·always be dependent on the nature of
I moisture content of the
• -4-•
the extent of contamination within a soil profile may be direct sampl ilng
i
of the soil materials.
Sampling soil, for chemical and physical analysis can be expensive, and
difficult to perform. The sampling techniques and the analytical proc1edures
'
must be efficient and reliable for an accurate assessment of pollutant: move-
I I
ment. It has been' demonstrated by many investigators that not all soi1l
' I . properties exhibit:the same type of variability within each soil mapping unit
' I (see Table 13.2 of.Warrick and Nielsen, 1980). Therefore, the sampling pro-
. '
cedure and the number of samples must be matched against the property
!
i
/:hat
needs to be determined (see for example Russo and Bresler, 19B2). I
I
' ' The movement ~f pollutants through soils has been studied by manyi in-
' vestigators. For example, Kort~ et al. (1976) evaluated the movement of 11
trace elements thrdugh 10 different soils. The rate of advance of thelwetting
front of six organic solvents and water in five soils was studied by
/\Jnoozegar-Fard et al. (1983.b). Wilson et al. (1981) evaluated the fat, of
I
13 organic pollutants in a sandy soil. Some of the studies such as those of
Alesii et al. (198q) and Amoozegar-Fard et al. (l983a)were directed toward
I
determining the effect of some of the soil's hydraulic and physical
'
I • properties
' I on the movement of ~etals. In the latter study, /\Jnoozegar-Fard et al. !(1983a)
report that the ratk of movement of Cd, N.i and Zn present in landfill-tiype
leachate can be est
0
imated by the soil texture, which is an easily measu1rable
' ' soil property. Among other soil properties important in the movement o'.f
' pollutants are soil' hydraulic conductivity,
I
face area. These properties are difficult
'
I cation exchange capacity anp sur-
1 to evaluate, however, (see B~ack,
I
I
1965; method of soil analysis, Parts I and II).
' There are a number of studies
'
where the more easily measurable soil properties, such I
as particle sizel
distribution, are related to soil moisture characteristics (Arya et al.( 1982) ' '
i
• • -5-
' I or soil porosity 1(Post, 1978). Although the accuracy of the prediction of '
' soil hydraulic properties based on particle size distribution is queJtion-\ ' ' able the approach may be advantageous over direct measureme~t. especially
I for deep profiles; where undisturbed sampling of
Complicating! the problem of effective soil
the material may be d_ifficult.
I sampling in the Piedmont
I
region of North c1rolina is the presence of saprolite. Saprolite is the class I I name for material ,derived from rock decay i!!_ situ (AGI Dictionary, 1976).
I Little is known about the physical and chemical properties of saprolite,
I especially as related to the movement and attenuation of ' toxic substances.
I Calvert (1978) stJdied the mineralogical characteristics of a rock-sai\rol i te-
l O'Brien (1978) evaluated a soil profile in th¢ North Carolina Piedmont.
number of physical, and morphological properties of the saprol ite in a 1soil pro-'. I file near Raleigh.I He determined bulk density, particle density, saturated
I I hydraulic conducti&ity, particle size distribution and soil moisture charac-' , I I teri sties for the saprol i te and the A and B horizons above it. His results
I
' indicate that in t~e C2 horizons the dominant pore sizes are generally'smaller
I compared to the upper horizons. ' The saturated conductivity values in ~apro-I
lite horizons were 2·.5-6.3 cm/hr '1 with the lower horizons having higher GOn-
ductivity values. In general, O'Brien's results indicate a distinct ve1rtical I ' I variability in the physical properties of the saprolite materials. I
I I
Since the soils of Piedmont regions are going to be used for waste1dis-
I posal purposes, an understanding of physical and
I
the soil and saprolite is essential in assessing I
waste disposal. I I
,
chemical properties of1both
I
the suitability of a si,te for
APPROACH
Objective 1:
• -6-•
Characterize'the chemical and physical properties of the soil pr6&ile '
I are important in determining the movement of pollutants in the vicinity of I waste disposal siies. (Emphasis will
' the
the saturated zone ofAground water.)
I Characterizing Soi:l Properties:
be from the soil surface extended to
I
The objective, will be achieved by determining selected soil physi,cal
' I
that
and chemical prope~ties at various depths and locations within two di~ferent
soil sampling units. The physical and chemical properties of the soil[s
selected for this ~tudy are particle size distribution, water contentJ
1
bulk
density, particle aensity, pore size distribution,
ductivity, pH, electrical conductivity of the soil
saturated hydraul ici con-
solution (EC), Fe ahd Al I I . oxide content, water soluble organic and inorganic compounds, and effective
I cation exchange capacity. In addition the clay mineralogy and the level of I I selected organic a~d inorganic polluting substances will also be deter~ined. • I Two sites witH contrasting soil properties -one representing Pieqmont
soils and one from the Upper Coastal Plain -will be selected for the study.
I . I , (If time and budgef permit additional sites in the Lower Coastal Plain iwill ' also be investigate8). An attempt will be made to select the sites in 1areas I
where the soil is contaminated with solvent(s) and/or heavy metal(s).
