NCD079044426_20000227_General Electric Co. Shepherd Farm_FRBCERCLA RD_Remedial Design 1996 - 2000-OCR

~iORTH SUPERFUND
, n1c ... tt.
NatureJII' canserva ncy,,
N(ll<TH Ct\ROi.\Ni\'
cn1\rlFl{
ID:
lfj., <>...1.n<1om~
~St
P.0 Rux 397
~~11.1&, t:c 1s1n-039f
11111,7.9,1700
8l8-7A9,l (19f1,(f)
ntir~l@lnC Ofll
Ms. Giezelle S. Bennell, Remedial Project Manager
No1th Superfund Remedial Branch
Waste Maryagemcni Division
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Atlanta Federal Center
61 Forsyth St. S,W.
Atlanta, ,GA :l0303"3104
Re: GE Plant Remediation, East flat Ro~k, NC
Dear Ms .. Bennett:
February 27, 2000
Thank you for your January I 0, 2000 respunse tu my letter. I am glad to hear that the
groundw.ater remediation system design "is being developed with protection of the bunched
arrowhead habitat as one of its primary objectives." I disagree with yuur comment that the
drawdown of Mr. Hyder' s springs is not related to your project I am very concerned that the
installation of addition~] pumping wells will have a disa.strous impact on the bunched ·
arrowhead habitat und population·.
I have reviewed the December 17, 1999 Appendix Hrcport entitled" Hydrologic Study of the
Bunched Arrowhead Habitat". The results.and discussion in this report have increased my
concerns about the adverse impacts that the AGRS has had to date,
• The report states that monitoring has occurred for 10 months. ln addition, most
monitoring wells have data collected on a quarterly basis. Quarterly data is not adequate
to show small fluctuations in the water table Bunched arrowhead habitat can be impucted ·
by small changes in the water table. The quarterly data collected for this study does not
reflect these small fluctuations, Quarterly data collet:tion can imply tha.t the system is not
changing, by flattening peaks and troughs experienced during the qua11er. So quarterly
data is misleading· Monitoring data should be collected on a weekly schedule at the
minimum. A decision to install additional pumping wells should not be based on 10
inonths of inadequate data e-0llection. The time frame for data collection and assessment
should be several years. Severn\ years of data should have been collected prior to the
commencement of pumping. Instead, monitoring wells were installed 2 years after
pumping commenced. Al~o, data should be collected for the entire period of pumping and
several years after pumping ceases to evaluate long-term impacts of the clean-up project
on the bunched arrowhead habitat. ·
-----------------'-----'·" ,-,--·-
4V11 llriiwrn1y Prill<', S:mr )()/ • /)u1/1,rn1, Nort/1 (;aroli11a 277()? • 1d 919 40J 85SB • }rlX 91.9 403 0.g7.9
Jwr1 natinnal H&1dq11mtrr1 • Arli11x1cm, Vir}(l11i11
MRR 02'00 9: 58 i✓o. 00 i P. 02 • • Page 3-5 .of the report says " Note that it woulct take a period of t1mc for the systym to
reach steady state and therefore for the drawdowns and impacts.I() be fully realized."
The paragraph goes on to slate that 90% of the steady state drawdown would be realized -
in 3 years or August of2000 and 99% in 6 years. The full impacts of the current pumping
system have not been evaluated yet. Additional pumping wells should not be installed and
brought on line until the current impacts can be measured and evaluated adequately The
drawdown in Mr. Hyder's springs this summer could be directly related to the current
pumping regime. Additional pumping wells.could have devastating impacts on this . . . .
population.
• The repdrt•'s conclusions state that drawdown caused by the AGRS has the potential to·
extend to the bunched arrowhead habitat. This conclusion should be sufficient impetus for
several more years of data collection prior to additional pumping well instal_lation
• The relationships between groundwater and surface water may not be evaluated
adequately. Also, PCRs are heavy. They are n9t good indicators of how water moves. So
PCB movements ctue to pumping may not reflect other changes in the groundwater/surface
watci relationship. . . -- -
ln addition to_ the concerns listed above, l h~ve a recommendation Groundwater pumping
should be 11exiblc; and mirror climatic changes. As rainfall changes, pumping rates should
change as well.· This flexibility would allow the rate ofdrawdown to be minimized a1id
buffered by rainfall.
As you know, bunched arrowhead is a federally listed endangered species. It has very specific
hahitat-requirements which include slow, continuous water.flows. The AGRS may be
adversely impacting the habita(ofthe neighboring population. Additional data collection is
critical. The data collected thus flu is inadequate to assess the impacts. If additional pumping
wells are installed prior to adequate assessment, the results could b_e devastating to the
bunched arrowhead populatioti. ·
1 I look forward to working with you to resolve these issues. !fyou have questions or
comments, please contact me at 828'749-1700 .
. J\. Este Stifel
Mountains District Steward . .
•
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY~,r
. REGION 4 '1M,g.
61 Forsyth Street, S.W.
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3104
January 3, 2000
4WD-NSMB
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: GE/Shepherd Farm NPL Site
East Flat Rock, NC
FROM:
TO:
Giezelle S. Bennett .
Remedial Project M~
Remedial Design Review s
Elmer Akin/Bill O'Steen, OTS
Scott Huling, ORD
David Mattison, NC DENR
Tom Augspurger, US Fish and Wildlife
Lynn France, COM
RECEIVED
JAN 05 2000
SUPERFUND SECTION
Attached is the 90% Remedial Design Report for the above referenced Site.
Please review it and provide any comments that you may have to me no later than
January 26, 2000. If you have any questions, please give me a call at 404/562-8824.
Thank you for your continued support on this project.
~t+ii~il:~f;: L _'; .·;..~. ~,;r,J.;i,\.,i..:l~·:~~ -.;,',,',:\'~di --· . WILt.:lAM ·· ·r• -~
~r~~~ ~*~~ ~ .. -·· --~~~~
~~·ii,~:>:.':. ~--. -"'· _, ... '-?S--~~ ~"',-·~ ;:-~ -; ... .,,.,, ~"."i.,,-'.J''l''::"'·~'.1_,....~, ;--~,~.i'.:.~~-~.}~~J~r--~
lJ .:t • .l~"J~ ji,~ ~~..:...•.--&:,A;!.;:'::.---t~)
,-=.1cri.,~\<J>o\i·~"~t:."2:"'-"1 ~ ~:t\r~~~~: ~~-~-i.ttt.J~.•~,·:t~r:'.;;
:.-...-,__ ---~ -4 ..... ,~ -;,;,:· "''1:S-~C-t;· .. ~lirttf::t;~if r
--~~•,j:..;;;,i¼i&~ . tiJES::.S:•1~·Jo·,:,~;tt~~"··~;
i
0
Ms. Giezelle Bennett
Superfund Branch
Waste Management Division
NORTH !ROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WASTE MANAGEMENT
August 11, 1999
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Rel!ion IV
61 Forsyth Street, 1 I th Floor
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
RE: Revised Drawings 4 -9
Final (I 00%) Remedial Design for Soils at the GE Subsite
General Electric/Shepherd Farm NPL Site
East Flat Rock, Henderson County
Dear Ms. Bennett:
The Superfund Section of the North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources (NC DENR) received the Revised Drawings 4-9 -Final (100%)
Remedial Design for Soils at the GE Subsite for the General Electric/Shepherd Farm
National Priorities List (NPL) Site. The Superfund Section has reviewed these
drawings and offers the following attached comments.
We appreciate the opportunity to comment on these drawings. If you have any
questions, please feel free to call me at [phone], extension 349.
Attachment
Sincerely,
7) J JJ /1(~et1~~
David B. Mattison, CHMM
Environmental Engineer
Superfund Section
401 OBERLIN ROAD, SUITE 150, RALEIGH, NC 27605
PHONE [phone] FAX 919•715-3605
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY /AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER• 50% RECYCLED/1O% POST-CONSUMER PAPER
Ms. Giezelle Bennett
August 11, I 999
Page I
REVISED DRAWINGS 4 -9
•
FINAL (100%) REMEDIAL DESIGN FOR SOILS AT THE GE SUBSITE
Drawing 8 Cap Details
I. The notes included in the title block indicate that the anchor trench detail was revised and
that an inlet detail was added. However, the inlet detail was inadvertently omitted. Please
correct this oversight.
Drawing 9 Miscellaneous Details
2. The first note for the detail "Eastern Drainage Channel, Section, Typical" indicates that the
channel is to be lined with one inch stone. Please clarify this note with a description of the
type of stone (i.e., gradation) as well as the depth of stone. Please bear in mind that the
drainage channel must meet the minimum drainage requirements as specified in the
document, North Carolina Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual.
tt!1
GEOTRANS
A TETRA TECH COMPANY
MEMORANDUM
•1080 Holcomb Bridge Road
Building 100, Suite 190
Roswell, Georgia
30076
770-642-1000 FAX [phone]
TO: Nick Urban, Earth Tech
CC: Todd Hagemeyer, HSI GeoTrans, Inc.
Giezelle Bennett, EPA Remedial Manager
,Davi(fMattison,.NC~DENR-;J
Lynne France, COM Federal
FROM: Phil Weeber, HSI GeoTrans, Inc.
DATE: June 9, 1999
SUBJECT: Request for Clarification, RFC3
Earth Tech presented HSI GeoTrans with four requests for clarification/
variation on June 2, 1999 regarding specifications listed in the Final (100%)
Remedial Design and Remedial Action Work Plan for Soil at the GE Subsite.
RFC3-l.
C:\gc\soil I 00\doc\ETrcsp3. wpd
Earth Tech has requested a variation to Section 2231 -Part 3.6.C.
(Compaction of aggregate base coarse materials). Earth Tech has
requested an alternative compaction requirement for the aggregate
base material. Earth Tech has requested re-examination of the
requirement for in-place density and field moisture content testing
on the compacted aggregate material. Second, Earth Tech has
requested re-examination of the requirement for Atterberg Limits
on the compacted aggregate material. Earth Tech proposes to
perform additional compaction on the installed aggregate base
coarse and to then proof roll the material following compaction. If
pumping or rutting of the material is exhibited, the installed material
will be recompacted. The aggregate base coarse layer will be
compacted until no evidence of rutting is exhibited during proof
rolling.
HSI Geo Trans holds that the specified aggregate base coarse
material should be crushed stone consisting of only stone and fines
from the crushing process meeting the stated requirements.
Therefore, it is reasonable to waive the specified Atterberg Limits
RFC3-2.
RFC3-3.
C:\gc\<;oil I 00ldoc\ETrcsp3.wpd
• •
testing. Second, it is also reasonable to allow proof rolling to test
compaction of the aggregate. If pumping or rutting of the material
is exhibited, the installed material will be recompacted. The
aggregate base coarse layer will be compacted until no evidence of
rutting is exhibited during proof rolling. A replacement
specification Section 2231 is included.
Earth Tech has requested a variation to Section 2222 -Part
3.1.C.2. (Common Fill -Placement and Compaction -Compaction
Criteria). Earth Tech has requested a variance in the moisture
content of common fill placed in areas to be finished with
pavement, surrounding utility conduits, pipelines, structures, and
easements. Earth Tech requests that the moisture requirements
stated in the structural fill specification section 2223-3.1.C.2 be
used for the common fill material as well. This would allow a
moisture range of+/-4% versus the specified+/-2% range.
Common fill will be compacted to the specified density of not less
than 95% of the optimum density.
HSI Geo Trans believes that it is reasonable to allow a moisture
range of+/-4% for common fill placed in areas to be finished with
pavement, surrounding utility conduits, pipelines, structures, and
easements. The common fill must be compacted to the specified
density of not less than 95% of the optimum density. A
replacement page for Section 2222 is included.
Earth Tech has requested a variation to Sections 2222 -Part 3.2.B,
2223 -Part 3.2.B, and 2225 -Part 3.4.B.2. (In-situ
moisture/density testing). Earth Tech is requesting that a variance
regarding the in-situ moisture/density tests. Earth Tech requests a
variance to use in-situ drive cylinder tests (ASTM D2937-94) in
place of sand cone tests (ASTM D1556) in order to verify accuracy
of the moisture/density tests. Drive cylinder tests would be
performed at the same frequency as indicated in the specifications
for the common fill and structural fill.
HSI Geo Trans has consulted both the EPA and NC DENR
regarding this variance. HSI GeoTrans holds that sand cone testing
will be required as specified.
2
HSIGEOTRANS
RFC3-4.
• •
Earth Tech has requested a variation to Section 2225 (Barrier soil
properties). Earth Tech has requested a variance to the barrier soil
material characteristics specified in the referenced section. Earth
Tech is requesting a variance to listed items 4, 5, and 6 (% passing
no. 200 sieve, liquid limit, and plasticity index) as long as they
achieve a maximum hydraulic conductivity of 1 x I 0-5 cm/sec with
the barrier soil.
HSI GeoTrans has modified listed items 4, 5, and 6 (% passing no.
200 sieve, liquid limit, and plasticity index). The minimum passing
the no. 200 sieve must be 30%. The liquid limit must be equal to or
greater than 20. The plasticity index must be equal to or greater
than 7. The maximum hydraulic conductivity of the placed barrier
soil remains at I x I 0-5 cm/sec. A replacement page for Section
2225 is attached.
Please direct any further question to Phil Weeber ( 404-310-8403)
regarding these clarifications.
C:\gc\soil I 00\doc\ETresp3.wpd 3
HSIGEOTRANS
PART I -GENERAL
1.1 DESCRIPTION
•
SECTION 02231
AGGREGATE BASE COURSE
•
A. Section includes the placement and compaction of aggregate to serve as a subbase
to asphalt pavement.
1.2 RELATED SECTIONS
A. Section 02510 Asphaltic Concrete Paving
1.3 REFERENCES
A. ASTM D422 -Standard Test Method for Particle Size Analysis of Soils
B. ASTM D43 I 8 -Standard Test Method for Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and
Plasticity Index of Soils.
C. AASHTO Tl80 -Moisture-Density Relations of Soils Using a 10-lb (4.54 kg)
Rammer and an 18-in. ( 457 mm) Drop.
D. ASTM Dl557 -Test Methods for Moisture-Density Relations of Soils and
Soil-Aggregate Mixtures Using 10 lb (4.54 Kg) Rammer and 18 inch (457 mm)
Drop.
E. ASTM D2922 -Test Methods for Density of Soil and Soil-Aggregate in Place by
Nuclear Methods (Shallow Depth).
F. ASTM D3017 -Test Methods for Moisture Content of Soil and Soil-Aggregate
Mixtures.
G. North Carolina Department of Transportation Standard Specifications for Roads
and Structures, Sections 520 and I 010.
C:\GE\DOCS\GE_SOIUSPECS\02231.-..,,d
Ji,ie 15. 1m Page I of 4
Aggregate Base Course
Section 02231
• •
PART 2 -PRODUCTS
2.1 MATERIALS
A. Coarse aggregate by NCDOT Aggregate Gradation:
B.
C.
D.
1. Standard Size #ABC or other approved by the ENGINEER
Aggregate Gradation Requirements (from NCDOT Table 1005-1 ):
Standard Sieve Size % of Total Passina bv Weiaht
1½· 100
1" 75-97
½" 55-80
#4 35-55
#10 25-45
#40 14-30
#200 4-12
Material Passing #1 O Sieve (Soil Mortar)
#40 40-84
#200 11-35
Material passing the No. 40 sieve (soil mortar) shall not have a liquid limit in
excess of 30 nor a plasticity index in excess of 6.
At the discretion of the ENGINEER, the CONTRACTOR may use material
removed from the site under other sections of these Specifications provided it
meets the specifications under this Section and is determined to be uncontaminated
by testing.
I. Contamination will be defined with respect to unacceptable concentrations
of organic compounds and metals that are contaminants of potential
concern (CPCs) at the site.
C. IGE\DOCS\GE_ SOIL \S?ECS\02231 . "'Pd
J ..... 15, 1999 Page 2 of 4
Aggregate Base Course
Section 02231
•
PART 3 -EXECUTION
3.1 EXAMINATION
•
A. Verify substrate has been inspected, gradients and elevations are correct, and is
dry.
3.2 PREPARATION
A. Correct irregularities in substrate gradient and elevation by scarifying, reshaping,
and re-compacting.
B. Do not place on soft, muddy, or frozen surfaces.
3.3 AGGREGATE PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION
A. Spread aggregate over prepared substrate to a total compacted thickness of 6
inches.
B. Place aggregate in maximum 6 inch layers and roller compact to specified density.
C. Level and contour surfaces to elevations and gradients indicated.
D. Add small quantities of fine aggregate to coarse aggregate as appropriate to assist
compaction.
E. Under Asphalt Pavement: Compact placed aggregate materials to achieve
compaction of95 percent of the optimum dry density and within 3% of the
optimum moisture content determined in the testing performed under this Section.
F. Add water to assist compaction. If excess water is apparent, remove aggregate
and aerate to reduce moisture content.
G. Use mechanical tamping equipment in areas inaccessible to compaction equipment.
3.4 MAINTENANCE
A. The CONTRACTOR shall maintain the surface of the base by watering,
machining, and rolling or dragging when necessary to prevent damage to the base
by weather or traffic. Where the work determined by the ENGINEER to be
damaged, the CONTRACTOR shall repair the damaged area; reshape the base to
required lines, grades, and typical sections; and recompact the base to the required
density at no cost to the OWNER.
C:\GE\DOCS\GE_SOIL \.SPECS\02231."'1)d
June 15. 19W Page 3 of 4
Aggregate Base Course
Section 02231
• •
3.5 TOLERANCES
A. Flatness: The maximum differential between the established grade and the base
within any I 00 foot section shall be ½ inch.
B. Scheduled Compacted Thickness: Within 1/4 inch.
C. Variation From Design Elevation: Within½ inch.
3.6 FIELD QUALITY CONTROL
Default to these specifications if not covered by County of Henderson, NC Standards.
A. Compaction testing will be performed by proof rolling the entire area with a loaded
dump truck In the event that pumping or rutting of the material is observed, the
material will be recompacted and retested.
B. If proof rolled material exhibits pumping or rutting after continued compaction,
remove work, replace and retest.
C. The ENGINEER may require additional or more frequent testing if the appearance
or quality of material is perceived by the ENGINEER to differ from other material
used in work under this section. The ENGINEER may require compaction testing
in accordance with ASTM Dl557, AASHTO Tl 80, ASTM D2922, and ASTM
D3017 if the appearance of proof rolled material is perceived by the ENGINEER
to exhibit pumping or rutting.
C:\GE\OOCS\GE_SOIL\SPECS',02231 :""P(I
June 15, 1m
END OF SECTION
Page 4 of 4
Aggregate Base Course
Section 02231
•
PART 1-GENERAL
1.1 DESCRIPTION
SECTION 02222
COMMON FILL
•
A. Scope: The CONTRACTOR shall provide all labor, materials, equipment and
incidentals required to place common fill as specified herein.
B. General: Common fill shall be used for various purposes including, but not
limited to, backfill of areas to be excavated and as earth cover and fill as shown
on the Contract Drawings and as denoted in these Specifications.
C. Related Work Specified Elsewhere:
I.
2.
3.
4.
Section 02221
Section 02229
Section 02270
Section 02800
1.2 QUALITY ASSURANCE
Former Landfill Excavation
On-Site Disposal
Sediment and Erosion Control
Waste Material Disposal
A. Perform work in accordance with applicable standards. Maintain one copy of
Standards on site.
B. Reference Standards: Comply with applicable provisions and recommendations
of the following, except as otherwise shown or specified.
I.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
C.\GE\OOCS\GE_SOIL\SPECS\02222.~
J ...... 15,1~
ASTMD2216
ASTMD422
ASTMD698
ASTMD2922
ASTMD3017
ASTMD1556
Moisture Content
Particle Size Analysis of Soils
Standard Proctor Test
Density of Soil and Soil Aggregate in Place by
Nuclear Methods (Shallow Depth)
Moisture Content of Soil and Soil Aggregate in
Place by Nuclear Methods (Shallow Depth)
Density and Unit Weight of Soil in Place by the
Sand-Cone Method
Page 1 of 5
Common Fill
Section 02222
• •
C. Material from non pre-approved borrow sources or from questionable or
suspect borrow sources shall be subject to analytical testing, at the discretion
of the ENGINEER, to certify that the material is uncontaminated.
I. Contamination will be defined with respect to unacceptable
concentrations of organic compounds and metals that are contaminants
of potential concern (CPCs) at the site.
1.3 SUBMITTALS FOR REVIEW
A. Submit to the ENGINEER manufacturer's or vendor's certified test analysis of
soil quality to ensure specifications are being met. Submit materials testing
data required under this Section to verify compliance with specified
requirements.
B. A 20 lb. sample of material from each potential borrow source shall be
submitted for testing under 3. 2A of this Section with results submitted to the
ENGINEER at least 2 weeks prior to construction.
PART 2 -PRODUCTS
2.1 COMMON FILL
A. No frozen earth shall be used for backfill and fill. All backfill and fill materials
shall be free from all perishable and objectionable materials.
B. Common fill shall consist of mineral soil substantially free from organic
materials, loam, wood, trash, and other objectionable materials that may be
compressible or degradable or which cannot be properly compacted. Common
fill shall not contain stones larger than 3 inches in largest diameter and shall
have a minimum of 40% passing the No. 40 sieve and a maximum of 30%
passing No. 200 sieve. Common fill shall not contain granite blocks, broken
concrete, masonry rubble, or other similar materials. It shall have physical
properties such that it can readily spread and compacted during filling. Snow,
ice, and frozen soil shall not be permitted.
2.2 WATER
A. Water to be used to adjust the moisture content of common fill shall be
uncontaminated, with a pH between 5. 5 and 7. 5.
C:IGE\OOCS\GE_S0ll\SPECS'D2222."'l)d
Jtroe 15, 1M Page 2 of 5
Common Fill
Section 02222
• •
PART 3 -EXECUTION
3.1 PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION
A. General:
I. Common fill soil shall be used to replace excavated soil to achieve the
elevation and grades shown on the Contract Drawings and specified
herein.
2. Unless explicitly shown on the Contract Drawings or stated in this
Section, stockpile locations shall be approved by the ENGINEER in
advance of commencing work.
3. Common fill shall placed in maximum 12-inch lifts, except where
otherwise specified in this Section.
4. Portions of the fill, which in the opinion of the ENGINEER, cannot be
compacted adequately with rollers because of inaccessibility or the
possibility of damage to structures, shall be placed in layers not thicker
than 6-inches and compacted to the specified density by means of
approved power tampers. The type of tamper and its method of
operation shall be subject to acceptance by the ENGINEER.
S. Surfaces between lifts shall be kept free of any surface debris.
6. Construction traffic shall be planned to ensure an even distribution of
traffic over the fill surface.
7. The sequence of installation of fill layers shall be arranged to provide
surface drainage of the fill layers. The surface of the common fill shall
be seal rolled with a smooth drum roller prior to periods of rainfall.
Temporary sumps may be installed to remove ponded water upon
approval from the ENGINEER.
8. Smooth surfaces shall be roughened by discing prior to placing
subsequent layers.
9. Fill shall not be placed during weather conditions that prevent the
specified moisture content of the soil material from being achieved.
B. Compaction Criteria:
I. Unless otherwise denoted on the Contract Drawings or in this Section,
common fill will be compacted in-place at optimum moisture, plus or
minus 4 %, to a density of not less than 90% of the optimum density
obtained in the testing performed under this Section.
2. Common fill placed in areas to be finished with pavement, surrounding
utility conduits, pipelines, structures, and easements or shown
elsewhere on the Contract Drawings shall be placed in 6-inch lifts and
C:\GE\OOCS'IGE_SOIL\Sf>ECS\02222.~
June 15, 1~ Page 3 of S
Common Fill
Section 02222
• •
compacted in-place at optimum moisture, plus or minus 4%, to a
density of not less than 95% of the optimum density obtained in the
testing performed under this Section.
3.2 TESTING
A. As a minimum, the following testing shall be performed on the common fill soil
material prior to placement.
TEST
Particle Size Analysis (ASTM D422)
Moisture Content (ASTM D2216)
Standard Proctor (ASTM D698)
FREQUENCY (1 Test per)
5,000 cu yds
2,500 cu yds
5,000 cu yds
Sampling points in stockpile areas shall be as directed by the ENGINEER.
Additional tests shall be required if changes in material are observed.
B. During placement of the common fill, the following in-place tests shall be
performed.
TEST
In-situ Moisture (ASTM D3017)
In-situ Density (ASTM 2922)
Moisture Content (ASTM D2216)
Density and Unit Weight (ASTM D1556)
FREQUENCY
5 tests per acre per lift
5 tests per acre per lift
1 test per 10 in-situ tests
1 test per 20 in-situ tests
CONTRACTOR shall perform a minimum of two nuclear moisture and density
tests each day of active soils construction.
C. During placement of successive layers of common fill, all testing required in
any layer shall be completed before successive layers are installed.
3.3 SURVEY CONTROL
A. Upon completion of the work covered under this Section, the CONTRACTOR
shall survey the limits and elevations of the top of the common fill in
accordance with the General Requirements of these Specifications.
C:\GE\DOCS\GE_SOIL\SPECS\02222.~
J...-.e 15, ,~ Page 4 of 5
Common Fill
Section 02222
• •
34 TOLERANCES
The following tolerances apply unless written approval from the ENGINEER is
obtained:
A. Grades: Plus or minus two tenths of a foot measured across any I 00-foot
section.
B. Scheduled Compacted Thickness: Within± 3 inches.
C. Variation From Design Elevation: Within± 3 inches.
C:\GE\DOCS\GE_SOIL\SPECS\02222.wpd
J.....e 15, HXXil
END OF SECTION
Page 5 of 5
Common Fill
Section 02222
PART I -GENERAL
1.1 DESCRIPTION
•
SECTION 02225
BARRIER SOIL
•
A. CONTRACTOR shall provide all labor, materials, tools, equipment and incidentals
necessary for obtaining, placing, compacting the barrier soil cover over the Dry
Sludge Impoundment as indicated on the Contract Drawings and specified herein.
Work includes purchase, excavation, transportation, and placement ofbarrier soil
obtained from a pre-approved borrow site.
B. Scope: The work shall include the placement of a minimum of 18-inch barrier soil
layer over the site areas specified in the Contract Drawings. The CONTRACTOR
shall obtain a qualified independent soils engineering firm and testing laboratory
(registered in the State ofNorth Carolina) to perform all soil testing required in the
specification herein.
C. Related Work Specified Elsewhere:
I. Construction Quality Assurance/Quality Control Plan
2. Section 02276 Geosynthetic Materials
1.2 QUALITY ASSURANCE
A. Perform work in accordance with applicable standards. Maintain one copy of
standards on site.
B. Reference Standards: Comply with applicable provisions and recommendations of
the most recent revision of each of the following, except as otherwise shown or
specified.
I.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
C, IGE\DOCS\GE_SOIL\SPECS\02225.wpd
June 15, 1999
ASTMD35
ASTMD422
ASTMD854
ASTMD698
ASTMD1556
ASTMD1587
Determining the Coefficient of Soil Geosynthetic
Interaction
Particle Size Analysis of Soils
Test Method for Specific Gravity of Soils
Test Method for Moisture-Density Relations for
Soils Using a 5. 5 lb Rammer and 12-inch Drop
Test Method for Density and unit Weight of Soil in
Place by the Sand-Cone Method
Thin-walled Tube Sampling of Soils
Page I of 8
Barrier Soil
Section 02225
•
7. ASTMD2216
8. ASTMD2487
9. ASTMD2922
10. ASTMD3017
II. ASTMD5084
•
Laboratory Determination of Water (Moisture)
Content of Soil Rock and Soil Aggregate Mixtures
Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes
(Unified Soil Classification System)
Density of Soil and Soil Aggregate in Place by
Nuclear Methods (Shallow Depth)
Moisture Content of Soil and Soil Aggregate in
Place by Nuclear Methods (Shallow Depth)
Measurement of Hydraulic Conductivity of
Saturated Porous Materials Using a Flexible Wall
Permeameter
C. Material from non pre-approved borrow sources or from questionable or suspect
borrow sources shall be subject to analytical testing, at the discretion of the
ENGINEER, to certify that the material is uncontaminated.
I. Contamination will be defined with respect to unacceptable concentrations
of organic compounds and metals that are contaminants of potential
concern (CPCs) at the site.
1.3 SUBMITTALS
A. Test results for all soil testing as outlined by the specifications herein.
B. Calibration data for each of the nuclear density gauges to be used during
compaction operations. Calibration of the nuclear density gauges shall have been
performed no more than 6 months prior to mobilization.
C. Barrier soil protection plan (see 3.2.E. of this specification) to be submitted to the
ENGINEER at least two weeks prior to commencing work under this Section.
PART 2 -PRODUCTS
2.1 MATERIALS
A. The barrier soil borrow material shall consist of inorganic mineral soil meeting the
requirement for MH, ML, CL, or CH, as defined by the Unified Soil Classification
System (ASTM D2487). The borrow material shall be a naturally occurring soil
free from frozen material, roots, weeds, debris, and any other deleterious materials.
C.IOEIDOCS\GE_SOIL\SPECS\02225.~
Jur,e 15, 1009 Page 2 of 8
Barrier Soil
Section 02225
• •
B. The barrier soil material shall have the following characteristics:
I. No angular stones, or stones having a maximum dimension greater than I
inch.
2. No soil lumps or clods larger than 4 inches.
3. Maximum gravel content of 15%.
4. Minimum 30% passing the no. 200 sieve.
5. Liquid limit equal to or greater than 20.
6. Plasticity index equal to or greater than 7.
7. Moisture content ranging from the indicated optimum moisture content to
not greater than 4% above the indicated optimum moisture content in
which 95% compaction can be achieved as determined by the Standard
Proctor test (ASTM D698).
8. Shall have an installed, in-place hydraulic conductivity no greater than
Ix JO·' emfs.
C. Pelletized bentonite, following manufacturer's recommendations for composition
and placement.
PART 3-EXECUTION
3.1 PREQUALIFICATION OF BORROW SOURCE(S) MATERIALS
A. Bulk samples from each proposed borrow source and material type shall be
collected and the following geotechnical soil property tests performed for each in
accordance with the referenced ASTM procedure.
I. Atterburg Limits (ASTM D4318)
2. Particle Size Analysis (ASTM D422)
3. Natural Water Content (ASTM D2216)
4. Specific Gravity (ASTM D854)
5. Soil Classification (ASTM D2487)
6. Standard Proctor (ASTM D698)
7. Standard Proctor (ASTM D698) modified to consist of four layers, each
layer receiving nine (9) blows
8. Permeability tests using a Flexible Wall Permeameter (ASTM D5084-90)
B. Permeability Testing: Permeability testing shall be performed on a minimum of
three (3) samples for each material type (by USCS) for each compaction effort, as
specified (ASTM D698, and ASTM D698 modified). Permeability test samples
shall be compacted at the indicated appropriate moisture content to achieve
compaction in the following ranges for each compaction effort.
C:IGE\DOCS\GE_SOIL \.SPECS\02225.wpd
J..-.. 15, IIKIO Page 3 of 8
Barrier Soil
Section 02225
• •
I MOISTURE CONTENT I COMPACTION I
Up to 4% DI)' of Maximum 95-100%
Dry Density
Up to 4% Wet of Maximum 92-95%
Orv Densitv
During the compaction effort, the surface of each previously compacted layer shall
be lightly scarified (roughened) with a fork, or other suitable object in order to
provide proper blending of materials between two layers. The above procedure
involves a minimum of three (3) permeability tests per material type proposed, as
specified.
C. Submit to the ENGINEER a report that provides results of the laboratory soil
tests. The Moisture-Dry Density-Permeability relationship shall be clearly shown
and the acceptable zone of dry density versus moisture depicted in order to achieve
a hydraulic conductivity of Ix Io·' emfs or less. The report shall be submitted to
the ENGINEER at least two (2) weeks prior to commencing work under this
Section. Report must be approved by the ENGINEER prior to installation.
3.2 PLACEMENT
A. The barrier soil shall be constructed to the thickness and lines and grades shown on
the Contract Drawings and specified herein. The material shall be placed in
successive 6-inch horizontal layers compacted as specified herein. Surfaces
between lifts shall be kept free of any surface debris. Construction traffic shall be
planned to ensure an even distribution of traffic over the surface.
B. Portions of the fill, which in the opinion of the ENGINEER, cannot be compacted
adequately with rollers because of inaccessibility or the possibility of damage to
structures (namely gas vent risers), shall be placed in layers not exceeding 4 inches