I
suitable site is an 1area with deep soil and contaminated with only one
i liquid such as xylene. Each site may be the location of a spillage or
'A
I • !)rgan,c
I
be
adjacent to a retention pond. I If a contaminated site cannot be located;
I
a site with deep soil profile best suited for waste disposal purposes will be
' I selected. In this case two additional sites that are contaminated will
1
be
I
• • -7-
examples, the Carolina Galvanizi~g
I '
selected for furt~er analyses. (As
Company site in Moore County, which
heavy metals; and, Benfield Chemical
is suspected of being contaminate1d with
I
Company in Haywood County, which :is sus-
' : I pected of being contaminated with solvents (see Huisingh and Hatley, 1983,
' ' pages 21 and 29) ~ill be good study sites). All the study sites willibe
I I ' selected in consultation with DEM~-wR~I, and Ors. S. Buol and J. Kleiss
I
' (soil scientists expert in soil classification) at NCSU.
Disturbed and undisturbed soil samples from the soil surface ext~nded
'
to the depth of 4.5 m or water table (whichever is shallower) will be :col-
! I lected at 50 cm in~ervals (10 samples at each depth). The samp 1 i ng wi 1n be
I
' replicated 50 time~ on a transect with a distance of SO to 100 cm betwren
I sampling locations; (A total of 500 samples for each site). The samp)ing
I I will be performed ~Y boring a hole to the desired depth using a bucket1auger
'
and then removing .a sample with a core soil sampler. The process will \be
repeated to the de~th of 4.5 m. If necessary, the hole will be cased Jith
10 cm diameter PVC pipe. I The samples will be labelled, sealed and bro~ght
' into the 1 aboratoryl for analyses.
I
I If the sites for the above study are not contaminated, the additional
' ' '
sites as discussed previously will be sampled for analyses. Five locations
' I within each site wil,l be selected randomly. Soil sam□les between the syrface
and the water table 1wi 11 be co 11 ected for analyses.
I
' The samples will b•
l analyzed for the ph)sical and chemical properties described later. In addition
I the level of contaminants (heavy metals), and/or solvents
I
using EPA and other ~lternative procedures. In addition,
will be determined
I
twenty neutron'. probe
I access tubes will bel installed randomly over the area. Soil water conteht will
' be monitored at SO cm depth intervals for a period of at least 6 months.:
Also soil water content at three depths will be determined by sampling the soil '
• • -8-
I at least three times during the study and determining the moisture cpntent I
' gravimetrically. ',
' Suggested Physical and Chemical Analyses:
The saturate,d hydraulic conductivity, pore size distribution,
'
I
' bulk
' density and partiFle density will be detennined using the undisturbed: soil
I I samples. The water content, particle size distribution, pH, EC, Fe ahd.Al
' ' oxide con tent, wa \:er soluble carbon, and effective CEC wi 11 be determined on
I
the disturbed sam9les.
'
I
I The clay mineralogy will be detennined at three
' I sampling locations only. The levels of heavy metal contaminations will be
' ' determined by standard
will be identified1 and
EPA and an acid extraction procedure. The sol~ent(s)
I quantified by GC and the analyses will be performed
by Dr. F. Digian□ at the Department of Environmental Science and
i
Engineering
I,
* of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. All the other analyses I
will be performed ~t the Soil Science Department, NCSU.
', Physical Propertiei:
Soil water con'tent will be determined by the gravimetric method.
I
\The
I
saturated hydraulic' conductivity will be determined using the constant head ' I
procedure. The par~ size distribution and soil water characteristic cu~ve
I ' ' will be determined using hanging water column and pressure plate apparatus.
The bulk density wi\1 be determined from the oven dried mass
the inside volume ofl the sampling ring (core method) and the
of the soil and
I
I particle density
will be determined u~ing an air pycnometer. I For the detailed description
I of the methods, see ~lack, Methods of Soil Analysis, Part I (1965). I
Soil Chemical Properties:
Et!. -Approximat~ly 20 grams of moist soil will be placed in a 50 ml ;,beaker
' ' with 20 ml of distilled water or lN KCl (l :l soil to solution ratio) and :stirred
I several times during the next 30 minutes. ' The suspension will be allowed: to
I
I *See Appendix A, Analysis of Organic Contaminants in Unsaturated and Saturated Zones.
• • -9-
I settle for 1 hour, and hydrogen activity in solution detennined using a
combination glass electrode (Peech, 1965):
obtain an estimate ,of exchangeable acidity.
I Use of lN KCl is included to I
IT -
I
Electrical conductivity will be detennined on the 1:1 soil t6 water ' '
extracts described above. To avoid possible salt contamination, EC measure-
' I ments will be taken' before determining pH (Bower and Wi.lcox, 1965). All I
measurements will b1e with a Barnstead Model PM-70CB conductivity bridg~ and
a pipet-type conduc~ivity cell.
I Fe and Al Oxide Content -Amorphous and free iron and aluminum oxi~es on
I whole soil samples will be detennined using standard procedures (Jackson, 1975;
' i McKeague and Day, lf66; Coffin, 1963) as modified by Dr. Sterling Weed,j.Soil
Mineralogist (Department of Soil Science, NCSU) for use with soils of Nbrth
Carolina. Dr. Weed;s technician (Ms. Betty Ayers) has extensive experi~nce
with these procedures and is available to aid in training of technicians who
I will actually perfonn the analyses.
I Water Soluble Carbon -Approximately 5 grams of moist soil will be 1placed
I t. I in a 50 ml beaker with l O ml of distilled water and stirred several 1mes
I ' ' during the next 30 minutes. The suspension will be allowed to settle for l hour I
I then decanted, and t~e solution filtered through a 0.45 micron Nucleopor
1
e filter.
Total soluble carbon'and total soluble inorganic carbon will be detennin.ed by , I direct injection into a Beckman Model 9158 TDC analyzer. Total soluble brganic ' . I I carbon will be calcul. ated from the difference between these two measurements.
' Effective CEC -1Effective cation exchange capacity of soil samples iill
I be detennined using the procedure of Gillman (1979) as modified by Dr. L. King,
(Department of Soil Science, NCSU) for application to the soils of North! I
I Carolina. This procedure is suitable for determining effective CEC in Ul;tisols
I
• • -10-
which do not contain unreacted limestone, such as might be applied for agri-
, I
cultural
unreacted
sites .
purposes, (Horn,
I
Alley and Bertsch, 1982). It is anticipated that
I
limes tone will not be found in· the soils at the selected i study
I
Clay Mineralbgy -Clay mineralogy of the less than 2 micron frac~ion will
I be determined on soil samples from selected sites. Clay separation and
I
i identification will be perfornied using standard technique (Jackson, 1975).
I
Heavy Metal Extracts -Extraction .of metals from soils is an ope~ationally
i
defined procedure; Two extractants will be used in this study. One fpproach
i
will use the pH5 dcetic acid-sodium acetate buffer procedure as defined by
I I
the E.P.A. for estimating toxic metal concentration (Federal Register! Vol. 43,
' I
No. 243, Monday, December 18, 1978, p. 58,956-58,957). The second approach
I
will use a hydroxyl amine hydrochloride-acetic acid reagent
I
(0.04 M NH 20H·HCl
I
in 25;: (v/v HOAc) ~ccording to the procedure of Tessler et al. (1979) .! This
i
extractant is classified as an intermediate strength extractant (Van V1al in
' ' and Morse, 1982) atd has been shown to effectively remove metals assoc~ated
with iron and manganese oxides (Tessler et al., 1979). Organic extrac~s are
'
not considered because of the pH dependence on efficiency of extraction for : . I
certain metals and lthe possible decomposition of metal chelates in the, organic !
fraction as a function of time (Dell ien and Persson, 1979). '
'
Metal concentrations in the extractants will be deterniined by fla~e atomic
I I
absorption spectroicopy with suitable matrix modification for .standard~ and to
'
avoid possible inte:rferences. Metals analyzed for will depend on wast~ site
selected for study.,
Analyses of the Data:
The variabilit~ of the measured results for each depth at the contaminated
I sites wil 1 be evaluated in comparison with the general variability of the
'
• -11-•
I I
I
physical and chemical properties of the samples as determined in the first
I I
I part of the investigation. In addition soil properties such as hydraulic
conductivity, pore size distribution and CEC will be regressed agains~ some
I of the easily measurable properties such as particle size distribution,
particle and bulk density and EC.
Objective 2:
Quantify the '.role of saprol ite in the movement of water and pol 1Jtants , I
through Piedmont s'oil s.
Two different saprolite horizons, more than 100 cm thick, will be selected
I after consultatio~ with Drs. Buol and Kleiss. Disturbed and undistur~ed
'
samples from three. depths at 50 cm intervals will be collected at five lo-i I
cations within the landscape. The samples will be analyzed for the p~ysical
I I and chemical properties discussed in Objective 1. In addition, morphological
I
and mineralogical analyses will be performed to fully characterize the~ profile.
The movement of different types of waste materials such as
and organic solvents through saprolite will be evaluated in the
heavy 'metals
I labora;tory.
Saprol ite materials will be collected at a depth of 50 cm below the upper
' boundary of the horizon.
I '
I The materials wil 1 be air dried, crushed and: passed
I through a 2 mm sieve. If possible, undisturbed soil cores 5-10 cm in diameter
and 10-20 cm 1 ong, '. wi 11 be co 11 ected.
The waste materials for the study will include septic tank effluents en-
rfched with two heavy metals, Cd and Ni; an acidic solution with pH ofj 2-4 en-
I I riched with the two heavy metals, one immiscible organic solvent, toluene or
xylene; and one miscible organic
I
The materials are selected based
solvent, isopropyl alcohol or ethylenJ glycol.
I on the availability of research data for other
• • -12-
soil materials, therefore, comparisons c~n be made if needed. ' u The soil column procedure for deten11ining the movement of heavy 'metals is
provided in detail in a project report (Fuller and Amoozegar-Fard, 1982).