in compacted depth and compacted to the specified density by means of approved
power tampers. The type of tamper and its method of operation shall be approved
by the ENGINEER.
C. Surface seal with a smooth-drum roller shall be performed to protect compacted
lifts from wet weather or to prevent excessive drying Before subsequent material
is placed on material previously surface sealed, the sealed material shall be scarified
and aerated or wetted, as necessary, to aid in the proper bonding between lifts. A
sheeps foot roller shall be used to blend one lift into the other.
D. Under no circumstances shall a successive lift be placed parallel to the general
direction of the advance of placement and compaction for the underlying lift. The
C:IGE\DOC&.GE_SOIL\SPEC5'02225 .• .,,.._,s.,m Page 4 of 8
Barrier Soil
Section 02225
• •
general direction of the advance of placement and compaction of any given lift
shall be orthogonal ( at right angles) to the general direction of the advance of
placement and compaction performed for the underlying lift.
E. The CONTRACTOR shall protect the barrier soil during and after placement from
weather and/or deleterious effects that might cause desiccation, cracking, or
saturation of the barrier soil material. Proposed methods of protection shall be
submitted to the ENGINEER for approval. The barrier soil shall be kept shaped
and drained. The moisture content of the soil surface shall be maintained at all
times to prevent desiccation or cracking until the specified overlying material is
installed.
3.3 COMPACTION
A. Compaction shall be accomplished by established and approved means.
Deficiencies in construction shall be corrected by the CONTRACTOR at no
additional cost to the OWNER.
B. Each layer of the barrier soil placed shall be compacted within the range of
moisture and density as determined for the approved material and method in
accordance with the testing results obtained from the results associated with the
prequalification of materials, as described in Paragraph 3. I.
3.4 QUALITY CONTROL TESTING
A. General
I. The ENGINEER will require additional tests beyond the minimum required
to be performed whenever materials or construction are questionable, and
at no additional cost to the OWNER.
2. A representative of the OWNER may perform supplemental tests at the
OWNER's expense at whatever frequency necessary to verify results
submitted by the CONTRACTOR. The CONTRACTOR shall furnish
samples to the OWNER's representative upon his request. Discrepancies
between test results obtained by the OWNER's representative will be
resolved to the representative's satisfaction prior to performing any further
work.
B. Quality Control Testing
I . As a minimum, the following testing shall be performed on the barrier soil
material. Initial tests shall be performed prior to delivery of materials to
C:\GEIDOCS\GE_S01L\SPECS'D222:I.~
June 15, 1~ Page 5 of 8
Barrier Soil
Section 02225
• •
the project site. The results of the initial test shall be submitted to the
ENGINEER for his approval prior to delivery.
TEST STANDARD FREQUENCY lone test oerl
Moisture Content ASTM D2216 2,500 yd'
Atterburg Limits ASTM D4318 5,000 yd3
Particle Size Analysis ASTM D422 5,000 yd'
Hydraulic Conductivity ASTM D5084 10,000 yd3
Soil Classification ASTM D2487 5,000 yd3
Standard Proctor ASTM D698 5,000 vd3
Bulk samples for the above tests ( with the exception of moisture content)
shall be collected from the same collection point as determined by the
ENGINEER. A minimum of three (3) tests shall be performed for the
project. Additional tests shall be required if changes in material are
observed.
2. The CONTRACTOR shall adequately control his compaction and moisture
content operations by in-place tests made in accordance with ASTM
D2922 and ASTM D3017 per the following schedule:
I TEST I STANDARD I FREQUENCY
In-Situ Moisture ASTM D3017 5 tests per acre per lift
In-Situ Density ASTM D2922 5 tests per acre per lift
Sand Cone ASTM D1556 1 test per 20 nuclear tests
Moisture Content ASTM D2216 1 test oer 1 o nuclear tests
CONTRACTOR shall perform a minimum of two nuclear moisture and
density tests each day of active soil construction.
I
Suspect areas shall be tested as directed by the CONTRACTOR's QC
Inspector or the ENGINEER. Additional tests may be performed by a
representative of the OWNER for verification of compliance. Deficiencies
in construction shall be corrected by the CONTRACTORs at no additional
cost to the OWNER.
3. CONTRACTOR shall notify the ENGINEER at least 24 hours in advance
of any testing. Written test results shall be provided to the ENGINEER
within three working days after the test has been performed. Verbal test
C:\GE\OOCS\GE_SOIL\SPECSID2225.~
Jur.a 15, 1989 Page 6 of 8
Barrier Soil
Section 02225
• •
results shall be provided to the ENGINEER immediately after testing is
completed.
C. Permeability Testing
I. General: During construction of the barrier soil and upon completion of
placement of the full 18-inch thickness, the CONTRACTOR shall retrieve
thin-walled "Shelby" tubes in accordance with ASTM D 1587 at locations
determined by the ENGINEER. The sampling tubes shall be of steel
construction with a minimum 3-inch nominal outside diameter and a
minimum 30-inch length. Sampling shall be performed in the presence of
the ENGINEER's representative. Sampling shall be performed by the
CONTRACTOR such that the full thickness of the low permeability layer is
penetrated and recovered by the sampling device. Tube samples with less
than 90% recovery shall be rejected by the ENGINEER, and the
CONTRACTOR shall perform resampling at his expense. The maximum
allowable permeability for the barrier soil shall be Ix to·' emfs. Should any
sample indicate that the permeability of the tested sample is greater than
Jx10·' emfs, additional sampling and testing shall be performed by the
CONTRACTOR at no additional cost to the OWNER.
2. Procedure: The plan view area of the barrier soil shall be divided into six
( 6) zones across the entire limits of the site, each zone representing
approximately equal areas. One "Shelby" tube sample shall be collected for
each zone, at locations determined by the ENGINEER, and tested for
permeability in accordance with ASTM D5084. Under no circumstances
shall the "Shelby" tube be pushed into the final barrier soil cap using
equipment which would allow tiling of the tube while pushing (i.e.,
backhoe bucket). The method of pushing the "Shelby" tube shall be
approved by the ENGINEER prior to sampling.
3. Procedure for non-compliance: Should any sample indicate that the
permeability of the tested sample is greater than Ix 10·' emfs, the
CONTRACTOR shall obtain two (2) additional samples for testing, both
approximately 20 linear feet from the failed sample location, in opposing
directions. Should test results indicate that the permeability of any of the
additional samples tested is greater than Ix 10·' emfs, the CONTRACTOR
shall, at his option, perform one of the following:
C:\GE\OOCS\GE_SOIL\SPECS\02225,wpd
J,...,. 15, 1999
a. Remove the entire area oflow permeability barrier soil material
within the failed zone sampled, and replace and retest, in
accordance with the specifications herein, or
b. Submit to the ENGINEER for approval, a plan for the delineation
of the failed area through additional testing, the removal and
replacement of the delineated portions of the failed zone area( s ),
Page 7 of 8
Barrier Soil
Section 02225
• •
and all else necessary for the reconstruction and testing of the failed
area( s) of the barrier soil, as specified herein, and as determined by
the ENGINEER.
All work associated with evaluation and replacement of failed areas shall be
performed at no cost to the OWNER.
4. Acceptance: Upon receipt of the permeability testing data, the
ENGINEER shall be afforded two (2) working days to render a decision
on the acceptance of the area of the barrier soil tested.
D. Shelby Tube Sample Hole Repair
I. The CONTRACTOR shall repair all test holes immediately upon
completion of sampling by using a bentonite soil mixture tamped in place
by hand.
3.5 SURVEY CONTROL
D. Upon completion of the work covered under this Section, the CONTRACTOR
shall survey the limits and elevations of the top of the barrier soil in accordance
with the General Requirements of these Specifications.
3.6 TOLERANCES
The following tolerances apply unless written approval from the ENGINEER is obtained:
A. Grades: Plus or minus two tenths of a foot measured across any 100-foot section.
B. Scheduled Compacted Thickness: 18-inches, minimum
C. Variation From Design Elevation: Within 2 inches.
C:\GE\OOCS\GE_SOIL\SPECS\02225.wpd
Jooe 15, 19119
END OF SECTION
Page 8 of 8
Barrier Soil
Section 02225
• •
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
4WD-NSMB
Ms. Janet Boyer·
EHS Manager
GE Lighting Systems, Inc
3010 Spartanburg Highway
Hendersonville, NC 28792
REGION4
61 Forsyth Street
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3104
October 21, 1998 RECEI\Jf:o
OCT23 1998
SUPEAFUND SECTION
SUBJ: GE/Shepherd Farm NPL Site
East Flat Rock, NC
Dear Ms. Boyer:
Enclosed are the Agency's comments on the Final (100%} Remedial Design for Soil at the GE Subsite, the Remedial Action Work Plan for Soil at the GE Subsite, both dated September 25, 1998, as well as comments on the attachments to' these reports. Please submit a letter report that responds 1 to each comment, with a notation as to the page number where the comment was incorporated, as well as all final reports to the Agency no later than November 13, 1998.
· If you have any questions, please give me a call at 404/56~-8824.
Sincere/ ,
~-~
Gi elle S . .Bennett
Remedial Project Manager
cc: Dave Mattison, NC DENR
Todd Hagemeyer, HSI GeoTrans
Lynn France, COM
•
RD/RA COMMENTS
RA Work Plan
Response to US EPA General Comments
1. The response to US EPA general comment #4 states that a spot excavation is proposed for the small area near the Dry Sludge lmpoundment (OSI) that exceeds the performance standard. Section 2.4.4 of the revised document states that a spot excavation is to be conducted on a small area in the northwest corner that lies
outside the fence and is adjacent to Landfill A. Please detail how General Electric (GE) proposes to address the two additional areas to the west of the DSI that exceed the polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) performance standard. Additionally,
please detail how GE proposes to ensure that PCB contamination along the fringes of the fenced perimeter of the OSI is properly capped beneath the landfill cover.
Response to US EPA Specific Comments
2. The response to US EPA specific comment #3 stated that the solid line on Figure 2-2 was labeled. However, Figure 2-2 of the revised document does not include this correction. Additionally, the areal extent of Landfill B, as shown in Figure 2-2 of the revised document, should be corrected io 0.14 acres. Please correct these
oversights.
3. The response to US EPA sdecific comment #5 and Figure 2-3 in the revised document do not address the. request to delete from Figure 2-3 the soil sampl.es and soil sample results that do not pertain to the delineation of the OSI. Please correct this oversight. '
4. The response to US EPA specific comment #6 refers to the response to US EPA general comment #2. However, Sections 2.1 and 2.4.2 of the revised document do not reflect the response to US EPA general comment #2. Please correct this oversight.
5. The response to US EPA specific comment #13 is acceptable. However, Section 4.2 of the Final Remedial Design (Final RD) report does not state that all contaminated soil will remain on GE property (although the last sentence of Section 4.6.2 of this document does make this statement). Furthermore, a specific
reference to the designated truck routes into the OSI, as depicted in the design drawings, should be made in Section 4.6.2. Please correct these oversights.
-1-
I
Response to NC DENA Comments
6. The response to NC DENR comments #4 and #5 stated that the List of Figures was
corrected. However, the List of Figures in the revised document does not include
these corrections. Additionally, the title of Figure 8.1 should be· shown as
"Organizational Chart" in the List of Figures. Please correct these oversights.
7. The response to NC DENR comment #8 and Section 2.2.2 of the revised·document
do.not indicate the material to be used for the final cover over Landflll A. Please
correct this oversight.
8. The response to NC DENR comment #11 should state "Refer to response to EPA
general comment no. 4." Please correct this oversight.
9. The response to NC DENR comment #13 is adequate. · However, the second
sentence of the second paragraph of Section 3.1.1 should reference Sections
01450 and 02221 of the Construction Specifications. Furthermore, the fourth
sentence of the second paragraph of Section 3.1.1 should state that "this soil will
be tested in accordance with Specification 02222 ... " Please correct these
oversights.
10. The response to NC DENR comment #17, Section 3.1.2 and Figure 3.1 of the
revised document describe a decision tree for the collection and analysis of
confirmation samples for volatile organic compound (VOC) content. However, the
decision tree does not provid~ for further excavation of soils in the event that less
than ten soil samples containing VOCs in excess of the North Carolina Soil
Remediation Goals are encountered. Please revise the text and the figure
accordingly.
11. Although the response to NC DENR comment #29 is acceptable, the last sentence
in Section 4.6.1 should state "All other utilities within the RA Work Area are
controlled by GE and will be relocated or disabled ... " Please correct this
oversight.
12. Although the response to NC DENR comment #30 is adequate, the second
sentence of the fourth paragraph of Section 4. 7 should state that" ... abandonment
procedures are specified in the North Carolina Administrative Code (Title 15A,
Subchapter 2C, Section 0113)." Please correct this oversight.
13. The response to NC DENR comment #32 should state "Refer to response to EPA
specific comment no. 17." Please correct this oversight.
-2-
•
GENERAL:
14. The Work Plan contains numerous references to attachments that were submitted
as part of the design document but had been attachments to the Remedial Action
(RA) Work Plan. These references should be corrected.
SPECIFIC:
15. Page 16, Section 3.1.2-Why do "1 O" samples have to exceed the North Carolina
standards before we "discuss" remediation options? On a possible 50-footgrid, this
would be a lot of soil that needed excavation. The rationale should be explained.
In addition, the rationale for choosing the PIO measurement of 100 should also be
given.
16. Page 16. Section 3.1.2: First paragraph. One sample per sidewall may be
insufficient for confirmation, especially at Landfill A. The number of samples on
sidewalls of each stage of excavation would be better determined based on linear
ft of sidewall in each stage of excavation (each stage being one to three ft deep per
Section 3.1.1 ).
17. Page 16 Section 3.1.2: Second paragraph. Please explain the basis for selecting
100 ppm voes as the criterion for sending a sample off site for analysis?
18. Page 18, Section 3.1.2, First bullet. A sample intended for headspace analysis
should NOT be homogenized ih a bowl prior to being place in a sample container.
Please revise the sampling mbthod for headspace analysis. ·
19. Page 19, Section 3.1.4 -Please list the target voes.
20. Page 19, Section 3.1.4 Please provide justification for use of a 10.2 ev lamp.
Have the ionization potentials of the potentially-present voes been evaluated to
select the lamp?
21. Page 26, Section 4.5 How will the fluid generated by the decontamination
protocols, and disposed in the OSI, affect the compaction bf the fill material?
22. Page 36, Section 7.1.2, Who will conduct the daily meeting with contractors? The
individual should be identified in the RA Work Plan. It is implied in the third
sentence that the GE on-site Representative and the Site Coordinator may not be
present. Will this meeting be conducted by the Resident Engineer?
-3-
• \
ATTACHMENT 1 CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS FOR SOILS REMEDIAL
ACTION AT GE SUBSITE
Response to NC DENR Comments
23. Although the response to NC DENR comment #55 is adequate, Paragraph 3.4.D.1
of Section 02225 should state that powdered bentonite or bentonite pellets shall
be hydrated in place for repairing all Shelby tube sample holes. Please correct this
oversight. ·
Specifications
24. Section 02221, Part 3.2 A -How will the limits of the excavation be located in the
field? Are there surveyed coordinates that the surveyors can measure in the field?
25. Section 02221, Part 3.2 C -Part 4 is referenced in this paragraph but-is not
included in this section.
26. Section 02221, Part 3.3 What provIsIons will be made to ensure that
contaminated material will not be spread to uncontaminated areas of the site during
loading and transport?
27. Section 02221, Part 3.4 -Does HSI Geotrans expect that any dewatering will be
required during the excavations? State the provisions that the contractor must take
to ensure that surface storm water will not flow into the excavations. Rain water ,
could pond in the excavation after a rainfall event and dewatering may be required.
28. Section 02223, Part 3.1 A 3 -The maximum loose lift thickness should be 8 inches.
Proper compaction would be difficult to reach using 12-inch lifts.
29. Section 02223,.Part 3.1 C 1 -Structural fill should be compacted to a minimum of
95% of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D-698.
30. Section 02223, Part 3.2 A -There is no acceptance/rejection criteria for the
physical tests listed.
31. Section 02225, Part 2.1 A and B 4 -The barrier soil should be classified as MH, ML,
CH, or CL. The minimum percentage passing the No: 200 sieve should be 50%.
It will likely be hard to achieve a 1.ox10·5 cm/sec maximum permeability using a
sandy soil. In addition, a sandy soil would be very hard to collect and extract using
a Shelby tube because the sample would fall apart.
-4-
' I • •
32. Section 02225, Part 3.4 D -The Shelby tube sampling hole should be repaired
using a bentonite soil mixture tamped in place by hand.
33. Section 02229, Part 3.1 -The section should include the measures to be taken to
ensure that contamination will not be spread outside of the OSI to other"areas of the
site on the wheels or the sides of the earthmoving equipment.
34. Section 02520, Part 3.1 A -How will the old pavement be disposed of?
35. The response to NC DENA comment #70 is inadequate. In accordance with the US
EPA Technical Guidance Document, Quality Assurance and Quality Control for
Waste Containment Facilities, "a sheet temperature of 50 degrees Celsius (122
degrees Fahrenheit) is the upper limit that a geomembrane should be unrolled or
unfolded unless it is shown otherwise to the satisfaction of the GOA engineer."
Please make the appropriate revisions.
36. Section 2900 of the Construction Specifications indicates that pegs or stakes shall
be used to secure sod on the sidE;? slopes. Please provide a detail drawing in the Design Drawings to verify that these pegs/stakes shall not endanger the integrity
of the underlying geomembrane. ·
ATTACHMENT 3 CONSTRUCTION HEALTH AND SAFETY/CONTINGENCY PLAN
37. The responses to US EPA 1comment #38 and NC DENA comment #78 are
inadequate in providing specific guidelines for work in and around the excavations.
The Construction Health and Safety/Contingency Plan must be specific in detailing
work procedures as they relate to safety and should not simply reference
appropriate regulations or guidance materials.
38. The response to NC DENA comment#79 is adequate. However, Table 10.1 should
reference the appropriate regulatory agency, the NC DENA. Please correct this
oversight.
39. The response to NC DENA comment #84 stated that the requested revisions were
made. However, the Table of Contents for Appendix B do not reflect Sections
2.3.1-6 or the correct page numbers for Sections 2.2, 3, 4, 4.1, 4.2 or 4.3. Please
correct this oversight.
40. The response to NC DENA comment #85 stated that the requested revisions were
made. However, the Table of Contents for Appendix C provides incorrect page numbers for each section. Please correct this oversight.
-5-
•
ATTACHMENT 4 CONSTRUCTION QUALITY ASSURANCE PLAN
General
41. The response to NC DENR comment #86 stated that the Construction Quality Assurance Plan (CQAP) was revised to incorporate the comments:· However, Sections 4.1, 4.2, and 4.3 of the CQAP do not accurately reflect the testing requirements or testing frequency as specified in the appropriate sections of the Construction Specifications included as Attachment 1. Furthermore, the following sections from the Construction Specifications have not been included in the CQAP:. Vegetative soil; Rock, Stone and Granular Material; Aggregate Base Course; Asphaltic Concrete Paving; and, Topsoil, Mulching and Seeding. As previously stated, please ensure that the CQAP encompasses all conformance testing as specified in the Construction Specifications as well as encompassing all comments made by the US EPA and the NC DENR.
42. The response to NC DENR comment #90 stated that the quality assuranc~ (QA) team responsibilities have been further defined. However, this section still states that HSI Geo Trans (HSIG) is to be responsible for quality assurance of the landfill cover construction. Although HSIG, as the engineering design firm, must participate in the quality assurance of the landfill cover construction, please provide justification for not employing an independent, third party for conducting quality assurance/quality control functions. Additionally, the Table of Contents should show that Section 1.3.4 begins on page 3. Please correct.this oversight.
43. The response to NC DENR comment #91 states that Section 2.3.4 describes the level of experience required fdr the QA monitor. Please revise the response to NC DENR comment #91 to state that Section 2.4.3 describes the level of experience required for the QA monitor. Furthermore, please revise the last sentence of the first item of Section 2.4.3 to state that "geosynthetic QA monitors will have NICET Level IV certification for geosynthetic materials inspection."
44. Page 18, Section 4.3.2, Item 9 -The repair should be made using a bentonite soil mix which is hand tamped into the hole. Experience has shown that pure bentonite can draw moisture from the surrounding soil causing substantial cracking.
45. Page 39, Section 4.7.2 -Section 03300 is not in the specifications.
ATTACHMENT 5 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE PLAN FOR THE DSI
46. The Operation and Maintenance Plan for the DSI does not specify any groundwater
monitoring requirements. Please correct this oversight.
-6-
\ •
FINAL (100%) REMEDIAL DESIGN FOR SOIL AT THE GENERAL ELECTRIC SUBSITE
GENERAL COMMENTS
47.--The text and figures still do not address all of the PCB contaminated areas in the western portion of the dry sludge impoundment (OSI). At least two areas with PCB contamination at concentrations of 13.7 and 14 ppm are shown lying to the west of the OSI cap. HSI Geo Trans should detail how they will ensure that these areas and all other areas which .are contaminated or potentially contaminated will be
rerriediated.
48. The design is only a partial cap. Some infiltration of rainwater will occur through the sides of the 3:1 horizontal to vertical embankment.
SPECIFIC COMMENTS
.. 49. Table of Contents -The heading for Section 1.5 should be placed on page 7 as indicated in the Table of Contents. Furthermore, the Table of Contents should show that Sections 5.10.1.1, 6, 7, 7.1, 7.2 and the References are on pages 28, 32, 33, 33, 33, and 37, respectively. The List of Figures should give the title and page number
of Figure 7.1 as "Schedule for soil remedial action at GE Subsite" and page 34, respectively. The List of Figures should also give the page number for Figure 7.2 as
page 35. Lastly, the List of Table should give the· page number for Table 7.1 as page 36. Please correct these oversights.
50. Page 5, 2nd paragraph -Add the word "some" before "residences" in the 3rd line.
51. Page 5, 3rd paragraph -The ROD was modified based on an ESD issued in September 1998. Please reword.
52. Page 5, Section 1.3 -Typo -change the first sentence from "shall be remediation" to shall be remediated".
53. Page 7, Section 1.5.1 -Please provide a description of the final cover to be placed over Landfi II A.
54. The response to NC DENA comment #8 and Section 1.5.1 of the Final RD do not indicate the material to be used for the final cover over Landfill A. Please correct this oversight.
55. The response to US EPA specific comment #6 refers to the response to US EPA
general comment #2. However, Sections 1.5.3 and 2.2 of the Final RD does not reflect the response to US EPA general comment #2. Please correct this oversight.
-7-
•
' 56. The response to US EPA general comment #4 states that a spot excavation is
· proposed for the small area near the OSI that exceeds the performance standard.
Section 1.5.3 of the Final RD states that a spot excavation is to be conducted on a
small area in the northwest corner that lies outside the fence and is adjacent to
Landfill A. Please detail how GE proposes to address the two additional areas to the
west of the OSI that exceed the PCB performance standard. Additionally, please
detail how GE proposes to ensure that PCB contamination along the fringes of the
fenced perimeter of the OSI is properly capped beneath the landfill cover.
57. The third sentence of Section 1.5.3 is a duplicate of the sixth sentence of this section
and may be deleted. Please correct this oversight.
58. Page 8, Section 1.5.3, Paragraph 3 -Typo -The sentence that begins with "Final
extent of excavation ... " is duplicated in this paragraph.
59. Page 8, Section 1.5.3, Paragraph 3 -The statement "The cap to be installed at the
OSI covers the entire unit with the exception of an area in the northwest corner that
lies outside the fence and is adjacent to Landfill A." is not true. The cap does not
cover the western edge of the OSI. All areas within the OSI that are contaminated
with PCB (>10 ppm) should either be covered with an impermeable cap or excavated
down to uncontaminated soil. Remediation of the contaminated areas within the OSI
should be discussed in detail in this section.
60. Figure 2-2, Extent of Landfill 8-The response to US EPA specific comment #3 stated
that the solid line on Figure 2-2 was labeled. However, Figure 2-2 of the Final RD
does not include this correction! Additionally, the areal extent of Landfill B, as shown
in Figure 2-2 of the Final RD, should be corrected to 0.14 acres. Please correct
these oversights.
61. Figure 2-2 -Please label the line that generally borders the site on the south and
east side.
62. Page 12, Section 2.2 -The text should include removal of the >10 ppm PCB material
located outside the limits of the proposed cap. ·
63. Figure 2-3, Extent of the OSI -The response to US EPA specific comment #5 and
Figure 2-3 in the Final RD do not address the request to delete from Figure 2-3 the
soil samples and soil sample results that do not pertain to the delineation of the OSI.
Please correct this oversight.
64. Page 12, Section 2.3-In the 2nd line, change the word "Performer" to "Performance".
65. Section 4.2, Disposal of Excavated Material -The second sentence of this section
-8-
should reference Sections 01450 and 02221 of the Construction Specifications.
Please correct this oversight.
66. Page 17, Section 4.2 -Section 4.8.2 is referenced but is not included in this
·· document.
There is nothing in the Specifications (Sections 02221 or 02229) which requires the
contractor to size the debris. Where and how will this sizing be accomplished? What
are the size restrictions for disposal in the DSI? In general, any debris.placed into
the DSI will pose a "compaction problem" to some extent. It is good that HSI
Geo Trans is requiring some control in the placement and compaction of the soil and
debris; however, it must be noted that the debris will have an impact on differential
settlement of the DSI cap.
This section should describe the measures that HSI Geo Trans will take to ensure that
contaminated soil/debris will not be spread to other areas of the site. Soil co_uld fall
off the trucks or be tracked on the tires which could potentially contaminate other
areas of the site. Will there be a designated loading/unloading zone? Will the trucks
be inspected aHer loading/unloading? Will all equipment leaving a potentially
contaminated area be decontaminated?
67. Page 17, Section 4.2 -The last sentence on this page discussed material that "GE
does not want to manage by long-term onsite storage". What kinds of material would
GE want to manage on a long term basis?
I
i .
68. Figure 5.1, Landfill Cap Cross Section, Typical -The third note included in Figure
5.1 is not necessary unless the seaming details are to be provided with this figure.
Please correct this oversight.
69. Page 21, Section 5.3 -In the 2nd sentence, delete the words "was proposed in the
30% design submittal and". This document is considered a draft, and will not be
finalized, therefore, it would not be subject to review by the public and should not be
referenced. Also on page 23, Section 5.4.
70. Section 5.3.2, Geo membrane (Flexible Membrane Liner) -The last paragraph of this
section should be restated and addressed in Section 5.4 as well. This section implies
that soil may be placed on the geomembrane. However, the geotextile/geonet
drainage layer is to be placed directly on the geomembrane .. Furthermore, additional
geomembrane and cushion geotextile will be inadequate to sufficiently protect the
underlying geomembrane. The US EPA Technical Guidance Document, Quality
Assurance and Quality Control for Waste Containment Facilities, recommends that
low ground pressure equipment of less than 5.0 pounds per square inch (psi) should
be used on geomembranes/geotextiles when less than one foot of cover soil is in
place. For lift heights greater than one foot, proportionately heavier_ placemen!
-9-
•
equipment can be used. Please make the appropriate revisions to this section and Section 5.4.
71. Section 5.5, Vegetative Cover -The last sentence of the first paragraph of this section should state that "further detail on vegetative soil and topsoil, mulching, and seeding are contained in specification Sections 02226 and 2900, respectively."
Please correct this oversight.
72. Page 25, Section 5.5, Top Paragraph -Typo -The section detailing Vegetative soil • is Section 02226 not Section 022226.
73. Page 25, Section 5.6 -Will the organics from the clearing and grubbing operations
be placed into the OSI? Section 4.2 indicates that this material will be excluded.
74. Page 32, Section 6 -If a problem is discovered, both USEPA and NC DENR must be
notified. This should not be at the discretion of GELS.
75. Page 33, Section 7 -The.schedule seems much too long (by at least 2 months) for the amount of work to be performed. Please submit a more realistic schedule.
76. Page 36, Section 7 -The cost estimate includes a line item for fences, posts, and gates. This seems to imply that at some point, the old fencing will be torn down. Please include verbage in the text and include ih the schedule.
ATTACHMENT 1 CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS FOR SOILS REMEDIAL
ACTION AT GE1 SUBSITE
77. Please address those comments as given above for Attachment 1 -Construction
Specifications for the Remedial Action Work Plan.
ATTACHMENT 2 DESIGN CALCULATIONS
Slope Stability Calculations
78. The first sentence of Section B of these calculations should state that "the side slope for the fill area is proposed to be 3:1 (33%) or 18.4 degrees." Please correct this oversight.
79. The third sentence of Section B states that the side slope does not have any geomembrane or geocomposite which could cause a slip plane. Please provide the details as to how GE proposes to construct a landfill cover with a permeability no greater than 10·7 centimeters per second (emfs) over the entire landfill, including the side slopes, without including a geomembrane and geotextile/geonet for the side slopes. (Page 8 of the RD states that "The cap to be installed at the OSI covers the entire unit.")
-10-
80. The maximum height of the slope is 20 feet. HSI used a critical height of only 8 feet.
The slope stability analysis should consider all materials within the slope to
reasonable depths.
81. ·· HSI Geo Trans assumed a moist unit density of 130 pcf for SC, SM, or ML soils. This
value is too high.
82. HSI GeoTrans considered water to be on top of the landfill but none on the side