I A brief outline of the procedure is given here.
I
1. Pack the· soil column unifon11ly with sieved soil materials.
2. Assemble: the soil columns, a constant flow pump and a
as shown: in Figure 1.
fracti,on
I,
3. Saturate' the column with deionized water from the bottom.
collector
4. When saturation is achieved, swftch the deionized water with the waste I
fluid containing heavy metals.
' 5. Collect the outflow on the fraction collector and analyze for pollu-
'
tan ts. Several modifications of procedure are also availabl:e which '
can be uked for evaluating
I
the movement of solvents through 1so il .
·' I Three replications wil 1 be used for this part of the study.
To evaluate the movement of solvents two series of experiments w:ill be
I
' conducted. I
I
i. Detennine the advance of wetting front in air dried saprol it1e.
ii. Deten11ine the flow of the solvents under saturated condition:s.
I
I Amoozegar-Far;d et al .(1983b) conducted an. experimental study to evaluate
the advance of the wetting front (unsaturated flow) of six organic so1Jvents and
water through five soils. A similar experiment will
' and one miscible and one immiscible organic solvent.
2 cm diameter and i4□ cm long, will be packed with air
I
'
be conducted using saprolite
I
Briefly, glass co 1 umns,
I
' dried saprolite~ The
solvent is introduced to one end of the column under zero head. The position I
of the wetting front, I the amount of liquid entering the column and time will be
deten11ined simultaneously. The advance of the wetting front will be deten11ined
in horizontal, vertical downward and vertical upward directions.
cations will be us'ed for this part.
Five repli-
1 ' I ' ' I I '
. ' • -1 3-•
To determine the movement of the solvents under saturated conditions a
modification of the soil column procedure will be employed. (Some ' I
have a deteriorating effect on PVC and tygon or plastic tubings.) I
solum will be sa'turated with water before the solvent is applied. '
solvents
i Sa pro 1 ite !
I
The break-
through of the solvent will be determined I by separation (for immiscible) and
I
I total carbon ana~ysis (for miscible solvent). Three replications will be used
I
for this part.
' I Laboratory soil column experiments have proven to be an effectiive way of
evaluating the fkte of organic and inorganic pollutants through soil,s. The
procedure is advantageous for assess_ing widely varying soils and pol1
1lutants I I (see Fuller, 1982). The use of small scale soil column, disturbed o'.r undis-
turbed, may seem· to be non-representative of the actual field situat',ion over
an extended peri6d of time. However, the procedure is the most effe~tive way
I of collecting information in a relatively short period of time using, a wide
range of pollutants
' I column to an act4al
and soils. In applying the results of the laboratory soil I
' field situation the operator must keep in mind the limi-
tations and the conditions under which the experiment was conducted.\
In the second objective of the study we are recommending the
. i tory soil column study as a means of collecting information about
i
I use
I
I the
of l abora-
behavior
of saprol ite.
attenuation and
In, another word, the attempt' is tb characterize the chemical
t1he capacity of the soil to retain the pol.lutants raJher than
I determining the a'ctua l movement of the contaminants.
• - l 4-•
Expected Results:
' This study is 'expected to provide valuable information about the soil
' I
physical and chemical properties as related to the movement of polluta1nts in
the vadose zone. In addition, the spatial variability and the
I the soil properties in vertical and horizontal directions will
;
depende'nce of
'
be eva l 1ua ted. ' ' . This is particularly important in determining the sampling procedures fo.r
' evaluating the soil properties that are important in waste I management prac-
tices. The study also provides information regarding the sites. Al so the '
I role of saprolite in attenuation of pollutants in Pieooont soils of North
I
Carolina will be addressed.
I
•
Figure 1.
•
~1 -..;:,:,..,
"' CO 2 ) BULK
RESERVOIR.
Diagram of the soil column system
the peris~altic pump and fraction
using i
collect.or.
!
!
I • •
I
REFERENCES
' AG!. 1976. Dictionary of geologicJl tenns. Anchor Press/Doubleday,! '
Garden City, 'NY.
Alesii, B.A., W.H, Fuller, and M.V. ,Boyle.
' I
1980. Effect of leachate;flow
I
' rate on metal migration through soil. J . En vi ro n . Qua l . 9: 119-i 2 6.
Amoozegar-Fard, A:,
predicting the '
' W.H. Fuller, A.W. Warrick. 1983a. An approach to
I movement of sele,cted polluting metals in soils.
Submitted to ,J. of Environ. Qua:1.
Amoozegar-Fard, A,, A.W. Warrick, and W.H. Fuller. 1983b. ' I ' ' Unsaturat~d
i movement of s~lected organic libuids through soil. Submitted to'
Soil Sci. Soc .. Am. J.
I I Arya, L .M. and J. F:. Paris. 1981.
'
Al physicoempirical model to predict the I
I soil moisture characteristics from particle-size distribution and bulk
density data. Soil Sci. Soc. Aih. J. 45:1023-1030.