slopes. It would be more conservative to assume some water will infiltrate into the
side slopes.
Settlement Calculations
83. No consideration has been given to the settlement of the existing dry sludge
previously placed into the OSI. The added weight of the waste fill and the cap could
cause the underlying dry sludge to settle significantly.
84. The settlement analysis should be computed at different locations within the OSI:
The calculation should use the full thicknesses of the backfilled material and
underlying sludge and then determine the maximum differential settlement per foot
of horizontal lengths for the data generated.
PREFINAL DESIGN CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS
I 85. General -Although the response to NC DENR comment #99 addressed some of the
requested items, the Final Design Construction Drawings do not include drawings of
necessary items such as the site layout, temporary buildings, job trailers,
decontamination facilities, etc. The design drawings must detail all components for
the excavation of the Landfill A and Landfill Band all components for the construction
of the landfill cover, including ancillary items. Please correct these oversights.
86. Drawing No. 1 indicates the approximate locations of four wetlands. However,
although Drawings 1-3 reference the protection of wetlands in accordance with the
Section 01800 of the Construction Specifications, none of the submitted documents
including Section 01800 present any specific details how the wetlands are to be
protected. The submitted documents must provide specific details how GE proposes
to mitigate impacts to these wetlands. Please correct these oversights.
Furthermore, the previous submittal indicated that the southern tip of Landfill B lies
in a wetland. However, this submittal indicates that the wetland lies approximately
12 feet from the tip of Landfill B. Please provide justification for this delineation of the
wetland considering that the GE response to US EPA specific comment #28 indicated
that the wetlands had not been delineated as of yet.
-11-
•
87. Although the response to NC DENR comment #102 is acceptable, the first note for
Drawing No. 2 should state that the "expected maximum depth of excavation shall be
8 feet below existing grade or as determined by confirmation sampling." Please
correct this oversight.
88. Drawing No. 3 -The top central portion of the drawing -The reference for "Land for
Contractor's Use" should be Note 12 not Note 10. ·
89. The cap cross-sections included as Drawing No. 5 do not show the geomembrane,
geotextile/geonet drainage layer and barrier soils extend to the outer edges of the
cap system. Please· correct these deficiencies.
·,
90. The cap cross-sections included as Drawing No. 6 do not show the geomembrane,
geotextile/geonet drainage layer and barrier soils extend to, the outer edges of the
cap system. Please correct these deficiencies.
91. The cap cross-sections included as Drawing No. 7 do not show the geomembrane,
geotextile/geonet drainage layer and barrier soils extend to the outer edges of the
cap system. Please correct these deficiencies. ·
92. Drawing No. 8 has not been modified from the original submittal and still does not
provide details as to how the crown of the landfill cap and the side slopes are to
interact. Furthermore, it appears that GE intends to place the geomembrane and
geotextile/geonet only over the crown of the landfill cover. This is not acceptable.
The cover must be placed over the entire landfill, including the side slopes. Please
make the appropriate revisions to this drawing and to all other appropriate
attachments, including the design calculations.
Landfill Design
93. The designed slopes across the top portion of the OSI are very gentle (3%). The
minimum slope should be 5%. Slopes of less that 5% can lead to significant ponding
problems if any differential settlement occurs.
94. The side slopes in the vicinity of grid 4+50 N and 2+50 N appear to be at 2.5:1
horizontal to vertical. Slopes this steep can be difficult to build and can lead to
significant erosion problems. The slope should be redesigned to a 3:1 horizontal to
vertical grade.
95. The design is only a partial cap. HSI Geo Trans should calculate the actual leakage
rate through the compacted fill and the existing berm on the 3:1 vertical slope.
-12-
..
North Carolina State University is •d-
grant university and a constituent institution
of The University of North Carolina
Office of Finance and Business
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer Business Division
October 13, 1998
Michael Townsend
Superfund Branch, Waste Management Division
US EPA Region IV
Atlanta Federal Center
100 Alabama Street, SW
Atlanta, GA 30303-3104
Dear Michael:
RECEI\/F'·.
OCT 19 1998
SUPERFLJl,!D
Campus Box 7228 / 203 Holladay Hall
Raleigh, North Carolina 27695-7228
919.515.2146 (phone}
919.515.1521 (fax}
The University has received Environmental Protection Agency comments on the Pre-Final
Soil Remediation Design included in the October I, 1998 letter to Duane Knudson, and
the University is preparing its response to those comments. However, because of the
nature ofa few of the comments, and not having received any previous Agency
comments, we believe that it is important to share some concerns.
The University has provided the Agency with opportunities to review and comment upon
project plans and design documents as required by the project schedule. These submittals
have been provided according to the project schedule as follows:
January 28, 1998 Treatability Study Plan
Health and Safety Plan
Remedial Design Work Plan
Sampling and Analysis Plan
March 6, 1998 Results of Data Acquisition Activities
Design Criteria Report -Preliminary
Plans and Specifications -Preliminary
Plan for Satisfying Permitting Requirements
These preliminary submittals lead to the June 30 Pre-Final Design (90% complete) set of
documents, which are the subject of the October I Agency comments.
June 30, 1998 Design Criteria Report
Construction Management Plan
Project Delivery Strategy
Construction Quality Assurance Plan
Remedial Action Work Plan
Performance Standards Verification Plan
Construction Health and Safety Plan/Contingency Plan
Plans and Specifications
Michael Townsend
Page 2
October 13, 1998
•
The University received North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources comments from the Agency on July 13, 1998, which was too late to incorporate
the State's comments into the June 30 Pre-Final Design package.
Although both the State and EPA offer many valid comments, it would have been most
useful to have received comments on design issues on the previously submitted material.
To receive our first set of detailed comments on implementation of the ROD-mandated
remedy ten weeks before the December 16 Preconstruction Conference, is troublesome.
The University and its contractors are fully committed to implementing the ROD-
mandated remedy safely and effectively and on the agreed-upon schedule. However, if
there are comments which cannot be resolved without additional site data collection or
which result in significant design revisions, then due to the late receipt of this guidance,
the remediation implementation may be delayed.
This is significant since substantial effort has been expended, including resource
commitments within the University and with its contractors, to achieve our project
schedule. A summer implementation would be almost impossible due to the time limits
on working in personal protective equipment. Also, with the Entertainment and Sports
Arena scheduled to open in the fall of 1999 in the general vicinity of Lot 86, there will be
additional complications associated with implementing the soil remediation next winter.
In this context, I encourage the Agency to provide focused and timely guidance as we take
this step that we have all worked so hard to achieve.
Sincerely,
Jeff Mann
Associate Vice Chancellor for Business
cc: v1>avid Matison, NCDENR
Sylvia Thibaut, NC Attorney General's Office
Charles Case, Hunton and Williams
Mary Elizabeth Kurz, NC State
David Rainer, NC State
Duane Knudson, NC State
. ..
;f;~~c5t::~~.
;;~~
~f.~.)f: ~,,,,;;""':
ft-'-i!:.:!--r~-e;; .. :. · . -·: t
~~'.. _,.·. '~-
. , ._ .. ~.
Ms. Giezelle Bennett
Superfund Branch
Waste Management Division
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WASTE MANAGEMENT
October 7, I 998
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Region TV
61 Forsyth Street, 11 th Floor
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
RE: Final (I 00%) Remedial Design for Soils at the GE Subsite
Remedial Action Work Plan for Soils at GE Subsite
General Electric/Shepherd Farm NPL Site
East Flat Rock, Henderson County
Dear Ms. Bennett:
The above documents for the General Electric/Shepherd Farm National Priorities List
(NPL) Site were received by the Superfund Section of the North Carolina Department
of Environment and Natural Resources (NC DENR). The Superfund Section has
reviewed the Final (I 00%) Remedial Design for Soils at the GE Subsite and the
Remedial Action Work Plan for Soils at GE Subsite and offers the following attached
comments.
We appreciate the opportunity to comment on these documents. If you have any
questions, please feel free to call me at [phone], extension 349.
Sincerely, py Z/t(ft,e~~~
David B. Mattison, CHMM
Environmental Engineer
Superfund Section
!JS.tr.~<.:
~::i;:-i Attachment <'...:""'Y_!f::.g"-• ~•:;i·.:.. ..... ~· ~N~; --_..,,...,,
~~~;"~~)
·"'~~~---•:' le,<-.,;,_,,,-._
~.r.-i~~~i:ti•.~ -·: ~~~ . ' . ~·
¼1r.&"r& ...
tflk~~-,. -~2 401 OBERLIN ROAD, SUITE 150, RALEIGH, NC 2.7605
PHONE [phone] FAX 919-71 5•3605
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/ AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER· 50% RECYCLED/10% POST-CONSUMER PAPER
Ms. Giezelle Bennett
October 7, 1998
Pagel
•
REMEDIAL ACTION WORK PLAN FOR SOILS AT GE SUBSITE
Response to US EPA General Comments
1. The response to US EPA general comment #4 states that a spot excavation is proposed for
the small area near the Dry Sludge Impoundment (DSI) that exceeds the performance
standard. Section 2.4.4 of the revised document states that a spot excavation is to be
conducted on a small area in the northwest corner that lies outside the fence and is adjacent
to Landfill A. Please detail how General Electric (GE) proposes to address the two
additional areas to the west of the DSI that exceed the polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB)
performance standard. Additionally, please detail how GE proposes to ensure that PCB
contamination along the fringes of the fenced perimeter of the DSI is properly capped
beneath the landfill cover.
Response to US EPA Specific Comments
2. The response to US EPA specific comment #3 stated that the solid line on Figure 2-2 was
labelled. However, Figure 2-2 of the revised document does not include this correction.
Additionally, the areal extent of Landfill B, as shown in Figure 2-2 of the revised document,
should be corrected to 0.14 acres. Please correct these oversights.
3. The response to US EPA specific comment #5 and Figure 2-3 in the revised document do not
address the request to delete from Figure 2-3 the soil samples and soil sample results that do
not pertain to the delineation of the DSI. Please correct this oversight.
4. The response to US EPA specific comment #6 refers to the response to US EPA general
comment #2. However, Sections 2.1 and 2.4.2 of the revised document does not reflect the
response to US EPA general comment #2. Please correct this oversight.
5. The response to US EPA specific comment #13 is acceptable. However, Section 4.2 of the
Final Remedial Design (Final RD) report does not state that all contaminated soil will remain
on GE property (although the last sentence of Section 4.6.2 of this document does make this
statement). Furthermore, a specific reference to the designated truck routes into the DSI,
as depicted in the design drawings, should be made in Section 4.6.2. Please correct these
oversights.
Ms. Giezelle Bennett
October 7, 1998
Page 2
Response to NC DENR Comments
•
6. The response to NC DENR comments #4 and #5 stated that the List of Figures was corrected.
However, the List of Figures in the revised document does not include these corrections.
Additionally, the title of Figure 8.1 should be shown as "Organizational Chart" in the List
of Figures. Please correct these oversights.
7. The response to NC DENR comment #8 and Section 2.2.2 of the revised document do not
indicate the material to be used for the final cover over Landfill A. Please correct this
oversight.
8. The response to NC DENR comment #11 should state "Refer to response to EPA general
comment no. 4." Please correct this oversight.
9. The response to NC DENR comment #13 is adequate. However, the second sentence of the
second paragraph of Section 3.1.1 should reference Sections 01450 and 02221 of the
Construction Specifications. Furthermore, the fourth sentence of the second paragraph of
Section 3.1.1 should state that "this soil will be tested in accordance with Specification
02222 ... " Please correct these oversights.
10. The response to NC DENR comment #17, Section 3.1.2 and Figure 3.1 of the revised
document describe a decision tree for the collection and analysis of confirmation samples for
volatile organic compound (VOC) content. However, the decision tree does not provide for
further excavation of soils in the event that less than ten soil samples containing VOCs in
excess of the North Carolina Soil Remediation Goals are encountered. Please revise the text
and the figure accordingly.
11. Although the response to NC DENR comment #29 is acceptable, the last sentence in Section
4.6.1 should state "All other utilities within the RA Work Area are controlled by GE and will
be relocated or disabled ... " Please correct this oversight.
12. Although the response to NC DENR comment #30 is adequate, the second sentence of the
fourth paragraph of Section 4.7 should state that" ... abandonment pr?cedures are specified
in the North Carolina Administrative Code (Title ISA, Subchapter 2C, Section 0113)."
Please correct this oversight.
13. The response to NC DENR comment #32 should state "Refer to response to EPA specific
comment no. 17." Please correct this oversight.
Ms. Giezelle Bennett
October 7, 1998
Page 3
•
ATTACHMENT 1 CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS FOR SOILS REMEDIAL
ACTION AT GE SUBSITE
Response to NC DENR Comments
14. Although the response to NC DENR comment #55 is adequate, Paragraph 3.4.D. l of Section
02225 should state that powdered bentonite or bentonite pellets shall be hydrated in place
for repairing all Shelby tube sample holes. Please correct this oversight.
15. The response to NC DENR comment #70 is inadequate. In accordance with the US EPA
Technical Guidance Document, Quality Assurance and Quality Control for Waste
Containment Facilities, "a sheet temperature of 50 degrees Celsius (122 degrees Fahrenheit)
is the upper limit that a geomembrane should be unrolled or unfolded unless it is shown
otherwise to the satisfaction of the CQA engineer." Please make the appropriate revisions.
16. Section 2900 of the Construction Specifications indicates that pegs or stakes shall be used
to secure sod on the sideslopes. Please provide a detail drawing in the Design Drawings to
verify that these pegs/stakes shall not endanger the integrity of the underlying geomembrane.
ATTACHMENT 3 CONSTRUCTION HEALTH AND SAFETY/CONTINGENCY PLAN
17. The responses to US EPA comment #38 and NC DENR comment #78 are inadequate in
providing specific guidelines for work in and around the excavations. The Construction
Health and Safety/Contingency Plan must be specific in detailing work procedures as they
relate to safety and should not simply reference appropriate regulations or guidance
materials.
18. The response to NC DENR comment #79 is adequate. However, Table IO. I should reference
the appropriate regulatory agency, the NC DENR. Please correct this oversight.
19. The response to NC DENR comment #84 stated that the requested revisions were made.
However, the Table of Contents for Appendix B do not reflect Sections 2.3 .1-6 or the correct
page numbers for Sections 2.2, 3, 4, 4.1, 4.2 or 4.3. Please correct this oversight.
20. The response to NC DENR comment #85 stated that the requested revisions were made.
However, the Table of Contents for Appendix C provides incorrect page numbers for each
section. Please correct this oversight.
Ms. Giezelle Bennett
October 7, 1998
Page 4
•
ATTACHMENT 4 CONSTRUCTION QUALITY ASSURANCE PLAN
General
21. The response to NC DENR comment #86 stated that the Construction Quality Assurance
Plan (CQAP) was revised to incorporate the comments. However, Sections 4.1, 4.2, and 4.3
of the CQAP do not accurately reflect the testing requirements or testing frequency as
specified in the appropriate sections of the Construction Specifications included as
Attachment I. Furthermore, the following sections from the Construction Specifications
have not been included in the CQAP: Vegetative soil; Rock, Stone and Granular Material;
Aggregate Base Course; Asphaltic Concrete Paving; and, Topsoil, Mulching and Seeding.
As previously stated, please ensure that the CQAP encompasses all conformance testing as
specified in the Construction Specifications as well as encompassing all comments made by
the US EPA and the NC DENR.
22. The response to NC DENR comment #90 stated that the quality assurance (QA) team
responsibilities have been further defined. However, this see;tion still states that HSI
Geo Trans (HSIG) is to be responsible for quality assurance of the landfill cover construction.
Although HSIG, as the engineering design firm, must participate in the quality assurance of
the landfill cover construction, please provide justification for not employing an independent,
third party for conducting quality assurance/quality control functions. Additionally, the
Table of Contents should show that Section 1.3.4 begins on page 3. Please correct this
oversight.
23. The response to NC DENR comment #91 states that Section 2.3.4 describes the level of
experience required for the QA monitor. Please revise the response to NC DENR comment
#91 to state that Section 2.4.3 describes the level of experience required for the QA monitor.
Furthermore, please revise the last sentence of the first item of Section 2.4.3 to state that
"geosynthetic QA monitors will have NICET Level IV certification for geosynthetic
materials inspection."
ATTACHMENT 5 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE PLAN FOR THE DSI
24. The Operation and Maintenance Plan for the DSI does not specify any groundwater
monitoring requirements. Please correct this oversight.
Ms. Giezelle Bennett
October 7, 1998
Page 5
•
F1NAL (100%) REMEDIAL DESIGN FOR SOIL AT THE GENERAL ELECTRIC SUBSITE
Table of Contents
25. The heading for Section 1.5 should be placed on page 7 as indicated in the Table of Contents.
Furthermore, the Table of Contents should show that Sections 5.10.1.1, 6, 7, 7.1, 7.2 and the
References are on pages 28, 32, 33, 33, 33, and 37, respectively. The List of Figures should
give the title and page number of Figure 7.1 as "Schedule for soil remedial action at GE
Subsite" and page 34, respectively. The List of Figures should also give the page number for
Figure 7.2 as page 35. Lastly, the List of Table should give the page number for Table 7.1
as page 36. Please correct these oversights.
Section 1.5.1 Landfill A
26. The response to NC DENR comment #8 and Section 1.5.1 of the Final RD do not indicate
the material to be used for the final cover over Landfill A. Please correct this oversight.
Section 1.5.3 Dry Sludge lmpoundment
27. The response to US EPA specific comment #6 refers to the response to US EPA general
comment #2. However, Sections 1.5.3 and 2.2 of the Final RD does not reflect the response
to US EPA general comment #2. Please correct this oversight.
28. The response to US EPA general comment #4 states that a spot excavation is proposed for
the small area near the DSI that exceeds the performance standard. Section 1.5.3 of the Final
RD states that a spot excavation is to be conducted on a small area in the northwest comer
that lies outside the fence and is adjacent to Landfill A. Please detail how GE proposes to
address the two additional areas to the west of the DSI that exceed the PCB performance
standard. Additionally, please detail how GE proposes to ensure that PCB contamination
along the fringes of the fenced perimeter of the DSI is properly capped beneath the landfill
cover.
29. The third sentence of Section 1.5.3 is a duplicate of the sixth sentence of this section and may
be deleted. Please correct this oversight.
Figure 2-2 Extent of Landfill B
30. The response to US EPA specific comment #3 stated that the solid line on Figure 2-2 was
labelled. However, Figure 2-2 of the Final RD does not include this correction.
Additionally, the areal extent of Landfill B, as shown in Figure 2-2 of the Final RD, should
be corrected to 0.14 acres. Please correct these oversights.
Ms. Giezelle Bennett
October 7, 1998
Page 6
Figure 2-3 Extent of the DSI
•
31. The response to US EPA specific comment #5 and Figure 2-3 in the Final RD do not address
the request to delete from Figure 2-3 the soil samples and soii sample results that do not
pertain to the delineation of the OSI. Please correct this oversight.
Section 4.2 Disposal of Excavated Material
32. The second sentence of this section should reference Sections 01450 and 02221 of the
Construction Specifications. Please correct this oversight.
Figure 5.1 Landfill Cap Cross Section, Typical
33. The third note included in Figure 5.1 is not necessary unless the seaming details are to be
provided with this figure. Please correct this oversight.
Section 5.3.2 Geomembrane (Flexible Membrane Liner)
34. The last paragraph of this section should be restated and addressed in Section 5.4 as well.
This section implies that soil may be placed on the geomembrane. However, the
geotextile/geonet drainage layer is to be placed directly on the geomembrane. Furthermore,
additional geomembrane and cushion geotextile will be inadequate to sufficiently protect the
underlying geomembrane. The US EPA Technical Guidance Document, Quality Assurance
and Quality Control for Waste Containment Facilities, recommends that low ground pressure
equipment of less than 5.0 pounds per square inch (psi) should be used on
geomembranes/geotextiles when less than one foot ofcover soil is in place. For lift heights
greater than one foot, proportionately heavier placement equipment can be used. Please
make the appropriate revisions to this section and Section 5.4.
Section 5.5 Vegetative Cover
35. The last sentence of the first paragraph of this section should state that "further detail on
vegetative soil and topsoil, mulching, and seeding are contained in specification Sections
02226 and 2900, respectively." Please correct this oversight.
ATTACHMENT I CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS FOR SOILS REMEDIAL
ACTION AT GE SUBSITE
36. Please address those comments as given above for Attachment I -Construction
Specifications for the Remedial Action Work Plan.
Ms. Giezelle Bennett
October 7, I 998
Page 7
ATTACHMENT 2 DESIGN CALCULATIONS
Slope Stability Calculations
•
37. The first sentence of Section B of these calculations should state that "the side slope for the
fill area is proposed to be 3: I (33%) or 18.4 degrees." Please correct this oversight.
38. The third sentence of Section B states that the side slope does not have any geomembrane
or geocomposite which could cause a slip plane. Please provide the details as to how GE
proposes to construct a landfill cover with a permeability no greater than I 0-7 centimeters per
second (emfs) over the entire landfill, including the sideslopes, without including a
geomembrane and geotextile/geonet for the sideslopes.
PREFINAL DESIGN CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS
General
39. Although the response to NC DENR comment #99 addressed some of the requested items,
the Final Design Construction Drawings do not include drawings of necessary items such as
the site layout, temporary buildings, job trailers, decontamination facilities, etc. The design
drawings must detail all components for the excavation of the Landfill A and Landfill B and
all components for the construction of the landfill cover, including ancillary items. Please
correct these oversights.
Drawing No. 1 Site Plan Existing Features
40. Drawing No. 1 indicates the approximate locations of four wetlands. However, although
Drawings 1-3 reference the protection of wetlands in accordance with the Section 01800 of
the Construction Specifications, none of the submitted documents including Section 0 1800
present any specific details how the wetlands are to be protected. The submitted documents
must provide specific details how GE proposes to mitigate impacts to these wetlands. Please
correct these oversights. Furthermore, the previous submittal indicated that the southern
tip of Landfill B lies in a wetland. However, this submittal indicates that the wetland lies
approximately 12 feet from the tip of Landfill B. Please provide justification for this
delineation of the wetland considering that the GE response to US EPA specific comment
#28 indicated that the wetlands had not been delineated as of yet.
Drawing No. 2 Landfill B Excavation and Site Plan
41. Although the response to NC DENR comment #102 is acceptable, the first note for Drawing
No. 2 should state that the "expected maximum depth of excavation shall be 8 feet below
existing grade or as determined by confirmation sampling." Please correct this oversight.
-· .
I • • •
Ms. Giezelle Bennett
October 7, 1998
Page 8
Drawing No. 5
• •
Cap Cross-Sections
42. The cap cross-sections included as Drawing No. 5 do not show the geomembrane,
geotextile/geonet drainage layer and barrier soils extend to the outer edges of the cap system.
Please correct these deficiencies.
Drawing No. 6 Cap Cross-Sections
43. The cap cross-sections included as Drawing No. 6 do not show the geomembrane,
geotextile/geonet drainage layer and barrier soils extend to the outer edges of the cap system.
Please correct these deficiencies.
Drawing No. 7 Cap Cross-Sections
44. The cap cross-sections included as Drawing No. 7 do not show the geomembrane,
geotextile/geonet drainage layer and barrier soils extend to the outer edges of the cap system.
Please correct these deficiencies.
Drawing No. 8 Cap Details
45. Drawing No. 8 has not been modified from the original submittal and still does not provide
details as to how the crown of the landfill cap and the sideslopes are to interact.
Furthermore, it appears that GE intends to place the geomembrane and geotextile/geonet only
over the crown of the landfill cover. This is not acceptable. The cover must be placed over
the entire landfill, including the sideslopes. Please make the appropriate revisions to this
drawing and to all other appropriate attachments, including the design calculations.
• I
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 4
61 Forsyth Street
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3104 ·
September 11, 1998
4WD-NSMB
Mr. Lee Humphrey
Senior Environmental Engineer
GE Lighting Systems, Inc
3010 Spartanburg Highway
Hendersonville, NC 28792
SUBJ: GE/Shepherd Farm NPL Site
East Flat Rock, NC
Dear Mr. Humphrey:
RECEIVED
SEP 16 1998
SUPERFUND SECTION
Enclosed are the NCDENR's comments on the Remedial Design submittal dated
August 13, 1998 and the Draft Final Remedial Action Work Plan dated August 1998. I As stated previously, please incorpo~ate the comments and submi_t the final Remedial
Design documents to the Agency no later than September 21, 1998. In addition,
please submit a separate letter report that states how the comment was incorporated
into the final reports .
. If you have any questions, please give me a call at 404/562-8824.
cc: Dave Mattison, NC DENR
zelle S. Bennett
Remedial Project Manager
Todd Hagemeyer, HSI Geotrans
Lynn France, COM
• •
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 4
61 Forsyth Street ·
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3104
4WD-NSMB
Mr. Lee Humphrey
Senior Environmental Engineer
GE Lighting Systems, Inc
3010 Spartanburg Highway
Hendersonville, NC 28792
September 4, 1998
SUBJ: GE/Shepherd Farm NPL Site
East Flat Rock, NC
Dear Mr. Humphrey:
RECEIVE[>
SEP 09 7998
SUPERFUNO SECTION
Enclosed are the Agency's comments on the Remedial Design submittal dated
August 13, 1998 and the Draft Final Remedial Action Work Plan dated August 1998.
NC DENR comments will be forwarded no later than September 10, 1998. Please ' . incorporate the comments and subm1t the final Remedial Design documents to the
Agency no later than September 21, 1998. In addition, please submit a separate letter
report that states how the comment was incorporated into the final-reports.
If you have any questions, please give me a call at 404/56208824.
Sincerely,
czt.&~
Remedial Project Manager
cc: Dave Mattison, NC DENR
Todd Hagemeyer, HSI Geotrans
Lynn France, COM
\ • •
REMEDIAL DESIGN/REMEDIAL ACTION COMMENTS
GENERAL
1. The 30% RD Report was submitted on February 7, 1998; the 60% or Interim RD
Report was submitted on August 10, 1998. The drawings and specs are only
one component of the RD Report. Please provide a final RD report (8½ x 11)
that provides the RD details in addition to the revised drawings and specs. The
August 10, 1998 Report can be considered a draft of this report. It does not
need to discuss 'Proposed Modifications to the ROD Remedy',.but needs to
include a background, ROD section (ESD version), excavation, sampling, and
backfill criteria for Landfills A and B, and details of the cap.for the DSI, including
8½ x 11 figures.
2. The landfill cover should be designed in accordance with 40 CFR 264. Please
revise accordingly. ·
-3. The design provides the general idea regarding the top cover system and the
side slope fill layer. However, it is not clear on how the cover system and the
side slope layer will interact. Please provide details. '
4. The text, figures and drawings do not address the area of PCB contamination on
the northwest side of the dry sludge impoundment (OSI) that is outside of the
OSI fence. Figure 2-3 clearly indicates that surface soils in this area have
concentrations exceeding the cleanup level. This area nee.ds to be addressed in
the design. /
5. As required by the Consent Decree, a construction cost estimate should be
submitted with the Prefinal Design.
SPECIFIC COMMENTS
1.
2.
3.
4.
Page 5, Section 1.2 Delete the last sentence of this section.
Page 10, Section 2.2.2 The worse-case scenario of excavating the entire landfill
to a depth of nine feet should be used as the upper range instead of eight feet.
Figure 2-2. Please label the solid line that generally borders the site to the
south on this figure.
Page 12, Section 2.3.2. Will the clean fill be seeded? It appears that the road
will be excavated; will a new road be built on the clean fill?
•
5. Figure 2-3. This figure depicts an area that is outside of the fenced DSI, but was
found to have PCB contaminated surface soil at concentrations greater than 1 0
ppm. How will this area be addressed? This should be discussed in the text. If
the area is to be capped, the design drawings should be revised to indicate this.
If this area is to be excavated this should also be shown on drawings.
For the comment above, if these samples represent Landfill A, then they should
be removed from this figure. This figure is titled "Extent of the DSI" and can be
misleading.
6. Page 14, Section 2.4.2. Per the ARARs listed in the ROD from both State and
Federal regulations, the cover is supposed to be designed as a hazardous solid
waste landfill cover, RCRA Subtitle C, 40 CFR 264. Please revise design
accordingly and add reference to the design regulations.
7. Page 14, Section 2.4.3. As required by the Consent Decree Appendix B, an
Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Plan must be prepared as part of the pre-
final/final design submittals and not as part of the post-clos·ure activilies. Please
prepare and submit the O&M plan.
8. Page 15, Section 3.1.2. How will the confirmatton sampling locations be staked
on the bottom and side wall of the excavation when the excavation depth
exceeds that which is safe to enter?
9. Page 15, Section 3.1.1 How will the Engineer determine if material is 'clean'?
Hopefully by analysis, and not by visual observatio_n. Please explain.
10. Page 15, Section 3.1.2 A 50-ft grid seems rather large for Landfill B. The grid
needs to be smaller to ensure that confirmation does not hinge on only one or
·two samples.
11. Page 18, first complete sentence. The criteria that the Resident Engineer will
use to determine if the soil is clean, and the procedures for segregating that soil
for later use as backfill, should be described in the text.
12. Page 18, Section 3.2 Final restoration needs to be specified. This is the final
RD and the final restoration needs to be specified for both landfills.
13. Page 24, Section 4.6.2 The specific route for the disposal of Landfill B materials
into the OSI needs to be spelled out. It needs lb be emphasized that all
contaminants will remain on GE's property and will not be transported on
Spartanburg Hwy.
14. Page 25, Section 4.7, second paragraph, third sentence. Please identify the
State and local agency requirements.
• •
15. Page 26. first paragraph. Please explain how the extra fluid (generated from
decontamination procedures) will affect the compacted material.
16. Page 27. Section 4.8.2 .• first sentence. Please reference the specifications in
Attachment 1 that this statement applies to.
17. Page 27. Section 4.8.2. What criteria will be used to determine if the debris is
approved for disposal in the OSI.
18. Page 27. Section 4.8.2. last sentence. EPA do~s not approve disposal options.
As stated in the work plan. debris must be disposed at an appropriate facility in
accordance with all applicable regulations. Please revise text.
19. Page 33. Section 7.1.2. first sentence. Who will conduct the daily briefing? It is
implied in the third sentence that the GE Onsite representative and the Site
Coordinator may not be present.
20. Page 39. Section 8.2. Proiect Schedule The project schedule should-include a
prefinal and final inspection as described in the Consent Decree.
21. Page 44. Section 8.3 Reporting. This section should include a description of the
Final Construction Report to be submitted within 30 days of the final inspection.
22. Page 45. Section 8.3.4. second sentence. This sentence should be revised to
state that "A Remedial Action Report will be submitted within 90 days after
completion of the RA work". /
~ 23. Attachment 1. Section 02225. The minimum hydraulic conductivity for low
permeability soil layer in a RCRA Subtitle C landfill cover is 1x10·7 cm/s or less.
Please revise accordingly.
24. Attachment 1. Section 02229. Please provide details on how the daily disposal
of spent fluids and wash water from decontamination activities (as discussed in
the work plan) will be conducted.
~ 25. Attachment 1. Section 02229. 3.3.B. Please explain how the ·moisture content
will be maintained when the spent fluids and wash water from decontamination
activities are disposed daily in the OSI.
26. Attachment 5. See comment for Attachment 1. Section 02225.
27. Attachment 5. Please provide calculations on soil erosion loss and slope
stability.
•
28. Drawing 2. The area of excavation is shown as including some wetland areas.
The text should include some discussion of the potential impact to wetlands and
precautions taken to minimize the impacts. Will the boundaries of the wetlands
be delineated in the field prior to construction start-up?
29. Drawing 2 Note 1 states that the maximum depth of excavation will be 8 ft. The
text states that the excavation will be continued until performance standards are
met. The note should be revised to state that this is the "expected maximum
depth" or should be removed.
30. Drawing 3. Note 1 on this drawing states that the maximum depth of excavation
is 8 ft. The text of Section 2.2.1 (Current Description) states that buried material
was observed at a depth of 9 feet, and Section 2.2.2 (Remedial Approach) states
that the volume estimate is based on a depth of 9 feet. The Note should be
revised or removed. The text in Section 3.1.4 states that excavation will proceed ·
until the performance criteria are met.
31 Drawing 4. The contaminated area on the northwest corner of the OSI ( see
Figure 2~3), that extends beyond the DSI fence needs to be addressed. The
area should be excavated, with material placed in the OSI, or included within the
cap.
' 32 Drawing 4. The fence on the northern edge of the OSI appears to cut across the
cap. The drawing should be revised to indicate that the capped area will be
enclosed by a fence.
!
33. Drawing 4. The reference to "Note 1" next to the Gas Vent Trench, should be
revised to "Note 7"
34. Drawing 4. How deep is the buried pipe shown to the north of the DSI? It
appears that the northern haul route will cross this pipe. What precautions will
be taken to prevent damage to this pipe from the heavy traffic?
35. Drawing 8. This drawing should include a detail of the cons_truction of the
geosynthetic seams and a detail of the construction of a typical geosynthetic
patch. ·
36. Drawing 8, Detail 1. Please provide details on how the top cover and side
slopes interact.
37. Drawing 8, Detail 2. Eighteen inches of compacted low permeability soil layer
should be maintained throughout the cover, even under the drainage system.
Please adjust the detail.
• ••
38. Attachment 3 {HASP) Excavations are included by reference in Section 9
(Confined Space Entry), and by reference to 29 CFR 1926.650 through
1926.652 in Section 3.1 (Physical Hazards). However, due to the significant
excavation work that will be conducted during the remedial action, it is
suggested that more specific guidelines for work in and around the excavations
be clearly presented in the health and safety plan.
39. Attachment 4, Construction Quality Assurance Plan /CQAPJ. Per the Consent
Decree, the CQAP should identify members of the independent quality
assurance team (IQAT). It appears that the "team" is identified in Section 1.3.4,
Quality Assurance Team, however only one member, the design engineer, is
identified by role. The Team should be identified by name and qualifications.
40. Attachment 4 Section 2 This Section should list the name of each person
assigned a QA function.
41. Attachment 4. Any quality assurance laboratories should be identified by name.
42. Attachment 4 Per the consent decree, the CQAP should include a schedule for
managing submittals, testing, inspections, and any other Of. function (including
those of contractors, subcontractors, fabricators, suppliers, etc.) that involve
assuring quality workmanship, verifying compliance with the plans and
specifications or any other QA objective.
43. Attachment 4 The CQAP should include a description of inspections that verify
compliance with all environm~ntal requirements (e.g., air monitoring and waste
disposal records). · · '
• • \
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 4
61 Forsyth Street
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3104
4WD-NSRB
Mr. Lee Humphrey
Senior Environmental Engineer
GE Lighting Systems, Inc
3010 Spartanburg Highway
Hendersonville, NC 28792
SUBJ: GE/Shepherd Farm NPL Site
East Flat Rock, NC
Dear Mr. Humphrey: ·
July 16, 1998
RECEIVED
JUL201998
SUPERFUND SECTION
Enclosed are the Agency's comments on the Interim Report on Remedial Design for Soil dated June 30, 1998. Comments from NC DENA will be transmitted no later than July 27, 1998. This document will be used as the basis for the Explanation of Significant Differences (ESD) which will change the remedy for Landfills A and B.
'
We can discuss a date for finalizing this document after the State's comments have been received, but be mindful that I would like to finalize the ESD in August.
If you have any questions, please give me a call at 404/562-88~4.
cc: Dave Mattison, NC DENA
zelle S. Bennett
Remedial Project Manager
Todd Hagemeyer, HSI Geotrans
Lynn France, COM
• •
COMMENTS
1. Page 3-1, Section 3.2.1 -Delete the last sentence in the first paragraph beginning "Note that no ... "
2. Page 3-7, 1st paragraph -Need to indicate that additional soil sampling will be conducted to determine the vertical extent of contamination.
3. Page 4-1, Section 4.1, 3rd paragraph -This paragraph describes the volume of material that will be excavated. However, it is not clear from this paragraph whether the debris will be removed from Landfill A, or just material that exceeds the 10 ppm criterion fcir PCBs. Please clarify what material will be excavated.
4. Page 4-1, Section 4.1, 3rd paragraph, last sentence -Please specify how the confirmation sampling will be conducted. Will this be conducted using field test kits with laboratory confirmation?
5. Page 4-1, Section 4.1, 4th paragraph -The PRPs state that the Dry Sludge lmpoundment (OSI) area has "more than sufficient capacity to contain excavated soils from Landfill A". Have any calculations been performed to confirm this statement? 1
' 6. Page 4-1, last paragraph -The report states that the modification is cost-effective. The Agency will need a cost estimate for the revised remedy and a cost comparison between capping the three areas, versus excavation of two -areas with one cap. ·
7. Page 4-3, Section 4.2 -See comments 3 and 4.
8. Page 4-3, 2nd paragraph -Add the word "preliminary" in front of the word "acceptance" in the last line.
9. Page 4-3, 3rd paragraph -In the next to the last line, the report states " ... based on the same area but with a depth of seven nine feet". Please clarify.
10. Figure 4-2 -The figure indicates that Landfill B includes a portion of the access road to US. Hwy 176. Will the road be excavated?
Page -1-
I
H~
GEOTRANS
• ;fl)
1080 Holcomb Bridge Road
Building 100, Suite 190
Roswel I, Georgia
30076
A TETRA TECH COMPANY 770-642-1000 FAX [phone]
Mr. Mark Cantrell
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
I 60 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, North Carolina 2880 I
Reference: Bunched Arrowhead Habitat
July I 0, 1998
GE/Shepherd Farm Site, East Flat Rock, NC
HSI Geo Trans Project No. N048-603
Dear Mr. Cantrell:
RECEIVED
JUL 151998
SUPERFUND SECTION
Thank you for meeting with Mr. Jason West of HSI GeoTrans in the field
on June 17.to examine the Bunched Arrowhead habitat on General Electric's
property in East Flat,R9ck, North Carolina._ General. Electric is committed to
protec.ting the Bunched Arrowhead, an endangered plant species. · We are aware
that the BJn~hed Arrowhead is sensitive to small changes in hydrologic .
conditions such as water table fluctuations and appreciate your_ interest and
expertise to protect it.
As you know, the GE Lighting Facility (site) in East Flat Rock, North
Carolina has groundwater contamination. GE has installed an accelerated
groundwater extraction system (AGRS) to remediate the groundwater. Enclosed
' please find the information you requested regarding the extent of contamination
and the potential impact of the groundwater extraction on the water table in the
vicinity of the Bunched Arrowhead habitat.
EXTENT OF GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION
Tetrachloroethene (PCE) is the primary chemical of concern in the
groundwater at the site. Figure I depicts the PCE plume in the groundwater. The
highest concentrations of PCE are found near the center of the GE facil_ity. Other
organic compounds such as TCE and 1,2-DCE are present \_Vitl_lin the P_CE plume.
Figure 1 shows that the groundwater plume does not extend to the Bunched ·
Arrowhead habitat. . . I • ' .•
P;\GE'DOCSV'ISH_W1.WPO
• •
GROUNDWATER EXTRACTION
In September 1997, the accelerated groundwater remedi':tion system
(AGRS) construction was completed and began operation. The AGRS consist of
four recovery wells (recovery wells RW-1 through RW-4), a treatment facility,
and the associated piping and wiring. Groundwater is extracted, treated, and
discharged to Bat Fork Creek under a NPDES permit. A cumulative total of
nearly 9 million gallons of groundwater has been extracted since start up in
September 1997. The AGRS extraction rate has averaged 1.1 million gallons per
month since December 1997. The AGRS is being monitored by GE and HSI
Geo Trans. Groundwater levels and groundwater quality are being monitored
quarterly to evaluate potential enhancements or modifications to .the AGRS.
Figure 2 presents to AGRS capture zone. All of the groundwater within
this zone is being captured by the AGRS. Figure 2 illustrates that the AGRS is
capturing the area of highest groundwater contamination.
WATER TABLE FLUCTUATIONS
Figure 3 shows the estimated drawdown in the water table caused by the
AGRS under the current average extraction rate of25 gallons per minute (gpm).
This drawdown estimate is based on a groundwater model calibrated to pumping
conditions. As shown in Figure 3, operation of the AGRS under the current
conditions is expected to cause less than one foot of drawdown in the Bunched
Arrowhead habitat, as well as, in a large wetland located along Bat Fork Creek
Monitor wells MW-25 and MW-28 are located in the vicinity of the
Bunched Arrowhead habitat (see Figure 3 for the well locations). Hydrographs of
MW-25 and MW-28 are presented in Figures 4 and 5, respectively. These
hydrographs illustrates the observed water table elevation over time in the vicinity
of the Bunched Arrowhead habitat. The observed water levels in these wells since
AGRS start up are within+/-0.7 feet the observed water levels before start up.
Above normal precipitation that occurred January through March'l998 has
heavily influenced the water levels over this time period.
P:IGE'-DOCS'FISH_W1.WPO 2
HSIGEOTRANS
• •
We will continue to monitor the water table in the vicinity of the Bunched
Arrowhead habitat on a quarterly basis. Please call me if you have any questions.
I would be happy to discuss with you the AGRS, or any other aspect of the
groundwater remediation effort.
cc:
P:'GE'DOCS\F1SH_W1.WPO
Sincerely,
-ro0ll[) 11-t--..y,~yi,~
Giezelle Bennett (U.S. EPA)
Lee Humphrey (GELS)
David Mattison (NC DENR)
Todd Hagemeyer, P.G.
Senior Hydrogeologist
'
Nora Murdock (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service)
Peter Rich (HSI GeoTrans)
3
HSIGEOTRANS
P:'Qe\gis-rd60\workspac\gecap2.wa
CJ
Explanation
Baseline PCE concentration (ppb) in groundwater
in July 1997 (from HSI GeoTrans, 1998) 0
I
I I
I
I
I
\
;,-
1/
I
/
/
I-I
/
500
SCALE IN FEET
MW-59
TTTl.E
1000 LOCATION
=
MW-13 • \
I
II
Baseline PCE concentration (ppb) in
groundwater in July 1997
GE Subsite, East Flat Rock, NC
CHECKED BY RTH FIGURE: HSI OWTEOBY RTH 1 GEOTRANS FUNAME PCEPLUME.INOR
AlTiltATECHCOHPANY DATE 7-7-98
P:\ge\gis-fd60\workspaclgacap2.wor
CJ MW-1 ---
MW-59
.._________
. Bunched Arrowhead~
-63 Habitat
Explanation Tl11.E
Observed AGRS capture zone in June 1998
Baseline PCE concentration (ppb) in groundwater
in July 1997 (from HSI GeoTrans, 1998) 0 500 1000 LOCATION GE Subsite, East Flat Rock, NC
-Observed AGRS capture zone (June 1998)
SCALE IN FEET
CHECKED BY RTH FIGURE:
-HSI "'-'Fm>BY RTH 2 ~ GEOTRANS FUJ;NAME AGRS6_98.WOR
--Attnu.notCOMPANY OA:rE 7.7.ga
P:\Qe\gis-<d60\workspac',gocap2. wor
--------------
MW"2
Explanation
-Wetland
· Bunched Arrowhead~
Habitat
0 500 1000
SCALE IN FEET
\
/)
TITLE Estimated drawdown in water table caused by operation
of AGRS at current extraction rate of 25 gpm
LOCATION GE Subsite, East Flat Rock, NC
FIGURE:
3
Figure 4. Hydrograph of Monitor Well MW-25
2155.0
2154.5
♦ ♦
2154.0 -• T
◄ ► •• ◄
2153.5 ....
g 2153.0
C AGRS Start Up ' .2 --.. > 2152.5 Cl
-1 iii ..
Cl -2152.0 ~
2151.5
2151.0 • -I
2150.5
2150.0
Cl Cl 0 0 ~ ~ N N (") (") -q--q-LO LO co co .... .... a, a, a, Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' C: s C: s C: s C: s C: s C: s C: s C: s C: s C:
"' -, "' -, "' -, "' -, "' -, "' -, "' -, "' -, "' -, "' -, -, -, -, -, -, -, -, -, -,
-£
C 0 ;: .. > ..
iii .. .. -i
2155.0
2154.5
2154.0
2153.5
2153.0
2152.5
2152.0
2151.5
2151.0
2150.5
2150.0
0) a;>
C "' -,
0) a;>
:'i -,
-
0 9' C "' -,
--
♦
0 'f ::, -,
•
~ 9' C "' -,
Figure 5. Hydrograph of Monitor Well MW-28
~ 9' :'i -,
~ C "' -,
N 9' :'i -,
"' 0)
' C "' -,
-
"' 'f ::, -,
-
~ C "' -,
~ -'-::, -,
-
AGRS Start Up
"' 9' C "' -,
-
.
"' 9' :'i -,
-,__
<D 0)
' C "' -,
<D 0)
-'-::, -,
-
r--. 0)
' C "' -,
-
•
r--. 9' :'i -,
♦
t
♦
4
co 9' C "' -,
♦
~
T
.
co 0) -'-::, -,
•
•
NORTH SUPERFUND .ID: •
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION4
61 Forsyth Street, S.W.
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3104
4WD-NSRB
Michael J. Bush, ManagQr
Environm0ntal, Health. and Safety
GE Lighting Systems, Inc
301 D Spartanburg Highway
Hendersonville, NC 28792
SUBJ: GE/Shopt1erd Farm NPL Site
East Flat Rock, NC
Dear Mr. Bush:
April 21, 1996
3:39 No.005 P.01
The Agency has revil~w9d your April 10, 199B request to move the submittal of tile 60%
RD from May 4th to June 26th. EPA would like to split the soil and groundwater remedial design
repqr,ts since It i_s apparent that the groundwater design will be more complicated and requim
!more discussion than will the soil. Therefore, we offer the following revision to th0 approved
sctiedule: ' .
''. •t ·.: ,,;;, •-
:::c••.•,'Groyndwater Design Soil Desjgn
·:: {..: ~
60%RD
Comments
90%RD
Commems
100%RD
June 26
July 24
Sept 11
Oct 9
Oct30
May4
June 1
July 13
Aug 10
Aug 31
Please submit a letter report that provides tile Iocat1on, description, and schedule of the
additional field acllvlties as soon as possible. In addition, the two RD schedules need to be
revised and submitted to the Agencies.
If you have any qu0stlons. please give me a call at 404/562-8824.
,. '•'J, '
\.',l·.~,r, ~if '
·· -11cc; Dave Mattison, NC DENR
'· Todd Hagemeyer, HSI GeoTrans
Lyno,f:'1ahc0, COM 1,ij_rr
Sin ~
Gi zelle S. Bennett
Remedial Project Manager
,. ,. ,. ~~~ lrNCDENR ~f !/f.t ·_~·:,:)·
JAMES B. HUNT JR ..
GoVE:RNOR ~.?;,
•
March 4, 1998
Memorandum
TO:
FROM:
RE:
• NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Arthur Mouberry, Chief
Groundwater Section
Division of Water Quality
David B. Mattison, Cn.1vJ.Jn•v
Environmental Engineer
Superfund Section
DIVISION OF WASTE MANAGEMENT
Preliminary (30%) Remedial Design Report
General Electric/Shepherd Farm NPL Site
East Flat Rock, Henderson County
HSI Geo Trans, on 6ehalf of General Electric, is completing the Preliminary (3 0%)
Remedial Design Report at the General Electric/Shepherd Farm National Priorities
List (NPL) Site. The document being reviewed is attached.
Please distribute this document to the appropriate sections and submit any comments
to the NC Superfund Section. We would like to have the views and permitting
requirements of Groundwater, and Water Quality Sections.
If you or your staff have any questions, please feel free to call me at (919) 733-280 I,
extension 349.
Attachment
401 OBERLIN ROAD, SUJTE 150, RALEIGH, NC 27605
PHONE.[phone] FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/ AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER· 50% RECYCLED/I 0% POST-CONSUMER PAPER
• •
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 4
61 Forsyth Street, S.W.
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3104
February 11, 1998
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: General Electric/Shepherd Farm Site
East Flat Rock, NC
FROM:
TO:
Giezelle S. Benne.I~
Remedial Project ~g~
Remedial Design Revie ers
Archie Lee/Dan Thoman, SESD
A-TRAIN Member
David Mattison, NC DENR
Lynn France, COM
RECEIVED
FEB 2 5 1998
SUPERFUND St:c·11UN
Attached is the 30% Remedial Design Report for the above referenced Site. Please
review it and provide any comments that you may have to me no later than March 2, 1998.
If you have any questions, please give me a call.
Thank you for your cooperation on this task.
July 15, 1997
Ms. Giezelle Bennett
Superfund Branch, Waste Management Division
US EPA Region IV
61 Forsyth Street, 11th Floor
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
RE: Document Review
General Electric/Shepherd Farm Site
East Flat Rock, Henderson County
Dear Ms. Bennett:
The following documents have been received by the North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources (NC DEHNR) and have been deemed acceptable with no additional
comments.
*Monthly Progress Report (May 1997)
*Proposed Monitor Well at Dry Sludge Impoundment (FAX)
*EPA Letter Notifying HSI Geotrans of Unacceptable Schedule
*Oversight Letter Report -Remedial Planning Activities at Selected Uncontrolled Hazardous
Substances Disposal Sites
*EPA Comments -Treatability Study Work Plan (Second Draft)
*Monthly Progress Report (June 1997)
We appreciate the opportunity to comment on these documents. If you have any questions, please
feel free to call me at [phone], extension 349.
cc: Mr. Grover Nicholson
P.O. Box 27687,
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Voice 919-733-4996
Sincerely, yJ 13 Jpb, c.HM/1
David B. Mattison, CHMM
Environmental Engineer
Superfund Section
FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
50"/o recycled/10"/o post-consumer paper
July 15, 1997
Ms. Giezelle Bennett
Superfund Branch, Waste Management Division
US EPA Region IV
61 Forsyth Street, I Ith Floor
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
RE: Document Review
General Electric/Shepherd Farm Site
East Flat Rock, Henderson County
Dear Ms. Bennett:
The following documents have been received by the North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources (NC DEHNR) and have been deemed acceptable with no additional
comments.
* Monthly Progress Report (May 1997)
*Proposed Monitor Well at Dry Sludge Impoundment (FAX)
*EPA Letter Notifying HSI Geotrans of Unacceptable Schedule
*Oversight Letter Report -Remedial Planning Activities at Selected Uncontrolled Hazardous
Substances Disposal Sites
*EPA Comments -Treatability Study Work Plan (Second Draft)
*Monthly Progress Report (June 1997)
We appreciate the opportunity to comment on these documents. If you have any questions, please
feel free to call me at [phone], extension 349.
cc: Mr. Grover Nicholson
P.O. Box 27687.
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Voice 919-733-~996
Sincerely, yJ D Jpb, E.HM-~
David B. Mattison, CHMM
Environmental Engineer
Superfund Section
FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
50% recycled/ 10"/o post-consumer paper
State of North Carolina & -~ Deportment of Envirament, W ,-,, Health and Natural IWsources 4 •
Division of Waste Management -. f I L [ CO p y-_ . _ ~;.
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary DE H N R William L. Meyer, Director ·
July 15, 1997
Ms. Giezelle Bennett
Superfund Branch, Waste Management Division
US EPA Region IV
61 Forsyth Street, 11th Floor
Atlanta, Georgia 3 03 03
RE: Document Review
General Electric/Shepherd Farm Site
East Flat Rock, Henderson County
Dear Ms. Bennett:
The following documents have been received by the North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources (NC DEHNR) and have been deemed acceptable with no additional
comments.
*Monthly Progress Report (May 1997)
*Proposed Monitor Well at Dry Sludge Impoundment (FAX)
*EPA Letter Notifying HSI Geotrans of Unacceptable Schedule
*Oversight Letter Report -Remedial Planning Activities at Selected Uncontrolled Hazardous
Substances Disposal Sites
*EPA Comments -Treatability Study Work Plan (Second Draft)
*Monthly Progress Report (June 1997)
. We appreciate the opportunity to comment on these documents. If you have any questions, please
feel free to call me at [phone], extension 349.
cc: Mr. Grover Nicholson
P.O. Box 27687.
Raleigh. North Carolina 27611-7687
Voice 919-733-4996
Sincerely, yJ 13 !lpb, {HH-~
David B. Mattison, CHMM
Environmental Engineer
Superfund Section
FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
50% recycled/l O"k post-consumer paper
• 00-20-1997 22:45 1 .426006 Oe0Tran3 Atlan. P.01
L
-HSI
~GIBOT~ANS
FAX TRANSMITTAL COVER SHEET
Office Numbers
Sterling, VA
[phone]
(703)444-168! PAX
• Boulder. CO
()03)440-4556
[phone] PAX
•
•
Frccllold,NJ
[phone]
[phone] FAX
Harvanl, MA
[phone]
(S0B)772-.ll83 FAX
Lu V•881, NV
[phone]
[phone] FAX
MaBc!lng Offlco
[phone]
[phone] f AX
Denver.CO
(3D3)279-7982
[phone] FAX
Reno,NV
[phone]
[phone] PAX
Sacramento, CA
[phone]
(916)UNB60
C-1\!Gsa,CA
(714)lll•l415
(714)51J..1278FAX
M.Dwaukee, WI
[phone]
(414) /'ll-1310 fM
Phoenix, AZ
(002)B94-2100
[phone] PAX
HSI GeoTirans, Inc;
1080 Holcomb Bridge Road
Building 200, Suite 305
Roswell, GA 30076
[phone]
[phone] FAX
DATE: 2--c.:::i :Ju ,..ie. :97
TO: _D _______ A.'-'-1/_I D ___ L_i o_w_u __ _
FAX#: --9----+-'--19,.__, -_J ..... 2"-=3_---'Y'--"-'i~l I~
TELEPHONE#: ______ _
# OF PAGES (including cover): __ Lf'.___
' SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: ___ _
oF-
Dt..I1;,,1.J l,.1.,1.. y
,,1.
I
,,
''
00-20-1997 22;45 1 7700428808 • OeoTra.ns At Ia.~ P.02
ev ___ DATE, __ PROJECT SHEET NO._OF _
CHKD. BY _DATE, __ PROJ. NO. ___ _
~ 1k fl.I) Wort. pl"""' ,prop~~a ' t). MOl1.0il-6',f w&I
, "' ~ ~ctf rt>~~ ~ oJ. ~ ~ r-c <.:.W~ ~p.,rn~ f ·
ttl c.,,,.,,(,r_, -4---.J ~ Wtt.\.v'I ~lqlo \":. tll'IG<.e ~~ 4 !u.J
\:14.lt.w 'r;w, ~ ~ .. .v-f•t,(U [~ ,0.1.,\t '5'-1). -rfu preptdlcJ
\IJfJ.D l~c.o..tidn ,·"!:) S\-\Ol,\JI'\ ;11 Pl'~ 'SJB, 1/,\.Q. WIJ....J CMw~s--
(ull'!) ~1\1¼1'~ d<:lud ~ fo/1o(q1' kJ€. A.\ll(OU,11\-v-cb
h,.Q.dAGC,(L oJt /5 ~ b.«l~w {fAN,,d )Cu)(«u. , /Vo r.w"4 Ukt.>
..Rv,(O\Jfl-4-..e_d. ~ ho~ , 'lo. '\OW o~ 0.'> ~ C'oYJ~'M,,l,.f
\,4) cA. f"~ \ \ o+-,-.u, tv\ Cl\-\\ ~..-~ ~ '
r be2~~ WQ.. ha~ ~ a.Cku-v.Qel tJur ~~.
"f¼.. lul'i\.Vl ~lt i~ /V\t,U ~ I~ A,J h.i(dw I.cw.ti
c;W\.fo..u_ a.,,l.r-o.. · loca.kl/l\. ~ cwae -ltJ "tw Pr-, .S~¾ ~mf>Ol'"cl~ l-. Tvu"":a v'\41.l.l . ~C\~f""--OLU~I/Vl \!:i
c.cn-. ... \,~ ~ \.u -~ f\J.~VJ'() Ml/hi~( ~~ MW-2.. oimd I'. ~\jj-q_
'I c_.,.ll.Lt..~d l,uO.\V\ ~\icttv',v., deiro. o,/i Ylilll.J-"2 tM,,,,()
1M. uJ -4 (N,,,d cu.vvpfM..ld ,'t-~ 5.#J/.<,w,lw! l'lq-1-
a;,J.o.. c h'tJ...,., " :i::. ') t.... ~ "' own hAl.o w .
Csr~,.i"6 61"6..MilW~\Jwl ~~ ~ , ~ b vJ&. i\PJ. , fclou"li'...-, U~ Woi~O) w.,~(l..)
MW-~ 2,\?E!, 7-,IG'"&, '2,.."2.. -Z,2-
\u,.W--i_ '2,.l',0 Z,l~i I~ 13
Geo'lr.lns,lnc.
00-20-1997 22:45 1 106428808 OeoTrans Atlan ..
BY ___ DATE __ _ PROJECT ________ _
CHKD. BY __ DATE __ _
l"""I ~
E
=: ,
3
I»
'Bello uJ ·= 0. (!_ y-c,....,,s.
(..e..\.o...~-"'~ ~~ -+-,.o
V\A4M \ Av-.J -..lt.....o too~
"2.l~ I '?:i SJ w:cl lb :&e "56,wt j
"l.1"7C
1~~---
,:JIPO -
z;-.0
2.1<10
k-.,-'\
P."3
SHEET N0~0F __
PFIOJ. ND. ___ _
\k >.uci'\.\,,, ~lolll ,....,, Miff! ~ IC , CuJ bt.low ~
bct'lt " ~ ~ br'-1 <;tudr TM()iM"J"""""t )ed,~~s.
GeoTrrans,lnc.
06-20-1997 22:4B 1 16426606 GeoTrans Atlan·· P.04
11V ___ DATE __ PROJECT ________ _ 8HEETNO. __ OF __
CHKD.BV DATE:, __ PAOJ. NO. ___ _
\JJL <>-re tCMc,,\' ~,,;. r --hue Of h.·wi~ Ct~ Ql.il ~CM betJI {Jflli,w.
lJ) \)~ ~ ~e\~ &A/6... k> ta"'1r...-,. ~ U.A.(Mn I
waw, ~'ol... d.lf•'c~,,.,,..,~ 0"4' OC.(WJ~#. TL-4-u i°~
M> ...e_..i;~ \(I ~LI~~ ... ~ ~()ll./'\~t ·r/J ~ \µti~ tt,blt,
v,t,'oUA ~ ~ (.:, 5 I u. c\ rt ~ pc1 J.,, ..1 k11.1tV1 J . , \
\.?\ ~-..ru.LO dv-0 <:.Q.ero u.:~ ~.
-:t:=-, ..e t. c""~ op \.l ""'"' 1. :r::. r-p ~ e/A.'-:. c 1.1 ~ c:., d fr,. , '<:,. ,-...<;. ~
w·,~ 0(', -n(V'\ Tv<~ , P. f · . hk O~!o. lo i"'-¼s
u ~c..e .,_,;.~ \-atv--&. · ~,Cfo ~cO ~A"'<l o.t "-. l:-wou\ J.
\, ~ · ~ &i."-~us<. ~~ 1-::.<,.IA.Q. wi.~ 'rP,J .ui.Dt~
~ . \..l>O rn¾ ~-o~rJ •
yl<Q'-)P no l,,e ~ ~ weil 'i> ;:>wv,' O\Jt\ l.'..,. \ ...J..,..._
9r"1 S~cl~ ';?Mpovri ~W'U41 f--wil I /:le... mo,.,1-o,-«.J
~ u ~ i-, for W4-lvr ~~ / r11 ~ ¥4-1 /-d ""'(Ill i 1-e , ~ t_ ~ h -J ':>.f!o...., (M ,,..Q. I.()~ f.. "-' lo.
(-,(AcUA.o "'""'', • Tu~ ~'!,, LUIIL :"ct..,rl Q '.
I
111. uJ -•l
Mltl -lb
WI I.ti ~"37
Iv. '<,I -2-
f,'\ IAJ -4-
Geo'lnns,lnc.
• •
REMEDIAL PLANNING ACTIVITIES AT SELECTED
UNCONTROLLED HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES DISPOSAL SITES
Prepared for:
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION IV
OVERSIGHT LETTER REPORT
REMEDIAL DESIGN INVESTIGATION
GE/SHEPHERD FARM SITE
EAST FLAT ROCK, NORTH CAROLINA
JUNE 6, 1997
RECEIVED
JUN 18 1997
SUPERFUNO SECTION
U.S. EPA CONTRACT NO. 68-W9-0056
WORK ASSIGNMENT NO. 46-4XJG
DOCUMENT CONTROL NO. 7740-046-LR-BRTN
Prepared By: / fe-= /hr--
Lynne J. France
Project Manager
Prepared by:
COM FEDERAL PROGRAMS CORPORATION
2030 Powen Ferry Road, Suite 490
Atlanta, Georgia 30339
ARCS REGION IV
Date: (;/6 / "17
L
CDM Federal Prog~s Corporation
A Subsidiary of Camp Orosser & McKee Inc.
2030 Powers Ferry Road, Suite 490
Atlanta, Georgia 30339
Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone]
une 6, 1997
s. Giezelle Bennett
emedial Project Manager
.S. Environmental Protection Agency
100 Alabama Street, S.W.
tlanta, Georgia 30303
EPA Contract No. 68-W9-0056
OCUMENT NO. 7740-046-LR-BRTN
SUBJECT: Work Assignment 46-4XJG
•
GE/Shepherd Farm, East Flat Rock, North Carolina
Oversight Report of RD Investigation Activities
Reporting Period : May 20 -May 23 and May 27 -May 29, 1997
ear Ms. Bennett:
DM Federal Programs Corporation (CDM Federal) is pleased to submit the above-
eferenced oversight report for the GE/Shepherd Farm Site. This report summarizes the
emedial design (RD) investigation activities perform by HSI/GeoTrans (HSI) during the
eporting period and presents to EPA any significant problems, issues or items of note
bserved by CDM Federal during the oversight of activities. This oversight report is
ubmitted in partial fulfillment of Task 12 ofCDM Federal's oversight work plan for this
ssignment.
enerally, the details for the activities being performed during the RD Investigation are
ncluded in HSI's Remedial Design Work Plan. Per your May 5, 1997 letter to Michael
ush of GE, some investigation activities ( the soil gas investigation at Landfill A, MW-
14, and MW-25) were subject to the approval of EPA. CDM Federal followed all
rocedures specified in the CDM Federal Quality Assurance Project Plan for the
E/Shepherd Farm RD/RA oversight in conducting oversight.
ctivities conducted on site during this reporting period included a geophysical
· nvestigation and a soil gas investigation. Ground surveying was also conducted but not
observed by CDM Federal. Attachment A is a completed copy of the appropriate sections
of the Hazardous Waste Field Overview Checklist from the Environmental Investigations
Standard Operating Procedures and Quality Assurance Manual (EPA, 1996). A copy of
he Field Oversight Logbook for the reporting period is included in Attachment B and a
photolog is presented in Attachment C.
CDM • • Feclernl Programs Corporation
PERSONNEL ONSITE
The following personnel were onsite during part or all of the oversight period (May 20-
May 23 and May 27 -May 29 1997).
PERSONNEL
Kent Hankinson
Todd Hagemeyer
Greg Council
Michael Bush
Michael Wightman
DavidHurro
Jim Phillips
Charles Kirk
Al Chandler
Rick Brooks
SUMMARY OF OVERSIGHT ACTIVITIES
Geophysical Investigation
ORGANIZATION
CDMFederal
HSI
HSI
GE
SDII
SDII
Target
Target
Spratt & Brooks
Spratt & Brooks
A geophysical survey was conducted at Landfills A and B from May 20 through May 23
by Subsurface Detection Investigations Inc. (SDI). The objective of the geophysical
investigation was to delineate the landfill boundaries and to detect any buried metal
containers that may contain liquid waste. Two types of geophysical technologies were
used, ground penetrating radar (GPR) and electromagnetic (EM).
0
The GPR data were
collected with a GSSI SIR System 3, GPR Radar, Model 38 video display Unit and 500
megahertz antennae array. The EM data were collected with a Geonics EM-61 High
Sensitivity Metal Detector and Omnidata Digital Polycorder.
At Landfill A both methods identified two significant anomalies. One is an elongated
feature oriented north-south, approximately coincident with the overhead power lines.
The other is also elongated, and is located on the southern edge of the parking lot. This
location is also coincident with the power lines. The power lines are not believed to be the
source of the EM anomalies as the anomalies were verified with GPR.
The extent of metallic and non-metallic debris was also determined at Landfill B. Because
the preliminary GPR and EM data indicated that the initial grid did not cover the entire
landfill, the grid was extended to the east, south and west. Subsequent geophysics
surveying defined the edge of the landfill in these directions. The edge of the fill on the
southeastern side was visually confirmed. A 200 gallon storage tank, rebar, and concrete
blocks were observed adjacent to Bat Fork Creek.
CDM • • Federal Programs Corporation
Soil Gas Survey
The soil gas survey was conducted the week of May 26, 1997 by Target Environmental
Services. A survey was conducted at Landfill A, Shepherd Farm and monitor wells MW-
14 and MW-25. The objective of the surveys was to locate potential soil contamination
source areas for soil and/or ground water sampling. Target used an on-site lab to analyze
samples using Methods 8010 and 8020. The analytes were the target compounds listed in
the Work Plan. Sketch maps of the soil gas survey grids at Landfill A and Shepherd Farm
are shown in the Field Logbook (Attachment B).
At Landfill A, elevated soil gas concentrations of chlorinated compounds, benzene,
ethylbenzene, toluene, and xylene were detected in an area approximately coincident with
the north-south oriented geophysical anomaly. The soil gas survey grid was extended