I
Black, C.A. 1965.
1
Methods of soil analysis. Parts I and II. ASA Mo.no.
Series No. 9 .. Am. Soc. of Agron., Madison, WI.
I ' . I I Barbar,ck, K.A., B,R. Sabey and A. Klute. 1979. Comparison of various ' '
methods of sa~pling soil water for determining ionic salts, sodium, and I I I calcium content in soil columns.' Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Jr. ' ' 43: l 053~ l 055. I I Bower, C.A. and L.V. Wilcox. 1965. Soluble Salts. In C.A. Black
I
(Edi.)
Methods of Soil Analysis. Part :2. ASA Monograph No. 9.
Agron . , Madi sdn, WI . Chap. 62. I
Am. Soc'. of I
Calvert, C.W. 1978. Mineralogical characteristics, transfonnations, and
I
thermodynamic 'stabilities of a rbck-saprol ite-soil profile in I '
I Carolina Piedmont. M.S. Thesis .. Soil Sci. Dept., NCSU.
I the !North
I
I
Cochran, P.H., G.M. Marion and A.L. L~af. 1970. Variations in ' i meter leachate: volumes. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 34:309-311. I
tension'
I
I
'
l ys i -
..
Coffin, D.E. 1963. "ethod for tre determination
I and clays. Can. J. Soil Sci. 43:7-17. I
• of rree iron in
Dellien, I. and L'. Persson. 1979. Effect of hydrogen-ion concentration on i I i the extraction of cobalt, nickel, cadmium and lead with APDC/MIB,K: Time
I I
stability of, the extracts. Taianta 26:1101-1104.
Fuller, W.H. 1982. Methods for coAducting soil column tests to pred1ict I : I
' pollutant migration. l!!_ D. Shultz (Ed.) Land Disposal: Hazardous
Wastes. Pro/:. 8th Ann. Res . Sym. U.S. EPA-600/9-82-002 MERL. U.S. I '
EPA, Cincinnati, OH 46268.
Fuller, W.H. and A. Amoozegar-Fard., 1982.
; !
Soil column procedure for1
predicting pollutant attenuatidn. Tech. Res. Document. ' ;
I
MERL, UI.S. EPA,
Cincinnati, OH. (Submitted). i
Gillman, G.P. 1979. I A proposed method
I I for the measurement of exchange
properties of highly weathered :soils. Aust. J. Soil Res. 17, 129-139.
' Haines, B.L., J.B; Waide, and R.L. Todd. 1982. Soil solution nutrie~t con-
' l centrations sampled with tensio'n and zero-tension lysimeters report of
I discrepancies. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. ' I
I I
46:658-661.
Hansen, F.A. and A.R. Harris. 1975., Validity of soil-water samples collected
I
with porous c,erami c cups. Soil i Sci . Soc. Am. P roe . 39: 528-536. i
I Horn, D.P., M.M. Alley and P.M. Bertsch.
I '
1982. Cation exchange capacity
measurements. Commun. in Soil Sci. Plant Anal., 13(10):851-862.,
' Huisingh, D., and ~.R. Hatley.
I
19Bi Present and potential impacts df toxic '
substances on municipal ground water resources in North Carolina.,
WRRI of UNC. I
Jackson, M.L. 1975. Soil Chemical Analysis--Advanced Course. Published by
' the author, D~partment of Soil ~cience, Univeristy of Wisconsin,
I
Madison, Wis.' 53706.
' '
I ~. . I
I • •
Korte, N.E., J. Skapp, W.H. Fuller, E.E. Niebla, and B.A. Alesii. 1976
I I Trace element movement
chemical prqperties.
I
in soi 1 :
Soil Sc ii.
'
Influence of soil phys i ca 1
122:350-359.
I and'.
' Krone, R.B., H.F. Ludwig, and J.F. Thomas. 1951. Porous tube device for
sampling soi,1 solution during yiater spreading operations.
I
Soil 1Sci.
I 73:211-219.
McKeague, J.A. anp J.H. Day. 1966.
1
Dithionite-and oxalate-extractable Fe
, I and Al as aids in differentiation various classes of soils. Can. J.
Soil Sci. 4p:13-22. I
' I O'Brien, E.l. 1978. Physical, morphological, and micromorphological: properties
of a rock-saprolite-soil profile in the Piedmont of North Caroli'na. ' I 1, : M.S. Thesis,1Soil Sci. Dept., NCSU. I .
Peech, M. 1965. 'Hydrogen-Ion Activity. l.!l C.A. Black (Ed.) Methods! of
Soil Analysis. Part 2.
WI. Chap. 60.
Monograph No. 9.
I
Am. Soc. of Agron., Mi!dison,
I
Post, D. 1979. Relationships of so:il texture with soil water conten~ and
' soil porositJ characteristics of Arizona soils.
Dept., Univ. of Arizona.
Soils, Water ancj Engr.
I Reuter, G.J., W.R.: Saunders, R.F. Dalton, and W.F .. Althoff. 1983. An
Emergency hydrologic evaluation':of a chemical dump site.
' 21(5):545-551.
Ground Water.
I
I
Riekerk, H., and LiA. Morris. 1983. i
Soil Sci. Soc, Am. 47:606-607.:
A constant-potential soil water sampler. I
'
Russo, D., and E. Bresler.
'
1982. Soil hydraulic properties as
I
' '
stochastic
I processes: Ii. Errors of estimates in a heterogenous field. Soil Sci.
Soc. Am. J. 46:20-26.
'
Tessler, A., P.G.C.' Campbell and M. B'isson. 1979. Sequential extraction
procedure for the speciation of !
51 (7) :844-851 .•
I
particulate
I :
'
trace meta 1 s. Ana 1 . O,hem.
'
I
tr Lc7TF:ll B •. -· North Carolina Department of
Natural & Econom~ Resources
JAMES E. HOLSHOUSER, JR., GOVERNOR· 1EORGE W. LITTLE, SECRETARY
May 19, 1976
Mr. Ward Skippef, Owner
Potter Septic 1Tank Compacy
Wilmington, NC 28401
SOUTH[ASTERN
FIELO OFFICc
31 ◄ 3 WRIGHTSVILLE AVE.
, WJLMINGTQ,-; :.8-401
TTLEPHONE 919 762·3394
'
SUBJECT: Removal of oil from Disposal pit
Potter Septic Tank'. Co.
Columbus County
Dear Mr. Skipper:
Personnel of this division, accompanied by Mr. Lawrence McCandless, U.S.
Coast Guard, inspected the subject, disposal pit on May 19, 1976 at 9:3D a.m.
Mr. Rick Shiver,,Regional l{ydrologist, has advised the Water Quality Section
that in his opinion the soluble COl)lponents of the oil in the pit·wi:11 con-
taminate groundwater resources in the area of the pit.
North Carolina General Statute Chapter 143· Article 53 "Oil Pollution
Control" which was ratified by the 11973 session of the General Assembly of
North Carolina gives the North Carolina Division of Environmental Manage-
ment jurisdiction to conduct investigations, and supervise the clean-up·
of ofl pollution within the state.'.
North Caro1i1na General Statute 143-215.83 states in part .•. )"Discharges.
(a) Unlawful discharges. It shall be unlawful, except as otherwise 1provided in
this part, for any person to discharge, or cause to be discharged, oil into or
upon any waters, tidal flats, beaches, or lands within this State, or into any
sewer, surface water drain or other waters that drain .f.nto the wateis of this
State, regardless 1 of the fault of the person having control over. the: 611, or
regardless of whether'. the "discharge, was the result of intentional or, negligent
conduct, accident'or other cause.a '
North Carolina General Statute' 143-215.84 states in part ••• ,: "Removal
of prohibited discharges.--(a) Person discharging. Any person having control
over 011 discharged in violation of this Article shall inrnediately undertake
to collect and remove the discharge and to restore the area affected:by the
discharge as nearly as may be to t_he condition existing prior to the 1discharge.
I I
Members of this Section have thoroughly discussed this matter with the
Divisions Enforcement Section in Raleigh and have been advised that the approp-
riate clean-up actions-should be irrmediately initiated. Failure to immediately
take action 1n this matter will resu~t in the Southeastern Field Offi,ce recom-
mending that civil penalties as provided by law be assessed against Potter
Septic Tank Company and that this Division take control of the clean-up operation.
I ;
I /
I
I
r
Mr. Skipper
Page 2 "'"".
May 19, 1976
• .,
'
If you should have any questions, please feel free to contact this office
at the above number and address. '
lms
I
i~~L~
F. Tyndall Lewis
R~gional Engineer
cc: Southeastern 'Field Office
Mr. M. W. Puette, Enforcement Secti.on
Bob Carter
'. '
B.
/ TI Pre•./, o v...s
'"\
ti -.... -i:: '<:'-
:i--~
-1-1
~ ~ l;7
\J\
'I ~
:t,
~ "'
□ ---....:)
,:C
...:,
0...
;p:rr fJ
.----------' s r flT!?' Roi¾ D
IL.fl1
,
I ,I
✓
I I I I
/'
I ,v--
:f
l
1
!
' I
I ,j
,,
('
0 () I.,
}----
.1.. I /V'I ~,,.,, / .... _ _r
Please print or type (Form designed for use on elite (12-pitch) tvPewriter) Form Approved 0MB No 2000-0404 Expires 7 31 B6
UNIFORM HAZARDOUS
WASTE MANIFEST
11. <;enerato(s US """ ID No. Manifest 2. Page 1
1ooc_u~en_t N_o. of I
Information in the shaded areas
is not required by Fodera!
law.I
;.:s, l:ienerator's Name and Mailing Address A.State Manifest Document Number
4. Generator's Phone ( : )
5. Transporter 1 Company Nam!!
, • 1 rensporter z Company Name
~-Designated Facility Name and Site Address
8.
I
10.