until the limits of any soil gas anomalies were determined. The survey was also expanded
to the north due to detection of PCE. The grid was expanded until extent had been
delineated.
At Shepherd Farm low concentrations (<5 ug/L) of methylene chloride were detected in
the central and north central portion of the grid, and total FID volatiles ( calculated as the
sum of the areas of all integrated chromatogram peaks) were detected in the northern part
of the grid. The grid was extended until the limits of the soil gas anomalies were defined.
The locations of the soil gas surveys in the vicinity of the monitor wells were discussed
with, and approved by, COM Federal prior to collection of samples. At both locations,
the grid consisted of five points, including one at the monitor well. The only detection at
either well site was at location 2 at MW-25 where 43.1 ug/1 of vinyl chloride was
detected. This location is the center point of the grid, therefore the extent was delineated
and the grid was not expanded. Soil gas sampling at the monitor well locations was
completed before CDM Federal arrived on site.
PROBLEMS/ISSUES/ITEMS OF NOTE
During the soil gas survey at Landfill A, low concentrations of vinyl chloride, as well as
ethyl benzene, toluene and xylene were detected at the southern edge of the original grid.
HSI initially did not plan to extend the grid to determine the extent of these compounds
because they believed that the vinyl chloride detection was a false positive and because the
other compounds are not on the target compound list for the site. After discussions with
Giezelle Bennett, EPA Remedial Project Manager, HSI decide to expand the grid to the
east, west, and south of the locations where these compounds were detected. As
previously indicated, no compounds were detected at the additional sampling locations.
CDM • • Federal Programs Corporation
During the geophysical sampling a 200-gallon tank was observed in Bat Fork Creek. GE
was notified and the tank was removed from the creek and placed on the bank.
If you have any questions concerning this report please call Lynne France at (770)952-
7393.
Sincerely,
CDM FEDERAL PROGRAMS CORPORATION
Lynne J. France, P.G.
Project Manager
cc: Rob Stern, EPA ARCS IV Project Officer
Gary Clemons, CDM Federal Program Manager
Document Control
• •
ATTACHMENT A
FIELD OVERVIEW CHECKLIST
Facility/Site Name
Address
Project No.
Facility Contact
•
EXIIlBIT 2.1
REGION4
•
HAZARDOUS WASTE F1ELD OVERVIEW CHECKLIST
GE Lio.hn11a Sv~fl'tYts.
?i¢J i!J 5PctrTti11b.J(<l /--1,-,,,,J,wi; v, I-IP,,c/e,-s(,11-, v,/)e, NC ,
'7'74d->646 -tVJA:t-cvsr EPA ID No.
2g7'/2
lvttchae I bush Pho~e No. 7J4/r;/13-2S{iS-
Overview Personnel ke.--f-J-1.,., k,:,, Sc<, Date r:;/2d/1? -'i/:l1/9?
~Contractor Project Leader 16dd J-let c, e,v, e ,; er
Affiliation J.f 5I G£ 0T£1t AJ.S Phone No. '7?(/-b'/2-ldr/¢
Address t(/<JJ J-lolcoinb Bnd-,e Roti/j &,;/tl.111,, 2¢1/ . Sfe Jd;;-Roswe /I CA-~Ji ,
Sampling Personnel G,eei r.0"11ci/
Other Personnel & Affiliation M,-ke Mi'ihfr,,1,,_11, Tuv,d HvrrJ, ,J;-,.,., Pht//,p,, C'h,.,rks kirk ,
Type of study? Geonhvf;,r,, I S,,,rv-et/ Ancl 5oi/ &J .<'w•··t>v' , , 7
Study plan issued? Yt:5 Date issued?
Study plan reviewed by the Division? Yes Acceptable? ¼'S
Cllmimmlli:
Was study plan followed?
fr, fi<L w~rk p/4n . CQmmen!li: ;]-,ea:, ~ve{e /lo d~v. i_-h,,;1 r
Was a safety plan prepared for the study?
CQmmen!li: Yes
Was the safety plan adequate?
CQmmen!ll: ¼.s
Was the safety plan followed?
COl!!!!l~Jm: A da.i/,1 c,,J,,,fi, ,v,ee~~'1 1✓4s lw/d ,J 1hz Jye,;,,·11;f'/~ v{ edi dc;(J_
' ' Additional comments or information:
, 7 I
Checklist sections completed
for this overview: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
Key: (yGeneral Procedures 4. Surface Water Sampling
2. Ground Water Sampling 5. Waste Sampling
3. Soil, Sediment, Sludge Sampling 6. Monitoring Well Installation
EISOPQAM 2-30 May 1996
76
• •
SECTION I -GENERAL PROCEDURES -SAFETI, RECORDS QA/QC, CUSTODY, ETC,
I. Type samples collected?
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
Comments: '3oi , ~, o,
Were sampling locations properly selected?
Comments: 5t1,11. k /,x,;_fi"o,,s were co!!t2ct?d 1n ci
Were sampling locations adequately documented in a bound field log book using indelible ink?
Comments: 5t1m /~ c O{(-hom were O(U/Y)(:,')fp . d --bd w/-/t, u~ ;;,k.
Were photos taken and a photolog maintained?
Comments: .6'ever. f'i b <t • .-
What field instruments were used during this study? Comments: ,.; _,, ch r'l'lc. , r. i · c -s· r1 r u,
Were field instruments properly calibrated and calibrations recorded in a bound field log book? l<u,m,/ 0>1 cvmp>Jfe,, 11ot l:>jbock. . Comments: G<s (l,rom:;,"trJ I"'< /, ,:A/;b,z:kd 1>1onim ,ind ve,,i,1 d,;,) ± 3rJ'l.
Was sampling equipment properly wrapped and protected from possible contamination prior to sample collection?
Comments: !he<:e i.1 110 rt,1l!cul '-0l1rt:)1 c,)/s k,r !./4 mec...surru ,-;., '>=>ii
Was sampling equipment constructed of Teflon"', glass, or stainless steel? . Comments: ~~111-, ,,, ,,_ u, ,;,e,.f w s c/_. ,,/. · ,;,lt,.ss sftt> ( 4'1
Were samples collected in proper order? (least suspected contamination to most contarniuared7) Sc,rv 7 Comments: Coulcln'fclef?rn,ri,' when? flK IJ; /w,I-c,'11/-,,..., ,,_,',f,o.., ""' t,,J,
Were clean disposable latex or viuyl gloves worn during sampling? Comments: ,:s no ,1.>Nol ,,.,/,,-,j, e~/ls {;,_, -fw ,, 1-1f"Pf i,,, so,/ -,J 5·«rve, J
Were gloves changed for each sample station?
Comments: NI/
Was any equipment field cleaned?
Comments: ½>s. So,·/ ciS
Type of equipment cleaned:
Comments: See # 12. tf!:o •~.
Were proper field cleaning procedures used?
Comments: 7?. w,J~r rinse.
-fleW
mm,rs were du +,,.,,;;, ~kJ ,;, -/t,e
Were equipment rinse blanks collected after field cleaning? dYJl. . Comments: -ue"c : ll\11c'. c.f .sf ... fof-d~ IY\e..af-e.J of:.,},_<
Were proper sample containers used for samples? Comments: G/c, s.s · ,;.rs w i
EISOPQAM 2 -31 May 1996
• •
17. Were split samples offered to the facility owner or his representative?
Comments: ,N,4
18. Was a Receipt for Samples form given to facility representative?
Qlmments: N4
1,9. Were any duplicate samples collected? c,,;:n b<. "'=l1 u,_J
!::l!mmen~: Na-vie r nlfocfed . .S~rnc. vir:./,.fw,ce I./-neuJeJ-
' 20. Were samples properly field preserved?
!::l!mm~n~: Mir
21. Were preservative blanks utilized?
Qlmms:n~: J,/,4
22. W field d/ . t . blanks tilized? 1) -,,fone a.f st,..,.f/fe?..a,df ere 1 an or np u 2 ,,,, ,. I-€1-,J. 0 "4£4 ,1,.
C2mm~n~: Reid hla.nks iveoz <tolleded: :1 -,, <'veA :.Z054• .1.,<
' ' 23. Were samples adeq11ately identified with labels or tags?
Comm~n~: 61111111i,,J were /4.be/ed i111 1i<e 4/,,_» ,_,,,jt, t,Jt t"n de /,1:,/e IVl~.-ker. .
24. Were samples sealed with custody seals after collection?
Qlmm~n~: NI+-
25. What security measures were taken to insure custody of the samples after collection?
!::!lmm~n~: Pitdnd 5fl md,, ,;, r,,,,lbr · ,, ' ,, -fl-.,~ .L',/ h, S?tmoler.
Were chain-of-custody and receipt for sampl~ forms properly compl~ted?
,
26.
Qlmmim~: NI+
27. Were any samples shipped to a laboratory?
Qlmm~~= No
28. If yes to No. 27, were samples properly packed?
C2mm~n~: A'//
29. If shipped to a CLP lab, were Traffic Report Forms properly completed?
Qlmm!lut§: t./4
30. What safety monitoring equipment, protection, and procedures were used prior to and
during sampling?
Qlmm~n~: 1-JIJU 1\.1<1.s .zi<>d -h c-leh,,v1Ji.1e, i/ u,-,"' rc.cle, h Le.-,,/ C., w...J //erPJJ;, r ' , 31. Was safety monitoring equipment properly calibrated and calibrations recorded in a bound
field log book? .
!:'-!lmmi:lllli: C,/,/x-c..1Jb.;1 Je/eJ/.i ~ re.Larde) "'Yl -Sep4rt,.,k sl,uA tn l+.5I {:/e .
EISOPQAM 2 -32 May 1996
• •
ATTACHMENTB
FIELD OVERSIGHT LOGBOOK
• •
: .. :. ·'·'°·
.::··,,•.: , ..
;.
CONTENTS
PAGE REFERENCE DATE
---e----~--========='<'===-
·-----· ---·--------+--------<
-------·--·--· -·-·-------------·-------/--·-
"" . ·------·------______ __,_ _ __,
.-... ----···--··----------+--~
·--··-· -------+----1
-·--· ---··-----··-. __________ _,_ _ __,
... -----· -·-----------+----1
----------------------+------'
-····-··-~·-·-··-------+----1
·····-··-··---·---------1------l
. ---·· --···--------------1---J
---···--···----·------------jf------1
. ·-····----·--·-------+-----1
-----· ----------------·------__,_ _ ____,
··---···----------+-----1
-. ·--------·-------------_,__ _ ___,
-----______________ ____, __ _J
--~ ______________ __,_ _ _____,
H± 5 0.4rt _ . !: 1~u/1z
rJ.'l.<i.r?J f<Jtil/~ /t-flr.,:.f,,_ .
J:?3() Arriv? ,ii fw:.f F}J Ro<:k., No<'1t C...rc.hn~
.. . Crew t!.cms•.5±..r of:
l(e.,if l-la.11k1ns(fr1 I CDM Federi..L
Tod cl f.lo.-!)e.lh?tyer; H5I Gecrlrz:.. .... s
Gr(j C:>unc, (1 H51 Gcc.h_vi5
.. (',1,'ch4t/ f?uJI, 1 G.,,,~,,._.;) f(ec/ric
.... &ti r;//;,e=cbe.,k Ir! vJiffi /...y.,rJe hliiK<",,
CDM n,derf./ Shi. $4y, cc.I/ be.ck /4fpr
-fpJcty or e11r/y -IJJ11?.ofra\-.JA
8Lisfi .Shows cre-v. _:f'At;'..d:t ~re. crew «,I'\
s+~5e-bet;;z~/. ~~ c;:re 1µ4Mhf).._<l'r)
. Svh:;4,£e, . _ ~ .. c,.p J.~11.?J~,;11~,, J.,,c.
... ST>rI perScmnef, 7hey Miss:ed -ftieir f ~l'JG
.... enr/lec 'ie,dc;y c.od A•e runniVI) /.<de .
. 'vJ.(c;.,1f)fS:: CIP-J.dy.1 i2°F
.J...<N~I 72_ ~dio-, . . ...
f}:c,.d jh@-lt-. ft_.,flh _c;,4 Jc,~ P/4,t b
S:f.J n he .... //l:. trv1J .s"'kl:J f t<vt (: hrd<. ;U£ep· o,: Y/t i!
...0rm, ....
Te /cl? &.,i e-No~ . .
_tJ_,cf,,,~//},,.,_,b 7o_fljr~-],3~~ ~~/yyy/.a~b '
. )qt,{d fk:;,. •1,g~( . ?'lf!/ f'/~ -:.!l.~IB
. ..\2f1w(l~vJe.. ~~D'JL(,.1~--:~~>9 ¥?. :65"1
{) /f,J(P~~ s fa/;~
/ 4 !-· ~hft~l!'f:~f .... •-·---·);a . 2. __ .i/i~J:tl -·· . . .. ._jgt -e, (.() \J!, v,/LKk.~<iGS ~-. .... .... .. ... . ~ .. ~· 15,plf!!(l fuw 'l"Y..d!~-b.~'-'' ~kLbz~~LdI:ilYrh-JJ . : . C<L1c.L uncltS tu.riJd cue.cs. w.lb i£i ,1., ~ 0l ? ... ( .... ! . W6.r.-s~.A[~ wl/l:. iP. be. ~Ji!'l/.k:d I~~,{ kin~L ; w be dr:illr:.d? S>t1°'dd u~ i'·•fhysics fu c!tt,r. : bo.,m~J Loa...tic;,, (l •. _ . .... .. . .. .. . ... . ... . .... ~ ... ! . ~~ it m.\~i?r ,vJ,,cl,. wr.y -&r...,c.Jw~r,1{1.J. : ori 1 1 7 ... en Rt.I.. . . .. . .. . ...... . : ~ CM L)fue[.;ed. ~dw:h{tr'f-:fl,jOIY)tJ,eLb:: ~.rw,(;;h :: or hlffrr :-fu!;,/e wul_11°t the /Q,..ier l,;..;J .,( ·/~~, c . J -~ . I qnJ C Ii. . . . t··· ~ . .1.S .f. (JeLe,2~ ·.fuyt C,l{]Qi(,,e., ~1,i,1r:,. ~c 11,.._ . ;: Gf'f{ t,w.,±3 .. __ . .. . .. .. .. .... .. . .... .. . . . ... ! 1'735 5D.II . .in 2pedj .li-ie,c_ G.f~.l&lit!Ji d J;;jy/ (;./ . . E ....... ·iti make ~e -Hiey Wt.lii_ndio!.ll"'1· _ UL!ltL ~~if"M .,1nfr:11~~, ME~1ed. 1~"fu 1y;,i1ddArntJ1. I .. L.nd .. llA fu d1et:k ~(1!9((Sj ;;+. 71~@ .. 1: .. ~suit, ,~1tli.a1ifir,,111vi1Je&ly h q~ •.. t 13¢¢ SQ JI che,1'5 ibe,r f;M tc,/:.fo S(ll;;st ,t 11 .. .... .. i!l rntJdrttJ.-i :ft1 $1,1.rvey .......... ·-·· .... . . .. . ... . JS3¢' 1I2!L ~f.i{ma;,/~ .wrU-. /1~1. Gecitrr,r15 .. . ...... ... . (W.$~1'\i: /. Dtl'itd Mt.fro dee;,. bnef ~(Se. . . ............ Yl l~ Um ms. t a..fi 01. ~K<f-L .. ··--·. . ......... . j Y'.tfS _Jf.<Avt. f>1t .. _ ··········-··-----···-·--·-········ ... . ··r(y (/;F.:~j1i;~-i; (J.i/h 5 '; ,. 0_,, 117 -~··--·~----·-···-···----·--------·___.:.~~"-Y.J_l_!_. ____ _ _il_U.Mll1il,i'l O.E .. Wl'RK. CDNi)Jd(,:JfQ_.'2.-J4f/!i.z ···--···l. Mad,,_9r1d.(iluudfi/Ltt d'!l.5-~cla'nifaL ···-·· . ··-:z. li ~ t . Gill .e.qu.1f:W!ed:. 41!! r.L fMt!J .,;, ,pmd -6 ><'<' . ·--. _j{: , t_.1LJ!j_.w12rk1n1 art/tc. .... -····--·····-···-. ····-······, I c.:.::::~=:;.;.:c.~~-----=··-· ·-·-·----··--···-·-····-··--·-··----. -------~~· _-··~~.~~? ,~~~ ' , / ------------·------------------------------------------.. -----· ··--------------------------I -----/--· -------------·-----------------------·------··--··--1 ··~ ~··-··· --· ··--···-·-······· -·-··--~---··--··· --·11 -·· ~-rfj'J(j,J~Jf;;:t~h 5 /;;i.0/ 'I
8
-_: ~:rt~!lf;;,~i~ ch+~ redtLbovi(~p!~) /~r-
14¢5 Re U>n,¼•>>eirtce fypz-~·,irvLy. /YI? 5,;,u. if, .of .. th ... 1:.-. 'jr/J.
. . rxt kr:-J.fi II A. If re~v.fts. oF rect5!1 ::,4rvf'(1vi1
1Ad1m fe, if~ neecl to MD!e. p,,.J!(t~ {;~cl tVJetil
Ct,1!?~ 1 -fl~ . #11Y1jS .,J1// t£ Movtd Ro.Ifs DPII', ,o:
fo) _ . A d, > k,rll1. Qt md"-/ t ":'l >
_ _ .. --.. __ _LQ_ _____ ti_ ~Y\) P"~L /1 ('i;':, _ _ _ ....
Kernmrne11ckJo~cd'ter fl'.,c,1; .... _
... _ J) f'1h Gi'R i(J ~vu-}j_,., m ~-b•!\C>{5nd ed7.;-
···· n,-J .111 7!,e vJc1virly of _fl,e, 1"]1'1 fo1d p:.lld,
_ so1A & J L 6h4 ti II A 0nJ . Re'.>IA. H:,: jfl:'etftT
_ 5o,.,:Hwrly et#.tif ;,!,-1.J'f.~w ~t (;Pf-. rewrW,1$;,t,a{e
. (~-)Will r(chdly h'1.Vl k ,',1WG md,J a,r~ ti•¥!
.... __ w()\:,,Je" p.Jlet.s. iv ~tferJ 5'{.vey l1i1<, ~,)/,,-
. ____ wu,--d -tl11.:.vi., l,e__1. xe•~ -m be ('\ efe prev~k.J
_ Son.-fh_ uf ihf .. 5rid iht..n w,1fi1V! ~ g.i-J,
_f~ .J°~? _Sk,-b d<111~J vr, ui.,rnc,/ Mks 1-u"«i fi> h,.vc
md:0LCt.f:i mwec/, W::,;:d-vi p.dltls wJnt b: mcv,,J 'f! Ck..'j'5 w,/{ b~ !'Y)P~td -/,)l)lorf'l!"J t,rpu.._J ,,irxc,
{ftMi). . ... . ....... _ __. . .
.. fV1i(h.ielJ31,~ ,ft, 1Jt1•~~ up,~~sfi> /Vl1kc.
_ 1'/,,1htmfln vib12"r 'Hit-.. pr'f:J&.7j o{ f;i.trvey-,
_ _i2I~-_ &{s.h.sbo..,J.,)_ t:H f-if~~'ld_ gnJ )).~,~H<'~ (<;VMC .
.. 1222 .. ~;,f ~~11,at.,~t~»9-;ft,;~r}~;:r~1~ ~
.----. ·i rl)'ftlit;~a:.;»v f}ir/11 .... ··-
10
·... ~'umma~·--. --···· ··-··----5fa.LJ'i2 _
.. . L t.a5 ¢. ... W.;!:J nf rna. tJ. r<J4 lte..s....£d_;us.&ied (f'n El,t 6l . _
. . . .. . -aouncJ mites. iLCk.[1¥£.K fBr«i ./lc,:r:,,;i - .
ft,§.6 f]t~tJ.me,_ 5urvey~YJ_J-w•fii_Et~(d . . ........ .
. l'lJi -_S_}Dp_ SY£-«y,f\'J k.·liit.,..di&j_ .... --..
. 'BuMMt1SY ar.. W<-t'K COJJJJtK..TEI>. s/2th1
..... _ J... Mo.rl<'.711ici Q "-r,d,£(LE,
-· . .., £/YI .s,,,_r'!.ey@~d-fJ.lb &f,;yj b____ _ ... _
. . 3, ~p-pri:,p«(,1.Jfl!l Lii Wfli, ,1 ru-...Q £,
· .. l1<Jf'.S,k~c11re. ···----·····-···--_
·-· -~== ~= ~;:
/ / ------------/L -----
-----------. :·/ \9'-------·
[ ----------~·-tL . ·-----.
f: - . -... --- -
---- -----· --------------~------ ---
11
_T&,v1-da'I----· ___ --·-5/2.2Lq2. ___ _
¢'23.¢. Meet@ Br1lw11 hD.4.!!e.___. ____ .. -·· _ -·-· . __ ._i1
-·-·· -· ~rsr.mne/:. ___ ... ___ -----··-----·······---·
_ . 1__ (j,r€')r;;.ty. C:i1,1.w:.il 1 .t-1S1.,E~/J_{L1;."'"5".'L _______ i
_ ~ _ Dr,.vid .. J:IJAccQ 1.5DII_i-Scir.ll.f.~ .. -.. -----·-'
•v1·k \.I -i..f en-I 5: r · , ! 3 ... IC I c.,. YVlj" Mi-in/;:, .1. .. , ... L VfJ-f/)__ .. . .. _.
4_ l<ef/\±._tk°i/;.1-.U<IY! 1 ~:.i.?!VI. F.-,J~~~,) D11'rlti§l~fJ.--
..... 1J.z.."-/'1n:: Cifr..• .7~·r t,J,:,d~ <-IB'"'J!l..
_ . . .. l;,w/ ~f. fh.fedi!2'l: 12. _. ___ ·---··--__
t2.14.S: ti i ke. _ w,2 L tm ... 11 p:~')-1._}_ _Q1,.1L.m~~ b~_madc. ___ _
_ ...... fb.r' 4._.,J_fJ/LB.yesk.cJ.r..'{---______ . ··---
--___ .. ge5u 1/::_fdel'lT. of fi l{,l_u.!-\df,'1/.JLfa~{ L__ ·-
-.. ····-dfhoed. wfi,_ r,w~+. «£. tf<e .MPli. fill n~qht.__ __
..... -·· CD1'!5!St._t2[c~ncrdi' w,-/h. l'.0,l1.1.i~ed.u-eb,c.. ... __ _
_ __ Wt'S{ lf.krt llhl bw,Hl6~Y-~V1d ."IT>. 5cJb l if catr/L~\l::'.i
-. --l'ifea.lly.{L'1tC:cprdhil/J!'i _ ----. ' J
_ _ (oc krn~-h ILH ,JVl,~c.. :h1il'ili'.:> F.vec/ii:ie I dt~t~.~
....... __ Jead m921 iherefure, '! e lililtili..:"'12 mshoct: a. ... ·-
! . __ _ __ ca -&1 fut..sw;-th df1T.Jha,,_ fnUef i_ ~------
: ____ Mek.Lui.1y2 "l~e beer1-~'. __ . ··-·-·--·-----• 4~~ . J!l<J.Jen .t;Cii\le .in fe:/,iCGfc,, JYJ5-ti.11Aft~.i2!1ih_.i:._ ___ ,
.. _/t.rJf\11.8. ___ -·-·-·--·-··-·-----1
-·-.········· _ . /J'k.c/i.'ni-bdwe.f/1\ hi't7~":_..,J._Qurg{.::f,, ___ ,.!
... ---pk~. ~d1.1.it_{i.cfMiieJ._k!e...cl_~J~_..2f ___ J
_ -· frbp b)Jft,..,,_,. f!_.:re,,_1-ed 1~.f ,.;vkt: __ !
-··· ---·--·-q7~s{c~~--st'.1.j_f11 ·
. i
;
' '
lfl+ -()PR s/z.2./11
J5')uf5 /I~ M:, OF /\JOT!;
I. 01,( hu,1,\ po,;1,, /,n(, -· r-ffeJ ,AcJ« /Jr ,wf 7
2. Ccdibrt,.VM vf 6Pl2 «V\d EMGI. ,1Lt I\Ctd.,J.
w·ncd is dv,1i:: is 11) Sr>t it Q~J,pfllc'At iJ f1i1'ck., :'11 (.,t f!,ie snup.tvke d 1) ~e.,;t 0-if)(:;ci.11S.-,./,t..tt~
3. ~pk ~.,.,k l..1<c,hi>V1J /ID) .-c,rJ ·/-v h: cltt.(ed ~
--it,t 5u,l U,S sl,('{vfy µv'c\ n.,,,.17 {h/-.>"1. ~,,,!'>
TI;+.;,,~ Cl\ l 'JSll.4i;S
I. Oudw,,d p>.,;ev-/,vies d,Jn·+ JI.rid JJ, 1-,.,tttu:e ,;pf(.f~ . . . I ?i,<~i.i . /I ,;._f(~ds lvily S~v>\le~ vp 01 -d,,tc, ih~ Slv,ll0 J ;,.,~ ~,...J .
viv1 ifie de,-,p ( p,it'v }i"e dil>Lh -.J:;.LI k.s.c k~ ~
OA b/i, M"f) ;f rwer i..., .. ~ r,Hceted Ji:J-,. L ,;JJ~,
C\'10M4'iel di.i,, p,..+e kw-.rrl. -k ,A,<-jt. ti.'4:, ~-/!,; ....,!,,irec:;,
-14~ cv'i'.t~ei,,J li~t\ cov, hi\\.('., ;., \£.ese v\,rech·",s.
2. ul,br,,fiQ•\ i:, si+e 5f't'llf.:_ .,,;-ii,~ G.fi< (-J 9161
1i,e,~ 15 11.:. M,,·J i, ,,, l,br.;te 11-.r,e ,,,,,1f:,{'i,ents
~ad.,< re~ Jf drvi,, l lu..,~0
1
.
¢'N7 N),ke w ·1hfmh11 st1y5 l1r: :/M') '5°od
corre/Ahil" befi..1£1e,, *'r t:tVI 'Vlf{ tf,Z dt..f ~.
jct}t5 }-1~ see.> m~/,./ h!t:.sft w.'ft.. d1a.W1eh,r·
}e~s -thr,n otie foof-qaorJ1t15 lo p,,,,.~1,0/c;,
..:(et{~ D/1 dcd(t, Mt,)(1h1u~ /;i,ir,~I 1-lr
,s 6-7 . f,/cink areti.5 Or) (rr. ~o.Jc,,.J( fl'lc!Ll,U
· s.Je, 1-o re v"iA ·fmm t;Dil 1 > . ho mi ev,·c. us!' "J il,e re 'r h ufli ; ~ ) +vr 'ill~
~1
fT1 '(J~ 'J 'l{,J41~.r' <;/JJ./17
1·;
LfA-~FR
?licfu # s.·vb1e ... t _
I :i GPR SJ.rvey ~t Lf A fti1,u.1fd 5adti
( fo-'.vsi"9 on l:M6 I cwom0il,e~J
14-i/,r/;<A lfe~ move. mdal c<•jS
15 tips Gf~ Sctwey J LlA -h ... ~.-di N.J
fio JI¢¢ GP(<. c{afa..
11 1355' C,/e,r,.111f19 GP!{ rccord<r
GPI< Seb ~e) l,i densdy aY1cl co,-1dlfi.lt,.rice.
'Da,k cefleclor e.,ai>ts t>.'TIJ1£r1 C-1sphc.lf w,d sor(
lr/1¢ Call Ly11ne Prar1ce, Pflljelf /\,1(-011lu1er1 CDrl1
re~ter~ l. 5/i e 5,ty5 h 1Y1£lk~ ::-vtre -!ht:1f ;[r·t
-1ii l/o:,11n'J SOP l« Cjevphy:,c,;,, if fl,ere rs 1)11e,
t¢4-S Shc,:,f CPR {i-c,m Go tb /20 ""dh norhv;ov'ffA
--fran 5e cfs .
. ,ffs'f 5''-18 ·'TlSO £SD U1/r~rrd-tt,rs l)umk,.
'le~ -3,iS--~oqo :E-SP {Y/a.in tJ,.,.,.t,f:r
M,11 O),~,/.r 7, //
SliJ5' p,"-fJi.,..,f"•
. l115 CA.II 1;5D lo iriv'€~~5c:..lt e.xi:,/efl{e o?' rl•t' .. I
iCA I SOPs.
GP/?. h, f ·fi,c..f dwsn t sbo(\J up Ufl time., doro.H1
is 11 of rneia./
Gr"j C'.cuncd a,, cl !Y/,l<e, Wi1/if rila.rt ~-,,le,"()
Jr'~ ·fo 5ovff, vvhe<e. rnd.d «,'je:; Hde.Q
-f It. ri'.1 1) , ft) 11 , ·
t "'( /JN[ dl~ S /J.;), J:-i 1-
,,.
Lf B~CPR. ~ /lih¥-
;35¢ M0v<, -hi L,,Jf;/1 B -lo CcJviducf GPR
wort
/35b CteCtttln~ (i'.((}rd1tllj/fni111~ w11~ £, GPP..
/4-1 ¢ ~'': GPR -fr.ive;5e-. i(s"':J /0 -ff ·m.11'.>:Xfi
cJtck, ,13 .:wry ~.
/4¥) ~fl':) Councd a..r~Nes d'l site.
· -/43/ · Cross /,hes (;}-5)-lrc,.versd w,-ft-i GPR. ,.._f
.s/i-;p ot ~nd tt4jce,,f -b &r hlrk O,xK
?t.,rpose ,_ lb loec.fe IS<>lc;_fc...J cJruwis Je:_.:fa/.
1),p-/J, Jt 6u<,f:'d mc-;ferri;./; ;if u;1riJr,1/ b
a.ver~,p > l, b -0.f
Cor1c0,fr1<ch,;;,-, "# object per /0 live...r .fcef
M1her di?W1ete, ohjeds ch.eru!J ovi dt-d-c..(ffli?)
µf-L£-..i,,.i/{//f 8.
!}a,Klllj ~,hor14/ 9n-d @ Lt;,u,j-/iJJ 8
(55/ Je5se Sk·!Di-1 drivl?5 h1 ·fo 5tty Mov '"3 o{ ~/ /,As
iS neAr <~cvi
5,1\fve yJfS . ".re }Jjft fi ><'hi etju ,pr11en/-
;s.s5 J;k5u1111c GPR c. t L,;.J,ff/1 f?.
l&1yf hnish GPR a.f [4"~./i (I B ir ila.J
ib12 /1-fove -lo J 1:;rlh-2.sfi:r.-, e,(J: ,,f .&:.J+i'il .B.
,111,,,k fwo eur,k0>1crtr:.y /,i,,ej exfewl,"j NE
ll-Jm ed,e ot eurre,-._f s-/i;Jy Ccfec...
_ Jl,,,35 ~,~ GPP-t.;}crn_1 2 /,i1ef 0<;/wee,, wrreA ~ arid
~~ trW~:~1s-~111
l/
l{/22/11
Su~1ec.f
JP/2. @ lf 13 ,~ (ooJ
/11._d:'.1½5 c,JJd-,011~/ 5,1f@.lt6
Area oFcaVJC(de, -hi { a.4.Fceh f-fu
'?.¼t Fork Vee)< , Lt..r-.J(i/1 6
1525 All'"-oF Cw,cr.ikc h// .J1~c<'kf -lz,
fut Fo,k. Creek) (.q.,qRI/ /3
lb5f Dnvt. vttn c.fd~'J ':J''d ~ f.t;,v,J{/1 B wit.. c..·v.fe..,,.,4. :
dr<Jjj'...,7 hehthd vehde.. . . •
~ £-.. fe,if re IY1"11t1/fJ? --h, be d.,/;,.,eJ ?. -I-Lf A : \
1705 50t.1-/{.,er11 ex:fo,it ·
~ Gn?j C~w,c, / re-hi rn5 firM flbfe. f-k f"'tc/.,,:;,J
1.¥ . .1 ~/u/H· ';;pray pci1111. . _
..L(<-110!,ced -/htit ,;.,sfe~J J s1.1rvey,":5 is.,k-/N
grer.;s wilt. 11. .. Gf'R, -/1-,e GPR is be,'i-) c.J,eJ ·lu s~~? /,irJe arca..s o.Her --fJ,,.,_ 1Df/v'J .JD.-k. ,s
wmpkk. . .
N0cfl.o.Je,-h<n :;iJe of L~J.(i// 6 f> ~
5<-Lrveyed w,ih GP{!. by 'D:._-.,i<) llv{'f'{),
l1JO M:.i.rk /,l'\/3 fxk,1d1"'5 viRsf)J0,1tii.v"d-w,,rd
ivl5,de of kNeJ tiret. M ltiJfJ/ 13
\r-/1 )/ yw YY)t'c.rk /cJerh/ axfrmt wilt, lh'.xden ·4.ke~
· vr ftie 1,ke?
1143 Fin,sh GfA. r£ST oF c11r1t11f C!feQ... C.,J,...,.,.J f,~o
, 1f ~ Ji~ ,;; /41 /11-
IL) -----L L.4t}Pf IL'-A
AJ\/Jf{}ALY ;l'IAf'.
!
8 ~
:.:, .. ,(I . ~ ~
•.. ~ . '<:·
"'" . -.,J < VJ
Q . ti < .... \lJ
(,'.l i
-i I ~
!
I ""j
---•·-----' !
I
I
)
i ' !
i I ) I I I
' ' -I l I ' '
.. Lf\NDF.lt..k B
NcNJALV !YIAP
~ :,
""' < ~ .,:
:i ....
l .
·1
+ ...
..
\__
---
I
V WJ r'"'7 8 W30...L ·s
·9 '-V J\ljf~'!7J a ,Jv_'/ r,,pv-x;~-a >j'..,W '/,
~ IJ!f('""7 iJ} '?;'Jf) T
11 11 ij-pv\i7 8 wi<ll · i!' v 11'-Jr~1o7 @°dofJ ·,
zyn/~ (l:l].?/10!'10) )12/rJ/V\ ::JO hc//;lhll'l/nf;
lb/z'z/ s
:./'J'JI-JJ/JYl tf :r/ -/17
111.?-/Jl ;;H/J j/,h?i-µ--,;/,:,,, /'7'"hOJ 'fJ j7 {3 WJ(JL.
'J./'"" ~"'!kt.,r,:; ,;,alw0n5 · ?/ls r;»v~r f/;t 51,i_, · f l7 bv!ppuG y,;1vy 7'3/ Ii)/ /£'bf
. ··tt /l1:fro/
fQ vo,:sv·~r'•d V,J'i}'fno5 r/jG 7~ f"')1 fl)! flM
. -~d
wo1'!JfJv 171,,v Ctlq ,,,,;iv c:'wpp,JG t1s•v:;::1 ¢~!,J
/,'i.,,,P/'Y''f .>i?aU V~\-7 (hf)
Ct11 /'/""q .J 17,JV
''JJ:7 p,.J' "t 'r-'~/Y : s-1/ r><..iJcf '/CJ W-=T
w-',,., 11.u~ r~rr,1~'t, 'te"'Li 17,)J/'J ,-<.,.,J~5 ri</'M
' lb/·n/5 /9W3-9 :rJ
-·-." .: ~-. ?. /;~,/r? 1ns¢ ,~II',+: Havikt:'\:,O(\ <i:>'ivmt:S Ccd>1'1YDI ◊t /!"'-;:'( b'X'k. Crew {Y-l;o-L ,-,,_cludeP ·· Ge~ C-vl\cd, /ieid MA""'j",., ,GIPTf~J1,, Jl-1,~ \/f.i!i,1hr,'Y\:-\J'I, L,,..<A Ge:0pk1,,lit, (;f;;i.sv11 Jl,.v,d !-~1,0, Ll,.s,s1.,nf Ge,,pt"tSl!l>r, $PT! Ke.1f 1,/J,,.,b,,)..,,,,, Ovu·~i~t,I, CD;✓1 fi.,lc,c_f t r~·;cJ !2 r f, ,jB_(;f!~"' : D . _ We4fher; .Ca 6 'F, SL11111y, hi 1,ids z l¢,'l-V1 (J,71.ff!, G0j G·Lt/\C, / c,, ,,{ f/1,chi,d ~~r5l, (.fr, ve l<p ¢7s;,-~lor111n:i )-kc,lih Ltnd ~,Jdy 1ncd11~ __ ~---Set l}.,p -h:, Sw'ley Sovth 9,1"1 c-J Lt.i11litill A f:-vvi-/i IDliM 1vi:-,-h-w•1e,1/-. (;r('0 C~c!~c I 1:c ~--luhd"') n:: -8 /i,,ie) mi,),ttl yc,t 2::l,'-1 t· wrh1. woa,~; A!•.te.s. __ _ t (/3f;J C,,1/ Ly11r1~ Fr!l,11&. Nef in M1k~ 'Nl~jhtmu,vi 1s ·h41111r'J Gre1 Cou"'r,1 a,, hLw hi ccnd,,{J MM acdti. colleL/iC.1 of) _nie a,ea (;,,ildecl v~~rlr~v so.(#t of -fhe ~-an~ Ii 4 Y"1:-<I•" '}nd. _ -f ~f1 Gre9 LuwKi! _ cci,Jdiicts e~ hie ffifM -,U.(\/fl/ . Ut h,1n~\!I~ wbi lt 5Ptr leo,rn [ 1-1(.1.rro, _ vv'jht1Y1,,n) perh!,m C,\l; ,;u,rvey north of _ Lei"'Jfi ll A. __ M,ihael 'B~Jh wf,/ls> ~r ___ . _ .. '.2P1I :i1'i'tr_ 13-i.f l)(i c;r~ .,.Vi'."j 1,,wl,\.l~s vp. · 1 ,(j,',IJ. U l i1 k#.,lv)Pr-. -_j /}.~ I? ___ !:i./ubl __ 12.d~~h'<>"l _dep/h _qyl _ 11)1;:M _ !~ IQ.b l;i{I-. _ _ _ 1.~et-:.1 & 0"1~xpic;,Jfd .:i.-011,:;..,~t'. :::.: _ SDI I uses Gffi 5outl,, of ~ 1r1J.@ ~~Jfi I/ A -_ 'v{i II drow nar1-~eft. ll1t cmd Mel_/1,( iou11J,,7 ___ 6PR "' deplf of b1.wo. I mid d@;wiefecL TupMd upon E Mb I -h, defevmi~c Meh.1/,'-__ __ /\Ja,1 Nirde-/1,c,' h,t~ ~/'.l? 1 11of 0,1 12~i(:,/_ ¢'N5 Team qoe5 1a/o &o11vri/10use _-fti i?15fe~t ckirn _ NO. Syr11ti;i!'lfJ i~ ~j'-'l;'!J ?d £1".s__ -b.ir>s -_ l Nole-: fttn k observed tif td9e_ d &..t Gr!::. (r-f.,,fi, -_ M,chr<tl 8e1J/1 b,1J b!e.11 nlfb/gd_, C Lt:i"c/61( 8 ). lip/ jDlT reduas dafa in /3r<W.ri/u.,,se. Dzci!.iovi tYw,de iv nAwo,,-k m S~!y,_J_'1f. Crw __ w,1/ {"'1rl1 ci/fer. l/.o.rki11J Ff. Li:,ljJF/113 Idec -klJ, ----------------_ Le;., {;JI A LS CDM(iefe,. Mov1(t ~ -fu LJ,,,Jf;/1 £', I l.3/ Crew mob,lize$ -1-u Lc,.r,J(f I ~'-I.J-IJP. _h:_,.~ 5/J:/ff
.,, ..
{1.,,_J,(UI Co,s1p,,,,.,cl5 ~ / 2 7 Jtn
e;T'J¢ Kt?tlf }-/c111l1fJ5011 C6:;un1es co1/rol of
l0ljl,(ok _
¢ 73', ke,1t i--11Mk1nson ':>pe_c. ks lo 7 odd /-fe;q~ ,my.-,-
r,1;7c1rtl1117 proqress C"l /lie pro1etf So fqr,
/Wif'-1:>5: '.) '°111..y,/<:) ueyadie,1f rd Mlt'-/4
n,~d, llH,'-2:i {ex,5-1-i,,_1 '.,.,,c://:;J_ A/st,
11 \liu,it,tc Drilc /,: l) 1 60°r, lv.:id.:. /ONJ('h
Levd .J (?cfah;," • D
l--".,(,u'.lf1e./ Pre Se,,+.
Kt,J Jlc11,f,.-1;n1 'C()f\,1 [f,/c"ld, o,,e,$'.')if
ToJJ i--/Nycn1fy2r 1 (],EUlR..ANS
c;~V C01.-u1cJ, (;,EOTl:?.AN'.:>
Ji'm P/i,//;p,, ) T.:,,cy,f c,,,>1fe l:d,,
CA,,r/es )<;(/:_ 1 Tc..,y0 f On:;ife L.:.LJ'.,
/,751' ~k-m 7'."1 PJ1;//,/.15. fk .Seif.-; '.1,·~ tok111L'
-fi,r fl,e -R,,// .. ,c,,"lj C'CJH1()0U,'Jti,(d1!.-x111c.-/1,(
hyck-D,i'bvo·,:;) .
\loc~ (CAie, ,,,dcd G1..-,/"'""J ;)
/vJDd,/;e,J tPt'.l (ll 1i,0r/ 't;uiu
' ('CE: T l!T FA
• Ti'.( • CCl4/1,2-DCA
'tCA • c),/,.,rcft,1111
• I, I D<,4 • "1t-f11~/.,,, c!J,,;1i<:
• c -1,2 ·D(E , t,/, J.. -TcA
. '?J 2iJC~ ,i.;:{h-ri ~\ /2ri Ji: (?c,ec,i,111 ,,, F'i ~ f"\. f_,i.11. t ,' I l?-i 111'2e1v.\.'Y\.., -::, / 9-'7 f1 7
g,lr>H'!'la()" of l;s f ~✓~"'' ~ vJ~-k .. ~! 2zhz
Meth,, ne C:Q/ lee f~,1 fra,'vl ;:c lectal s·,,1, ;e/c '.,
/VH;i~?">
rmv-14
Mtv'-::U _ .... ... ... . .....
:'lnd 111e1rk po11~/\ 111 tc,,,,//;/( A-,;0'1 P,
· /Jie<e ar<2 cci!rt?nfl'f .S,1,vt'yor; .'1 '>i,rp/,,,) Gr,v\
::,'wwVi"inze /<1;,f w<"f'K ..
• D,Ju1cd ~x1fnh@ l.,11dhl I, fl, 6
, Di,/ I] Qt ·6,1,I or'{)/ic l,,,iJ:s
• Fov1r1cl (i(t:t;_s l'f ''"Jh re)p,;v:s2 t,~/ ,;,e,,,
cf /ovJ rf5pc'' St'. 7!11:.. 5C i/ c;c,'· 5,1(11,y ,~
.. ce,dt11ed c-,1 c;,r,\, ,,{ /1 111 res,,J,1,~. _
• N,d,,re J t,~wn,;y '. ,/,:,11,l,,1,; ( ?lGJ 1.,.-,d(t/ •'
A. Fi//4,d . /Vl cv, /11 . ..
• :D1,YJ.,,1,ic>1>' c.fr;nal)1,;/,1(!) C,,.,,/{,l/ /J:
I ..
L ..
2l;
S,1/ -r,
Gc:1 s Kr ;;,dt ~
-60, I Gli.5 n,, ;,-f s
Lt:,,1df,II A
5/2"/ti}
({( 14.:i
2J0 {) 0 0
LFA-b ! t-"l\-12 LfA-/~
150
1r·L· ~ .. Gs
<' v V
LfA-, LfA-1/ Lfl\·1/
/{.}(! CJ20Ct 646 J'(i."'3.1•
I.) 0 .. 0
L:FA-4-LfA·JC Ll"A IC
'T't-1 V..;l 14.fo 5, " V 0-0 LfH -_-_'> JJA·f l fl\-j>
Cl"/2l,.L.-'J. (..3 \1,1111ci.11i.:.
D 0 Tc,J Vil: "·'( O· -0
LFA-Z Lf/~•l) LFA-1,f-
Plf 1.ZL V.~ylO,i ,o . ., IIPcA·Ll'f -5u O· 1d V:,t.,-..~ . 0 0
Lt·A-/ LFA·] U,A-1.;
30 go I 3()
B,,·.ed an "'" ,,,1 .. /1" s /.: .,,/t,;t,q,1 0/ ·it,;, '~-'/1 ,,/ ·
pr1'(,,..,1n,ry _So,/ G,-,, ,(,,,,,,/<' f!cs,,/l,, 14-lo l7s.,/
7,,, r,,,.,f, i.1c-,·.: ,;(Id<>,/ r:•« ... d--,1,t f'<C:'fJ,.,1 ,f.
-jf,) l 1>11 ('-~cf,,,, //1 ,. //,; ,ve,l' Ltlitlecl t1lhxr:ll1c'( -
A 1bh;/ of-_,'f ,,l,11'•' po,,ifs \veri ullech·d /,,,,.,
-ff,L Lr,y1Af. II A ei}Jz,i/i,er, ~nyfJi;""l '(c',k,-//,,,.,
ff,, ,lt/cJl',;»1 /,;vi,/ J, (r·,1-;r11e<N/ f{ /1.--/.
Ern.r'.lce..0.LL
_ VOC?
JPe-/nit'LM C,,.,,,p,,_,rJ !) ...
__ f\l!eit,od 'i,Q.Ju !}1,.,d,f.u.l
• ()2.,, ze,-,c.,
• e 1-1, y I 1,,.., 4''1 e
---h)1:!.f ~~?
, -/.,-/;-, I Y-y/'"-"'"'
/rJ_,J(! /0dd ;-/t\o/£/'}r''/ff rev<,< dc,fc--6ur-,, 0'.'c/~// /l
,:,.,,1 ,-,dds~J? rn,;(c' su,/rl'' p<•,,if5 '-.;·(2''.;(o,••,;i/
,11,irks -lhez. p,;;_,,-,-f, /ll /he £eld.
. N ofc Jv/'vv'-14 . .5 (''c'l!d, rW'1 d,J;:cf.
/i-lvv'• 25 _5 {"'-•·~L 1w1 def-1tt _ _ 'fh,~ f-Jc,k ~:,, ~,-t•n1,-cl 1,,,-k,rJ.7-s/,2-l_f,;,1
!J-S,) Dceonn •l'J) 9i/ 'f'' pv1iif, [Git.;nci/, /<Jrk)
Decovi (X,cl ;-11,_s pit.~-/,,:_ ->lic\1ih'_J dYl <1sp/14/f:
. 011(' k,yc,-J. ri,,-hc ,l,cc>hhl c1n dr/v.!I: .
-De(v-nf,;M1nd1',,,1 pt0((:.5 t;CA,nr,.;~-/r:-c I ({r,Sf) «Ji-14.
>Vf'j ,vr,-h-r -&,_//o,,i,-s/ 1,1 ,,,,JI'.. ;,';-ff-. _:!,~;9.11•:,r.c/
wa:fec /V:, u/cuhcl ,_,,.,J (-Cl ,/f<il)i_.
l<x/llA Ca.II Ly,v>~ F,s,,e, njed f11,,;1ruyc .(TY'1 fu)er.:;/_
She s,1id <:)"_{ ./;,,,,,_,,s1:i'!!f J gr,,/, -/r-b, ptc/c.,·',
make sqr~ ,i""'-lyx.1 /Vld1 dt. f"'pc1>t-cl f,1,1,1,1,u
«r1d tj(e_ -/1,,re CiA1 f"' L/,,,-.p _ r.1,:-/1_, 6 t,4',,,P ~?
J;l.i/)'i Peconn1>1 1 l),de,M I,; . _
i~+s:-JJ,;r~ -her sci I rs 1,~,;, i, c,,/)cctr!£/ t{Li,, ell, I J JI f) l:uct 1{1.i,_,~;vY,, s /2 7 / i ?-
_ U-/lr'(s '\\.~?f'1g}6111;:l ~ i,----~---------"--~ ------,:;,rr}wL<,
I' -;---:s,;r, w~-fayi,'fl~J~fi'fjiJ ;)[~, F:.:111aJ y/;jw ~r,;,rT ______ _
'1-----ppo]_~-:TZJ-1~p,.,rruv1YJ-~r1?tp;;iy:;-17f-ru11m-;;¢n
,--AS-a B-zr:;s/1,0/7 J2,,w11G xo/ ~20tf"fJ o// ;,,019 r---------------;111_,S-ft;;~/OL L 'r---1){./r;,'7!17-x-,'f--. --
ii-,:;r;w,9 ::>""'7-•7. ~~•,r v.,, r~,.-lyr;g,-:,,,7)7;!;
11-,,, •v:_ ,~-f§1""rv--•:~rv~r~1--:?rr-c,;1nf.-~1-"7~-,-~a_3 ___ -___ -__
1j,,r111,v o/f5"c'!'.T"1 7'F, Gr;r;,q dnu, ;,,r,;,TJr ?I~ ~~--
I-/2dco"' :J:J,,/ PlflZl5l7/\\I ,c75 -;:,~li'?J-,uFkreif f1-:5'5f1 v_, ~ J----------c ,, ,fu,,,.,-7;,w ,Z-1_;7fi"I 1707/-rzi
i. -----v,--vJnp_,--, f'l''i--J),k;1w~fi 117;·---iwrar--JliJfJ-c•T~
: , -----{i,iiil'll.llJ.l l]O?Vl-<;5?1J'Jl'-,,l/\;lL1r;,l,vrr1'\i\) /' w 110) f f9
; ! ------_: __ ---·ryooJff :f'JTJ -v--1'4''7«'7':J'H-ITl/t
i ',---0,-r71,rr/,y,Jn,TtTzx-;;•1r ry 1,1•'11,1lt1(l<1 -,i-7-,,-------
11: --11::r""'f?-'1."'di<f ".:ip,-np rywoJ-r,_rn11J1T7P t11'1VJ-1W01-
' _ --------------------------------,,;aJ\lYls s'>"G--1 'i') __ _
il --------~-;,'1r-:,~'[FV,1'iliifli/W-•r-r7 1nr;;,,n--1u.md hftl'JJL (1 )---
;1; -----tVJP, ;,,rJ--TfJil/7'1-ry'i.'0-7 f'T7;1TT"'-17-J(~J"'i?!J" W?lM1J ___ _
i~ ---------.-?)r,1,---.,-,7,.,:~rf-TT"i ~-v;z-'p•:v1r·[t s"1r""-""17.1
II~---'Jt-J"v IA'-"{!-;,l01,--""'-v J" j}" ""1/ i'-0li--fu4-<::<2t~~\
i~ -----------------'f5JJ--5fliiii~-,ry{j-~-(r1rf.--,.,u11_1 __
i,:--. ----------.:i1G;'lqc1rsJotiiUTT.s-:'f1P i / IJ.,--71i1~.~u7-·q-c111.u
:lr-fr,,Jns:-;s:r?-S:li)/\M)h$ 1 voiJ-7?JJ7r:J----P)f')vtryirrn°T-
l; fl~~--;;,rr----w-~;rrTiTT)f/Ul--r,cid--vi;---p~mu
: . ' ----o"Ac>~J\"1'7'TT"'1f PJJ?~"71Tf, Dt7;1q,; •?Lf -+r-~ ,~
· -------:r1:i,-1c Fo 11< d,il::;n~rnnm-r.,; 1._, i-:, s . ','7""r,····J
Be
t!./-i>tfs l<,,1,,FJ',1~:;e l'"::t,Q ,
. J:'PY Jtµ. "'' wa,pJ,7 l"''P'' 0f cf~ p,_,[,
p,1:0d,J bt1r1?JJQ.J t,,7 !it:'~JC'.0\ ,oAJp,11, f lil> /')V>'c~7 ¢¢s1
?-f''5 3,~'1?( l).tj '.1f5 1'~'1 '1''0 'zl $Yfl
-''+'5 -f 1?
71,"YJ/J L\9_f,-/-,;: ?l<;<;JJ y'l•J1 lJ""H / ;mlp!ii/ O}fri
1,,;r, r ,., rJc_.r}
~)(,/ F' ~)Y,11.);)}7 '5.'fPt(J t'11•,~~, ·?\•1 1 ~l1f''l.f]l(7
_('' y)•q <i'] l" ,:, ,11/l''tJ i,,,L 't' ,Cf" F r,,,u
l, :yww (>f ')! '/•-N":J) l""'~j,) '/Ao,,s /'•;:,1p;:,1f5 fll s;~(7_,
'>{..J(.'/t1
~1"1.,f-·'"~Q] P/"0 '/5 \l'f_L ff'"c,J S'.,(, J'OS 9/) P"F
f1X-f, ,; 'f.j.'.M I\Ul;J t''?1J1s f'' /.,!-J-5 ctj--Si
l'1'/';/ 1/1 '11 /'Jvn".) '/ rJVn°.) ¼,') "{->'.>f/1.Zf (-I;/ }'Ye/,/
f'1''1~l-'1?J 10 4/l?lf) 11v1, ;r-''Y-"4 \ll/'fUl/7W
''{ N(f <.u•~j-lil p,,..,, 1~41,;:i9 :JJ/Jz?JC) //'7,' //VS
(/"''n' "'I' Jm:-s· ?9t; JJ;,(Q,J ~111-p'ldcut 11 '"J?•cAll'
1'/''"l/1 't>ilJi'' -:i~t,1;1/J )7 /OU ,1 "'H 'p;,,,Ni/Jl)
"1 /1!?:} ·'"l);il90 ,!7 Cl!O/ s /7 5/1)7_<; i'ltf, '-37 ~
''"'F"'"I' ('J"i\'-/-<:?CJU)5i'(]_ -;,11,r";I,_ )u1,/-.7 Of .S'f/'Jf-H:f r;tt/
,.-,-,f,u 'l'/' \•l/f .JO ),ll/
/1/'('U )V)-; 7J11l7J_J ")t•L•l.7 // D. V•,1~7/1 -'-"'<'f'~S
2P''F)G'U ""'-'Id ·'f'I-S ~·11 110 /'IJ(, ~1'1/d'-"11,'S
/,~,,,,-,, ,,/j /'0j ~1/f ;c-cd/< ''/-,_,.~/,(';iJl1<; _J/;l!!J-
;-,s,J /f'r'-1 l,~,t.L ·uv1J _;1?'1J--U<Jj-A1111/2",r ?/?'-~;-y:.J
°I r..,,,.,r, "'-'!' /..,,t1f ,-;,,,-' _J)l)wJdr;)}i r112_
t.t,f-1, r:/_f; ?l;u "YJ l'l,;,_;J
o::
. -,::
;jfJ
_Cu/l~ct Soi/ G<h 5mnples _ . :5/n/i7 _
6c,/ '.JC<> 5<,,Vlp/e;, cm; b"'11j c,,f!ecte,/ frJr» /tic
(ef "!t11n,d it(t(L ~ CoC{vlC.Icwd k1r/<, . _
Ao/e. • /J,:_w fy?tn•j ri,,c/ ,ynnj~' 1/,e u.sed fu-_
eLtc/15({ 1'1 pie. :2/,.k fi,:, l"l•VJC(..I (.] ,e de.urv1n:J
171/ '0nephe,-J (, be,.~,! _ callee ted. by i:.11 I<. __
C1Jw'l(1f tJ•i<'S, HN!) +o ,crfc,, for /-le,J/t, ,inc/
,;r,{:'.,r ;(.(t'/'il/h.J' 'i?g,c•II • ere"' +, r,_,,Vl~,t;/ ;I),,., -
Leve/ [).
11t;;¢ To,i<l 'ef'e,J1 ,-0.fi, IYJr: .)h:,r,ru. ,ba,.f -fie ,c•r,.,1 u
~p.1111n7· C1Llc'.l) to /JI) /1t,ckyqr,1 jQ ll,e'I {<1<I
pl,ae a. 50,/ 911, fXJtJ f/,,ere.-, ,
-------· -...
C(? Nnl o&rJ!,nJ{/f/., -::; 1:,-, /11
31 I
_frflll(cf~ UM Met, ti _ _ . £/:iff1;; _ ti
.C'J.73¢ k~,,t !lt"'ki,12,M.L,ke!>cL,.,AoL'!{H,, _f,.,tibj,_ l I Ii .. __ Meets JodcA ff:,1e1\'\eyc.,' .A~J. Grey-(,x,,L,/ .. .!1;
_ _____ (£J &:~1vnh OU ;e . l
_IR,W,,t!_ _ k' I:! d r, ves n: _ In,}es 5.,,f"'rM,, ~hi. f 1() fiK -Mhp _
. cJ 7/1;;:f'J'ff cl c,1rm 5i'I I 1?<'1.> 5,1,vry Cnd. _
/!30'5, I.fl 1eh1rn:; -io B•o""llbo,1,e. (.~ //:, Ly11,w tr-,,,y_·e
. (_tU CD!Yl udr,rd, Att<1nf.:,' !jer ,,yY]Mt:d}:
C 1) 11-tp ,J /J,d /p'j>I,/~ ,,ff_,.., l,\-/nr1 ,,,,,,5,-0,,
( 1) fww 1,. "J-e.,d' of°tl,sr,,s,./ c:lt(,~o/,o_,l ,i, fti,:
-i',v/d?
($) 11,;ve,. Ttidd !l~yw,_rye_r c,__/f C,,:,~el!c -/.j/s,,,.,~s·
....... .. . 11,'f o/ .Sh,~u:,d hirn1 : . .. __ . . _ -.
fl:</M J"px,J: -Iv !Ykh1,,,tl 73,,;,/1 ,~£. £~v'th:m&nk../_ _
Ccvd,i11;:/or. iz£!V.? /,,~ n'1 "'""k,:d_s1,_,d,~5 ,-{
.. PRP (,'>1.iH/i,..,f} !v'irk $9 ~( . .. . .. .
,/.ji:LAsk~A To.dd th-jtwwye,: v. a /L_{jJt?dl~ &!'"'f ___ 1
i,b,,v._{ (Ylt,p. /!e. ,S,,;,( be h),y(t/_£//obi '1/' l"'lh J,'?r; J
Co('y (l"J'{ It~ fr!r. f_C[)_ ,..,j f 1[) I LqoiRa E . .. l
___ 5.er p~-3i:23, -fli;s l.z7l,ooK _ ... . . .... --------[
fj'i/J p+wr --lo ?h"f'Jg,/ f;.r,., rvdt.. (ie.1 ~",,,,,,L,-,,,?/ --f
C /,,r/,,J /::.1rk ,71,,'/ >.v,f/ &:J'" y,ci.,i,,5 //1, p•dt.
__ n 1,,._ c,li"fecA -/,;,/")'-_
1AJf:5d ~p f bu/u I") m f }5 --·-·· ------
1¢)¢ Drive iu B,D,2rihousef.U(YI <;¼_Jer.Jfii.nn.1! .
. chi?ck_ c1,./ilj."'I {e,rlh, c,bfatnd 1hv:5 ljr. ____ _ 1P f:iJ cfMJvJi.1v0n ,;):i-li_!'J''l
. -
·•
32
_ 5c,I ~~,>_c:·!~'.·11;t[11_£i._(?<',~lf-~ ;~/c§./1J _
LANDE!LLIJ _____ . _ . __ __ __ _ __
__ ECO_ ls.f.5-L!LT.,S __ _
_ff?.EU!l!IVAR 't_ 017Jl _ _ ____ _
------•·t__ · @~---· (i~---,:.z -AJO -
····-------··~ --· .'1 .... __ ;L_.,.;w __ -;c.
----------------1£ .. --lV --•~--------•'"--· . .;." o
····--.• i." .. -·0'--..• ! .. ____ t)!L .. ,..~---s.:> -----
.• ~. --@'~--~~--

•