I
US EPA ID Number
US EPA 10 Number
US EPA ID Number
a.State Generator's ID
i
C.State Transpo~er's ID
D.Transporter's P,hone
E.State Transporter's ID
F. Transporter·s Phone
G.State Facility's I ID
H.Facility's Phon~
12.Containers 11. US DOT Description (Including Proper Shipping Name, Hazard Class, and ID Number 13.
Total
I 14.
' Unit
0 1--------------,----------------------+--N""-o·~-t-'T_n,•··,,e+-_\.!.!!!~!ll'----fl!l<
E a.
Ouantitv, MNr
N
E
I
'
R i A i--b,-.------------'------------------!f----1--+----..;..-+-~-;
T '
0 '
R !
C. I
'
d .. I
I
I. .
Waste No.
..
'
;,_-
..
'
:f.
'
'
,.
K. Handling Codes for Wastes Listed Above $~I 4t · .,
15. Special Handling Instructions and Additional Information
10. GENERA I uR ·s CERTIFICATION: I hereby declare that the contents of this consignment are fully and accurately described
above by proper shipping name end ere classified, pecked, marked, end labeled, end ere in all respects in proper condition for
transport by highway according t0 applicable international end national governmental regulations. I . I
. Date
Printed/Typed Name I Signature Month Day Year
I I I
T 17. Transporter 1 Aclcnowledgemerit of Receipt of Materials I Date •1--~-~~-~~-------------------.=-------------------,----'---------l A Printed/Typed Name , I Signature I Month Day Year i l----~~-~-~-..,,.---,--~~~-,--~-------------''---1 ___ 1 __ 1_ o 18. Transporter 2 Acknowledgement or Receipt of Materials· Date •1--~--,--~-~,,.--------,---------------.=--c------------------~---'---~----l T Printed/Typed Name !Signature Month Day Year ~ i I I I
F • C I
19. Discrepancy Indication Spece
l ~-----------:-::----,----:--:----:-,:-----:----:-,-------,--,---,-:----,,:---------:-:-----------1
I 20. Facility Owner or Operator: Certification of receipt of hazardous materials covered by this manifest except as noted in ~ Item 19. 1 \ Date
Pnnted, , yped Name I Month Day Year •· .. +· .. '.;• .. , ....
,-
0 .>-
--3,,
, "" ~-_.,.
C H N ,,r.r: r. .
BR Pi .-J~ i+
' ' ~ I
I ~ i
:? ..
~ "'
c ol'VTAr,. 11e ,;r -' :Boor1 ft
I
:RP.E.A
~
~
"1
lJJ t,
\o
~ ;
~
-..:,
-c
0.,
. :,
__l l I.{ H LU J_ N .l:r r't •
R. Fnn. E' ~ I" IH,; E
8AF,~~
C () NTFIT:Nf1E:NT
-,Boo 11 8
.,
C •w~r(>J He-fJT :aoo11 a
•
. -
I
I
) ·1 :.. • FWDD-JCS Mill IECISION OF Y.--IB D.!:'...::.CTCR, DIVISION OF ENVJRON1-E!ITAL MANA"~-G!IT,
IN THE MATTER O? Af-1 1.mL.4.WFUL OIL DISc~:.:.:3 :SY HR. Ol'TO SKIPPEn, BRUNS;IICY.
COUNTY, NCRTH CAROLINA ( 0 7&--l2L)
FINDINGS lQTr v,'
' Acting pursuant to NCGS 143-215.91(a), 15 NCAC 2J, and under the authority of
the Environmental :Management C0'T'i s-sion (EMC), I find the following: ;
' A. The estate of George H. Skipper o·.-ns property upon which was located four
(4) pits used by Mr, Otto s.,---;pper to store oil and oil sludge, Tlie pits
were adjacent to Chinnis Branci a.~d other areas where oil sludge had been
dumped were siinilarly adjace::t to Chinnis Brar1ch.
B, On August 5, 1976 at 3:10 P•=·, officials of the United States Coa,st Guard
recei~.re~ a !'e~c:-t of a lE-:-g-e ~o\ffit of oil flowing in F..attlesnal.ce 3ra11ch
at the bridge on S.R. 1419, c1ear Maco. United States Coast Guard 'officials
in turn notified Departme;::, of Nat=al and Economic Resources (D!IBR) staff
at 5:45 p.m. DNER staff a.""d United States Coast Guard officials c:onducted
an investigation of the disc~,arge the evening of August 5, 1976,
c.
I).
E.
The
oil
The
Mr,
oil
The
the
' •,
' ' I i.r1vestigation revealed t:ciat the discharge originated from one pf the four
pits maintained on the &'ripper Estate property by Mr. Otto Ski?per.
d:ike to this pit had broken, releasing the oil. ,
Otto Skipper had never applied for nor received a permit to discharge
to the storage pits on tbe Skipper Estate property.
oil escaping from the b::-clr.en oil pit on the
Chinnis Br8:11ch, which tra::sported it to the
I
Skipper property f:).owed
Rattlesnake Branch.
'
'
into
The affected waters are classii'ied as Class C -swampwaters, and said waters
were affected for a distance of approximately 1.9 miles.
I G. The a:nou:1t of o_il discharged -.-as estimated at 20,000 gallons of No,, 6 fuel
oil.
H, The area of the Skipper Estate property where the oil pit was locaied also
contained three (3) other ur7 bed oil storage pits. One contained :thick oil
sludge, another, contained se,eral t:1ousa,1d gallons of oil and the third also
contained a large a~ount of o<l a.'ld was observed to be seeping oil lento an
adjacent la'1d area and into C:-~~'lis Branch.
I
I. Mr. Skipper removed or proper:.:;-disposed of the oil and oil sludge contained
i.r1 t~:; ::--e:i":o.ir.i.:J.g th:..~~e pi~s ;_:_;;-:::1 r::-!:.'2.-::e from DEM staff. 1
J, Mr. Otto Skipper prepared a::d executed a statement which indicated, i i.'lter alia,
that he ,:as the ,Party res.,:,or..si;:Jle for the oil discharge into Chi."lni s ac1d
Rattlesnake Bra'lches and tha~ he had since 1969 used the subject pit for oil
storage.
K.
-) ')
, . otto Sk~p-has since 1969 cischarged o'i.to the land i-'1to stcrage J:. 5 o:i the ,Skipper rs Estate p!"ope:-t:r rd.t:lout havL11g secured a Permit as rE-lired by G.S. 143-2l5.83(c).
I
L. Cle.n-up of the o; 7 discharge :L'1to Chinnis and Rattlesnake Branches was beg,.1 on Au,;--,:ist 5, 1976 a_'1d completed on Allo"l.!St 27, 1976. The c~ea.n-up
M.
was initiated by the United States Coast Gua.=-d a_'1d pa.id for by ~.r. otto Ski.Der. There was, ho¼-ever, no effective way to remove the oil'from portions of t,e swamp· due to the tend.ency of the oil to cling to vegetation a'Jd natural ' ba.'"I' ·_er s.
' }'.r. Ovc:i Skipper's use of \L'llined oil storage pits such as those 'located ·at t'i-is~ Sk"'..Dper property is in violation of G.S. 143-215. 83 as it 1constitutes the i-'1ti.•.nti,nal and negligent discharge of oil upon lands within the State without a permit, such that the oil is reasonably likely to rea.ch,the waters of the State.;
N. By mai.-ritaini..~g a"l cil storag?. pj.t? adjacent to sw2.mpt•/aters and j:n yi.olation of G.S. 143-2l5.83, which subsequently broke and ca.used the discharge of oil into Chinnis and Rattlesna_lce Era_'1ches, Mr. otto Skipper willfully dis-charged oil such that it reached the ,raters of the State.
I
Q. G.S. 143-2l5.8J(a.) provid2s that it is unlawful for any person to ca.use the discharge of oil upon the lands or into a_'1y waters within the State
P.
except as otherwise provided in that part. '
I • G.S. 143-2l5.83(c) prov-ides that any person charge oil onto the land of the State shall for the discharges.
I who desires or proposes to dis-be required to secure a permit
Q. G.S. 143-215.9l(a) provides that a civ-il penalty of up to $5,000 be_ assessed a.gaj_'1st a.'ly person who :L'1tentionally or negligently discharges oil or permits the discharge of oil in vi~la.tion of G.S. 143-215.83(a.).
II. DECISION
A. Considering my fi-'1dings a.bo·.-e it is my decision that Mr. otto Skipper be assessed a civil penalty of $ ,::! 5°4>41' .,e,.-c for the unlawful intent,ional discharge of oil' "i.thout a per.nit to the oil storage pits located ori the Skipper Estate property w:1ich oil subsequent leaked and was transported, as
B.
a res:.llt cf th2 failur:: of the dike, to the Chi...'1rtis c.nd Rattlesnat.ce Erar..ches. ' :
I In determinir1g the
. follo_\ .. --ing factor-~:
a'llo\mt of the penalty assessed, I have considered1 the
l. The oil spilled include::: thick oil sludge a'Jd No. 6 oil
2. The pi-cs had :oeen useC. for U.."'1perr.iitted oil storage since 1969 arid. la!"ge amounts of oil and oil sludge were stored there.
-3-
3. The pits '.were unlined, earthen-diked, visibly leaking and adjacent to swamp1-at~:-s, posing a great likelihood that the oil a."d sludge ;;ould reach surface waters. 1 '
4. The oil and sludge storage was intentional.
5. 20,000 gallons of No. 6 oil ·,;ere spilled into the surface waters affecting those waters for a dista."ce of 1.9 miles.
6. I Upon discovery of the
and properly disposed
III, TR.M:SMI'ITAL
spill,
of the
Mr. Skipper cleaned up the pits 'and removed oil, oil sludge and oil-soa.%ed spil,
-
I The Enforcement Section is directed to prepare a letter tra.~smitting these Findings a.rid requ~sti.."'1g payment i.:.~ acso:-dE...'1ce -.-;ith G.S. 143-215. 91.
Date
I
q
W, E. Knight, Director
Divisio~ of Environmental Management