~~~ ... ?!. ':!00 __ _
---~ . i: .'~ -~,~~----·
---:,-·-----(fpk) ... --;! ( __ --·-~~ ---.}L. --------".~~Q ___ ... ----.. ----.. ---. --. --·--
~-:c,db: J~: flf::--Z..28; 1~,Jti; :-: l'://i; rz: rri::: :.5Pi; ,[.):
II tYI= -$. '57, t/2 P(f -/0,/.., J ~/2f{:E -lA& )T(f-6'/', 1 l'(f'-
'.2"/, :Li It/ 11f '.~II j ~: CH~CL:z. ~J,i .. i;,; I: f'cf-l.n;
_. /3; II t7cd =I.Xl; l'L itf.~1J_6 > 22: ~l~!X_f--::1•1~ ____ _
--3-'1 I'! f2 }.'W ND 1 4 J; NI2 _ _ __
_____ :jie It v:-,1"'~' ,1111 n,J r~rfeJ ,&r i:1 s,v.,,,rle f1->111t, __
-__ .flK fe¼<ll::1;, bd.,,,,,,,_J"t~Ji..,n lin~d: Lf,.r,y
. tr ti-,~~ r,r~t
. ·--. ----rf j{,J-!M~}/J;;;;,~---~/;gj'r~
33 Iii.
--5:,JL_fu:,_ltn./1tfr~L ;f!;:,.,__/}1_ __ ----_5.)J.'i.ll.l_ -

-
-t
_LANP[/lc LA -

-

-
---··--. . . -_)i
_Fl D [?EC,UL T5-------··· -------------

-

-

-
--l
_f!1!£ LIM L/\/.fi/2,'f_ DA(4-:_ _ __ _ ___ _____ ___ _ ------~
/ '(2 .,~ _;-------------------1,
.LI 2l. '1} Llf .:,
·-··-··•·· .••··---.-· .. ---•-··-......... ~---·-· . ·--·lj,. :Ii --i • IL
. •--·-.... --. --.
l1 ... •-----------I, 2.1 . --·--------·--...
---'~ -----fir_ -·---
;., .iJL --•-------
. j;~Li;;i}:;;Go/V_'i r,i_ ~-,dwrd :f"</ r'o~ ,j7 51-,,;,· 'J--f•rv·-
( · · ··· · ?~11,is ,q1,11d · ·· · -····· -· ······ ·-··
Cli'sn -,qrpJ;jrJ i.VilJ ~•h J"!S. --···
· Jo :>jd•ii'iS ff>?/Jo'J >(''l/ IJ/l'iif;) ·· 55ll _____ ~·:~=
i · · · · · · · ~'i"i i'J"'''f/ ii;>i3>"9 ({/) ..... t -f"'rJ ; ,,r,·'l'"' j J ;,/'i/ ;, up -...
/[· isc/s-f.C-.1f"'1 "'/-pwrn,,~ '/"/-" 0u,;-,r· .
I~ f•';j ry•~iJ) )~jfivfj:,J·.13':)~f L . . r;l,Sl l
/[;' -;.2"'J/ S u:c,,11>f/ Gwu~5 3,'il 1r, ·· ··-·
•~ i.i:,,lijYCf tii ruG (,0,,n;J 15 II .. r/'JI ..
l~i .. -_p2-Jf5 V~11'ff ~;:JJ)-·-
it· . _sil ;9pr; f; a, 4rr;y (v;,7J .. ---. -
:ti pnrisJ,.J-!-'w::vv-;;9·Tsfl--"!,urr· -· -, --
,., JJ"J\'1,m:;· ·---~f;J.';J._: , k' c,foR·
iJ,f"r.c/-cJ ·····-----· --··· -~7 C'f"73:::
·--------·----··------------···· ---------
. . ,-~;;}-; r '/Jl{J ~91-;,, r.;£ ~w,ij/.:
(~,,<,,;,,,s -'-x}ll!};j~ (11'1/U 5/1;;,; stJ/i;tJfJ~9 · I.sf/
..... 3s a]f'.b3_),,r5ff:-pnr1 "'11-"'.i p;;~ixl,-,:,J :,JJV ,)<jf
.. <'i,."" > _,l,,,.v _;1;>ijf!''_"fl-[tt_~1s_ 1 •;,u1,"JGJ,)9 '7>57'"1 -
-t•r->QJl:7 F' 7°1-~ JJJh '1f'r:v, :p,.(,,;J,r;; )~Z!.. ffZT
· J;;IJ.,,13s at T'I-J1? 5/l"71 '/J\y/0 ~ ]30'fitiI. .9ZI
'5./.IJ1V 51/1 /1-'S .
-:J,.',Jll.f-/-7717 l'r1~"1 i?>f{ /71 ~ ·· 1:-s Ff ' 'JJCJ'J}JIJL
')J?J~< r-w (jl l,NF.'JF ;iq . .pu 11-1,1.7 ,)fl<IJYrJJ
'~•,:,-,. :,,if -Jl4j"l2'f,j--pvv qJd t_ ~ '"1.l./''Jf 11JJ110;;, ·
··· . 3 JJ >J (H/ t z fi11od crc,n,rnq' ;;,7vt':9 -
;)/. ,/,7 /'i.i[i li"S ~15Ji''1TI f;:,,:i_j Jq P·'f i /nb~j ;>_I;?,'-\
?Pl(i. , z l fi •1oJ f .j n,?fj/--1ou /-''l'v j\ Jl"'J/.H II .
''.if'.hll f/-4/cJ r;,,f; /'"'> /1/L'oy,/'F)J b · 1;'-'r'
'Zf /o/ ~1,1;p!J p //9 pv1'7 ¥ p;,,ow j-Vl;;>JJ O't}l
·. Ill -J."1
'('''In°,_) &a1j -f'' c,r"tJ ?i'Jf Jj.5{-, J I ¢¢f,}J ¢[,t/
',>{n;d ?715oiA:fo ·
{1,9 r;C'/ 1°9J J?t;' ~-rtrd I) lu:;/l•~,1LI{ )"?3.
n1J,;)011fO!Jd Y/r> ./NJ);! C,v;rc/i\11!, 517Gj!c.?!5"
f7-'07;}J '1/-W.J.1;! r'J?'f>ys-fl/-<;UJ~"'J H>f. 3h11 .
::i,~s-·te-·····-· ········-....
L "/' 7./_.;
_i-f(tG ,<;.__ ~
1
I '·2f f1
.• -

•

--
------------------------·---. ,_,.;\/,H--=Vi,
-----------------------. ------------: ---
I -~ ----------------------... --·------------------------~--
i--------'';}A 1, ~ ----~ :'-f,y-0--------•------•···----..... ·----o---·-f---~-
1· · ---------'.5,., ·c,,<f. -rt ,~ or, 1,1 ~' L'
E ~-" {::: .. } ,~?~~~~;;: ·"'~
I
;:----------· --------------------~----,,,i,------s• --· 1· -·---. ---•-----I~,.-~
/_,/, I q ti J, V(.f','~TVJ8 f \!Jr)-,
. -----·-··· ··--. -

-

.

·---.. ---------------------.. -I ... --------
-------------· ---------------
. ---------------------------------------···------------------
-----------~= · :wwJ-,o-·-.,n~v------------------------------------·-·--
c,('. . :J ,,c:
1,h,:P_,·1,.fr-'D-/~~;;!j9·-----------1ru-··--------hf . ·c
. -···.:, -···--···------·------·7;r..1fr----------------·----------· :_,
. -.
----1 l"'iJ"" j70.c: J95j,00-· ------~?:[.r------·-s1 ··
f n: ;(;1 }'_lfr·,,1· ,_, J'J\17'•4-'t;;!}J ___ -----· .... ---·------·------------·--· ·-
-1,;iT•l!l fv, l,1/)'5:J 7'J,1rp/~•,s, -!,'VJ1 _____ '{J
----. -· ...... --. --··--•2rJ nH_,,:;;--------· --------
17/j l'"$})r.11~:1a,:.p;1,;rr-----------

-
------------
--~G1Jufs-J9-s,,1zt-75_09___ 1z<11--------1 r-
" -

-
--., -----------

.

q7~,-----------:._c;/
:fW-:J ~(l?i'OW ;fu,y------,_91~:f f/ -
--· ·-----------~-,;np•1m 11-----· ·-----------------"---·
~r;,Jd·;;Y-lfr'DP1'TTJsrg-·---J{n.r···--rr
----------------------;i&i173------595£ ,-.. -----·-z (-
-zJ,~7/.::;.--·--------------~-------,7--rrJ __ _
98
1·-,_·
I '
3U
So, I. 6,15 A(]fl !'1:buJ (l,,,;,! H~ _ ...
~;h~'('ll<?c•df t,uu .. . ..
~, ,~ j::t ,It . -· •·-.. •---
~-
.2_ /0 ,.I! ~---·~ CHzCL1 -4.2}
jj ~ •. I. • ---· •--·-. ------·•-----r-.. ..
. • }2. . . .. ., ~~ ~
lll1Ct., ·"
.. .z~ -.• i.1. .. .N ,; •-·
.,~ .JlH.
_____ ??
X
,n .,~ ,l'i .2/
Le'.l'"'J .
·'7 '.S,,I_C.•i,2 ~,~t SF-I?
s J;,1.,-J_ h '2
" . -
,, ,, __ , 1
'ti' .?1
.. ~--~...:, •---
,.➔ .?l
•·-:'>, •··
" -r·
LI. 2/'¾ ~ ··-.. 1):1 •~:::-
J """' . 0:,, . .,
2/ ... i?._ .,, ...
··--1,
X 56, I ,:,, s;,,.,,,io; n,t {6/1~,kd i i,c,_:bc-1.i" '''"IJk ct-li-1.•;,'.
~,z.dory_ u{ f!,£;~,l c~1h\{2lr.I ..
_5.kil G,'..~. Siirvtt -. . .
-"=S:.~rlc.. . Tm,;__ .... D(,fe._
___ TO
... fQL
__ 102..
LY.3. .
[CJ4: __
_1~1>-S-.. rii.z ..
1 ']?,?,._ _ J h 7 ....
30
.. s· /4s /27-:
------. ---
_ C:".!1 !"7"" h .
--------------
" .,
,,
/9.f
.fqb .
}Q?__
)Oil _.
Uli. -·-· .
.. I ';:i1..¥ _ 2/J.. 7.
JQ'l,Q 2/2-¥ ..
r?c.'lc'i __ s),f ....
___ §/2,L
·--------·--,, //
··--
_ r/2~. ,, ,,
12,;1 ...... s.h•·
.. -_,,;Jz~
" ,.
.,
------------/I
------· -.. ------------.. 1hoc,, .. cf,,,..,r4~ .c-'..'.r~ _,,/{ Dmcdderf_£-r_ci1b,-1~r..hd_\,
___ Cil.'<'.n(1JW1(ls J,'Jd_ __ fJT[X. CYl•l(&>~:~J1_,'1b1 1 k½.S ..
CEp,xf ed .. 6.j c.Jl..'Lfl.ll I !t,;i .... Q)1. 5/_.1,xh ZG-' Q11 h.-
.JO
·--------·-·· -.. -------------· ----... ---··· . --. ---·· --
_ Re.5,.J_ij,__d .¼'flF,_/lj} f .Y!\.) ti1f(Vl ~Ci!:"ldt'= . ···-·· --: I
_LE.tl::: ';/j_ ;_ll_,2 0_"yl,;hLorkle, 5,1,_'j '{1!,,1,/k,:,e"'!'"r B-'ix/t:,,o_.: i
"'r:. !33 To/-c,I f W l,-/t.h(r I i /.,Ul:'10 ; lb,& Vl"-y) ,M,:,.,)c; ___ ; ·
~[[!: di' 2't.2-Jli;,,yl.:l1k,"le; I. 1-efttyi~•,Y,1ts:/rl1 x1L-.,;,x;_, .. ;
_ 2s:.1_1dd ELD i'i:ilr, fJ,,_ i. _ _ __ _ _ . _
__ f/Je; __ Ii, 11. ,.1'--________ _ _ ____ _ __ _ _______ _ ___ __ _ _ _ _
__ i}~~c/1,,,.,L rw.,,.e1cr_::-&o~~:li1Ld ~-f?J[X _{h ~-tJ_;~ ~i,,,:gj _
__ zlt/:,._/b1,,,, __ fC"n-.r_lu -/ 4 3 _ 'i'CE _/IL..1 k.vc _ ,, jp,,r/ __ e:k _____ _
-.1) Sb:yh,J ___ k_r_l)'\ _:. 2-1n,-/!:_i,;fo,~. ,:1,/,,.cl__ ~.J_•:i~ J".-__J~l ..... :
_ -i)~1,rLc,.d. G,,,c_-:__J-,d: l~"--!.J!,_ix.tf"•,lh 7J=-.. J
_J 'I . J. I -I / 1-11:-J . - ' _ -~lhlL._!'.!1!>/_, ':.r!liL_ll, __ ,'.,;:µ,:,L-§ 11:Ll'.olt\i~'l.k-'~ .. z~'. _.:,,-,~.j
flC J',. flfr,,,;_'.}"'?Jii-f;To---j;-;-· -.T f<j--;-----. ----1
1)"/4,vf Jl{,-,$.iv>"<l"v 5 ,,;21 1} _ "
~ -----· --,,'Y
lJ-/,?r/ S ~ :l!y11f}{-'i+1i7J,(;
/5v,~o) 1115 ~ 11,;~<ii1'::("1.?f! 10:J(pc/ l,,,,iV'hl i/?l(
·\11y :1 u.1«,i:p,cJ,7 XJJ.'il
j'i °J)jnc,s i'l{-?Li:fl7 <i/· r'<'f J?U ?q p/lii)1\I
~'''/(}1,il,> p•dlf'l')"J , N"'?J ''S,V'r{zi,LOYJ 7<:.ff
'.•?l~:vic-•1rl J1f<j_ 'rJJ}1?J /11((_7 I Jiv'J-9 -;/(,ljf
( 11.:13 I p14;~ ?//~ZJlrJ 1;;;8/'1,f;lc/ f/':>J ?,Jl,jr,J~fl'",7 fE</!i ··,
'((IJ,JJ/.i?J i5C( /''"'1·'··
.:-,,/,.,,;,,>(;ti r"J?7L //'.',) P/11"-'' )'tJ /J"'r r·q
(;_,yd «:•s ("'i"'H' pp1-1 p,-,r--, a;-,,,,u.,.c,,,.5 -:-•i::;
)'!(':'<ii ("U fJ7,>( f'-Jj -f''/'>~ z>.Jt,""I '/'/
'iJ'"'/'J·' iJ,;,,~ -;,</f f/3/-"f'/'7 "1/5 'If'.'/ )(J.~<,:!
f"J .f1··~?-X,? i) _\_._i'lf 10 S J/ .. Oi:ji? }"' ?U JJ)UfJ) )'j ";ili:S
'-',) o;-;;(i't'·:'f!s 1.,,"h-' i''~' ~ '""'} ,1;,,/.7 !/~) 9'¢¢; ¼os,,r,~ ,, ('_)' H,)tp I-" vA,?p
"' 7,,,/vi ·-v,y 1Y'fJ-""' 1· ,,i,7.:. 1U ----1' I f --
-'? 37,1 ~,,~ ;,l/~0 1,i' "f''<'i'/7 /"•-. 'JPl' U)
"lr>V . ,,, +, -J•..1
J1; ,c;11J ;1,v;,;1 9/1 f' o,Ql(,y I, "'t I ~n-.;_,f:h -
. 51r)J,1)J_,j t-7 JJ]fc)\t1~' t.~} ;111-'.y1rJ•i~~ \7.)
l•¢tf-~>1J'f"~rf -;>j'l''jd/7 "7 +f/ (I)
: ~(' u"f'j) I;_,,/,
'; /,
,, 'c,;, ',.,, ,;,,.q). "''.!/-0 II i I_Yr 0 'i7 ,3' .\"1!,J Jc' s /'l/ C[/
/"L' wi:1, }/oj;~J,,1; .+~·"t_Yx-tl<J av ~!('cS
/'''''~) l<"if) Qf wn«•.• <J<>'l(/1 oJ(i'V~\ [).ii]: :",,'//)
U,/i i/s 11'.7 ~ h•~'1";,)
, C:r
PHOTO#l
PHOTO#2
• •
SITE/LOCATION: GE/Shepherd Farm Site, East Flat Rock, North'Carolina
DESCRIPTION: Marking Geophysical grid at Landfill B
DATE: May 21, 1997 TIME: 0820
PHOTOGRAPHER: Kent Hankinson
SITE/LOCATION: GE/Shepherd Farm Site, East Flat Rock, North Carolina
DESCRIPTION: EM-61 Survey at Landfill A
DATE: May 21, 1997 TIME: 0845
PHOTOGRAPHER: Kent Hankinson
PHOTO#03
PHOTO #04
• • """"""""'"""'"""'"":;;: .. ~;.-p,,£;'~~,.,~;;.~-=--!~1-~
~~~.&~ •;;~{-~::.-::-~~,:~: ;:•1~\~·~t;~, _sr[i;1£ff~~t~!! ~:-.. ~r 5{fi:~~:;af ~~t-;~•· : -
'l ... ~~-;~-~.'.,,•-j/-',~$•.:..">:.~ •• -....... ~~"'I ': .., .. ..;:,~.:~.r:--.,... ~ .--. ~\ ?;.;, •.:;::-'.-~ ... • ,f~~-~~:-:::-7,J· ~-r~~ ~ ~--:~ ~.~, :-=--·,~~~~
.. -~--;_~;:~\-~
SITE/LOCATION: GE/Shepherd Farm Site. East Flat Rock, North Carolina
DESCRIPTION: GPR antenna
DATE: May 21, 1997 TIME: 1430
PHOTOGRAPHER: Kent Hankinson
SITE/LOCATION: GE/Shepherd Farm Site, East Flat Rock, North Carolina
DESCRIPTION: GPR recording equipment
DA TE: May 21, 1997 TIME: 1440
PHOTOGRAPHER: Kent Hankinson
PHOTO#0S
• •
SITE/LOCATION: GE/Shepherd Farm Site, East Flat Rock, North Carolina
DESCRIPTION: Area of concrete fill adjacent to Bat Fork Creek, Landfill B
DATE: May 22, 1997 TIME: 1520
PHOTOGRAPHER: Kem Hankinson
PHOTO#06
SITE/LOCATION: GE/Shepherd Farm Site, East Flat Rock, NC
DESCRIPTION: Slide hammer decontamination, soil gas survey
DATE: May 28, 1997 TIME: 1218
PHOTOGRAPHER: Kent Hankinson
PHOTO#07
SITE/LOCATION: GE/Shepherd Farm Site, East Flat Rock, NC
DESCRIPTION: Driving hole for soil gas collection, Garden Haven Way
DATE: May 28, 1996 TIME: 1150
PHOTOGRAPHER: Kent Hankinson
•
•
PHOTO #8
• •
SITE/LOCATION: GE/Shepherd Farm Site, East Flat Rock, North Carolina
DESCRIPTION: Soil gas probe
DATE: May 28, 1997 TIME: 1227
PHOTOGRAPHER: Kent Hankinson
.. -~~ .
-S~::S~iL~-
~~if f ~2
PHOT0#9
I
SITE/LOCATION: GE/Shepherd Farm Site, East Flat Rock. North Carolina
DESCRIPTION: Connecting vacuum tank to purge line prior to sampling
DATE: May 28, 1997 TIME: 1215
PHOTOGRAPHER: Kent Hankinson
PHOTO#IO
• •
SITE/LOCATION: GE/Shepherd Farm Site, East Flat Rock, North Carolina
DESCRIPTION: Collecting soil gas sample from purged line using plastic syringe
DATE: May 28, I 997 TIME: 1155 .
PHOTOGRAPHER: Kent Hankinson
. -,
·: ..o,-.,; ,._ .. < .;, • .--.-: .-.-.. ,,--,-. -.
. -
PHOTO #11
!1--·:.'t-',. ........ . ..
SITE/LOCATION: GE/Shepherd Farm Site, East Flat Rock, North Carolina
DESCRIPTION: 200-Gallon storage tank pulled from Bat Fork Creek
DATE: May 28. 1997 TIME: 1315
PHOTOGRAPHER: Kent Hankinson
I
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 1AGENCY
REGION 4
61 Forsyth Street, S.W.
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3104
4WD-NSMB
Mr. Charles R. Faust, Ph.D.
President, HSI Geo Trans
46050 Mancldn Plaza
Suite 100
Sterling, Virginia 20166
SUBJ: GE/Shepherd Farm NPL Site
East Flat Rock, NC
Dear Mr. Faust:
April 14, 1997
RECEIVED
APR 18 1997
SUPERFUNO SECTION
This letter is written to clarify an error in the April 4, 1997 GE Monthly Progress Report. In
this report, you stated that "the EPA review process required three months and only one month was
scheduled." EPA required forty-two days to review the Remedial Design documents and to transmit
comments. EPA normally requires thirty days, however, due to time ofthb year when the documents
were sumitted (the Christmas and New Years holidays), there was an inevitable delay.
The other two months that you have indicated are not a part of the EPA review process; they
are a part of the PRPs finalization of the document. If all comments had been incorporated as
specified, the document could have been finalized sooner. Therefore, the tyvo month delay is not the
responsibility of, nor was it caused by EPA. Please keep this in mind when preparing schedules and
monthly reports in the future.
lfyou have any questions, please give me a call at 404/562-8824.
Sincer
. G?Yl\/Ur-...._ f
Gie le S. Bennett ,
.Remedial Project Manager ;
. '
cc: Michael Bush, GE
· David 1,o~n, NC DEHNR ·'
• Geofrans, inc.
QROUfllDWATl!II S"ICIALISTS
46050 Monekin Plaza ■ Suite l 00 ■ Sterling, Virginia • 20166
703 • 444 • 700:J FAX: 703 • 444 • 1685
VIA FAX AND U.S. MAIL
Ms. Giezelle S. Bennett
Remedial Project Manager
December 6, 1996
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4
Atlanta Federal Center
100 Alabama Street, S.W.
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3104
Mr. David Lown
Environmental Engineer
North Carolina Division of Waste Management
Superfund Section
401 Oberlin Road, Suite 150
Raleigh, North Carolina 27605
RE: GE/Shepherd Farm Superfund Site, Hendersonville, NC
Monthly Progress Report (November 1996)
Geo Trans Project No. N048-100
Dear Ms. Bennett and Mr. Lown:
\Vork Performed and/or Completed During the Month:
RECEIVED
DECO 9 7995
SUPfAFUNo SECTION
Began to draft Remedial Design Work Plan and associated plans (HASP,
SAP, QAPP, and TSWP)
Drafted a lease agreement for site access at off-site locations
Made arrangements to record notice of the entry of the Consent Decree
with the Registry of Deeds
Work Scheduled for Next Month: Finalize draft of Remedial Design Work
Plan and associated plans (HASP, SAP,
Schedule Issues:
0 <,(QNIKOWFAusn1996'.L!:T'8ENNETT.W61
QAPP, and TSWP) ,
Submittal of draft Remedial Design Work Plan, HASP,
SAP, QAPP, and TSWP, scheduled for December 30, 1996
•
Ms. Giezelle S. Bennett
Mr. David Lown
Problems Encountered: None
Other Issues: None
CRF/pk
cc: M. Bush (GELS)
T. Hagemeyer (Geo Trans)
D 'KONll{OWF;;,usn \ 9961J.E'T'8ENNETT. W61
2
•
December 6, I 996
Sincerely,
~R~i~
Charles R. Faust, Ph.D.
Executive Vice President
Geo Trans, inc.
, • Geofrans. inc.
•
QROUNOWA.Tl!:R S,-l!CIALISTS
46050 Manekin Plaza • Suite 100 ■ Sterling, Virginia • 20166
703 • 444 • ?COO FAX: 703 • 444 • 1685
VIA FAX AND U.S. MAIL
Ms. Giezelle S. Bennett
Remedial Project Manager
December 6, 1996
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4
Atlanta Federal Center
100 Alabama Street, S.W.
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3104
Mr. David Lown
Environmental Engineer
North Carolina Division of Waste Management
Superfund Section
401 Oberlin Road, Suite 150
Raleigh, North Carolina 27605
RE: GE/Shepherd Farm Superfund Site, Hendersonville, NC
Monthly Progress Report (November 1996)
Geo Trans Project No. N048-100
Dear Ms. Bennett and Mr. Lown:
Work Performed and/or Completed During the Month:
Began to draft Remedial Design Work Plan and associated plans (HASP,
SAP, QAPP, and TSWP)
• Drafted a lease agreement for site access at off-site locations
Made arrangements to record notice of the entry of the Consent Decree
with the Registry of Deeds
Work Scheduled for Next Month: Finalize draft of Remedial Design Work
Plan and associated plans (HASP, SAP,
QAPP, and TSWP)
Schedule Issues:
D.•.KONll<OWF ,\,UST\ t 996\lET\BENNETT. W61
Submittal of draft Remedial Design Work Plan, HASP,
SAP, QAPP, and TSWP, scheduled for December 30, 1996
•
Ms. Giezelle S. Bennett
Mr. David Lown
Problems Encountered: None
Other Issues: None
CRF/pk
cc: M. Bush (GELS)
T. Hagemeyer (GeoTrans)
0 .'KONIKOWF AUST\ 1996\LET' 8ENNETT.'MI 1
2
•
December 6, 1996
Sincerely,
~R-~
Charles R. Faust, Ph.D.
Executive Vice President
GeoTrans, inc.
• Geofrans, inc.
QROU"IOWATl:R SPl!CIALISTS
46050 Maneldn Plaza ■ Suite 100 • Sterling, Virginia ■ 20166
703 • 444 • 7000 FAX: 703 • 444 • 1685
•
November 8, 1996
VIA FAX AND U.S. MAIL
Ms. Giezelle S. Bennett
Remedial Project Manager
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4
Atlanta Federal Center
100 Alabama Street, S.W.
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3104
Mr. David Lown
Environmental Engineer
North Carolina Division of Waste Management
Superfund Section
401 Oberlin Road, Suite 150
Raleigh, North Carolina 27605
RE: GE/Shepard Farm NPL Site, East Flat Rock, NC
Monthly Progress Report (October l 996)
Geo Trans Project No. 7788-100
Dear Ms. Bennett and Mr. Lown:
Work Performed and/or Completed During the Month:
• Obtained and reviewed existing reports and air photos
RECEIVED
NOV 131996
SUPERFUND SECTION
Developed outlines for Remedial Design Work Plan, HASP, SAP, QAPP,
and Treatability Study Work Plan
Began organizing Remedial Design Work Plan and associated plans
Work Scheduled for Next Month: Continue writing Remedial Design Work
'
Schedule Issues:
D;1KONlt<OWlfAUSn1996'lE1'8ENNETT.\-W\
Plan and associated plans (HASP, SAP,
QAPP, and TSWP)
Submittal of draft Remedial Design Work Plan, HASP,
SAP, QAPP, and TSWP, scheduled for December 30, l 996.
·. •
Ms. Giezelle S. Bennett
Mr. David Lown
Problems Encountered: None
Other Issues: None
CRF/pk
cc: M. Bush (GELS)
T. Hagemeyer (Geo Trans)
O:IKONIKOW\FAUSn 1996\I..El\BENNETT.W6 I
2
•
November 8, 1996
Sincerely,
~;'kT
Charles R. Faust, Ph.D.
Executive Vice President
Geolrans,inc.
• UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 4
ATLANTA FEDERAL CENTER
100 ALABAMA STREET, S.W.
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-3104
4WD-NSRB
Mr. Michael J. Bush, Manager
Environmental, Health, and Safety
GE Lighting Systems
3010 Spartanburg Hwy
Hendersonville, NC 28793
SUBJ: GE/Shepherd Farm NPL Site
East Flat Rock, NC
Dear Mr. Bush:
September 30, 1996
EPA is hereby approving GE's choice of GeoTrans, Inc as the sup~rvising contractor for
the performance of the Remedial Design and Remedial Action pursuant to ,the Consent Decree
between GE and EPA.
' .
In accordance with the Consent Decree, the Remedial Design Work Plan is due no later
than 90 days from the date of this letter, or no later than December 30, 1996. In the RD Work
Plan, please be mindful ofEPA's desire to complete the Remedial Design within two years and to
complete as quickly as possible the delineation of soil contamination at the: Spring Haven
community with subsequent soil removal.
If you have any questions, please give me a call at 404/562-8824.
Giezelle S. Bennett
Remedial Project Manager
cc: Grover Nicholson, NC DEHNR ~.
Recycled/Recyclable • Printed with Vegelable Oil Based Inks on 100% Recycled Paper (40% Postconsumer)
September 25, 1996
Ms. Giezelle Bennett
Project Manager
•
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4
I 00 Alabama Street
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
•
Lighting Svs<ems Oepartmenl
Genc1a! flectric Ccmpanv
lfemforsonville. NC ?H793
Re: Notification of proposed Supervising Contractor, and
Project Coordinators
General Electric/ Shepherd Farm Superfund Site
Dear Giezelle,
GE Lighting Svstems
EIVED
OCT 1 7 1996
suPERFUND SECTION
I am writing to provide you General Electric Company's notificatiori requirem~nts pursuant to
Section VI., paragraph IO.a.; and Section XII., paragraph 40. of the Consent Decree. The
proposed Supervising Contractor is GeoTrans, Inc., with Dr. Charles R. Faust, P.G., Executive
Vice President of Geo Trans, Inc. as the Project Manager. Enclosed are three copies of a
' Statement of Qualifications for Environmental Services prepared by Geo Trans for this project.
The Statement of Qualifications includes information on the experience and qu.alifications of
GeoTrans and key project members, including Dr. Faust.
General Electric Company will use Mr. Michael J. Bush, Manager -Environmental, Health and
Safety, GE Lighting Systems, 3010 Spartanburg Highway, Hendersonville, North Carolina,
28792, telephone [phone], as the Project Coordinator. Mr. Bush has been the contact at
the GE Subsite for almost eight years. The Alternate Project Coordinator will .be Mr. Lee A.
Humphrey, Environmental, Health and Safety Engineer, GE Lighting Systems,: 3010 Spartanburg
Highway, Hendersonville, North Carolina, 28792, telephone [phone].
General Electric Company believes that GeoTrans and the Project Coordinators have the technical
expertise and experience to perform and oversee all aspects of the work. We hope you will agree
and provide your approval. If you have any questions, or need additional information, please
contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Michael J. Bush
Manager ~ Environmental, Health and Safety
enclosure
cc: GeoTrans (w/o enclosure)