NCD003200383_19870424_Koppers Co. Inc._FRBCERCLA SPD_Application for Change in Classification References 17 - 46-OCR

Koppers Co., Inc.
NCD003200383
Application for Change in
CI ass ifi cation
References 17 -46
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-1
I
I
I
I
I
Region J Geology:
A Guide For North Carolina
Mineral Resource Development
And Land Use Planning
by
William F. Wilson
P. Albert Carpenter Ill
_ .... ,., ..
t:J9Y Series 1
North Carolina Geological Survey Section
1975
revised
1981
North Carolina Department of Natural Resources & Community Development
1-----,
Ref. 17
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Triassic Basin Rocks
Sedimentary rocks of the Durham and Deep River
Triassic basins occur in long, narrow, north-to
northeast-trending "half-grabens". These sediments
commonly dip gently to the east or southeast and
are up to 10,000 feet thick. The basins occupy an
area 5 to 20 miles wide and are bounded to the east
by the Jonesboro fault and to the west by metamor-
phosed volcanic and sedimentary rocks of the slate
belt. Numerous northwest-trending faults crosscut
the sediments, particularly in Lee County. These
faults developed during late Triassic or early
Jurassic time.
The Triassic sediments are divided into three for-
mations; from oldest to youngest, they are: the San-
ford Formation, the Cumnock Formation, and the
Pekin Formation. These formations consist of clay:
stone, siltstooe, shale_. sandstone, conglomerate,
and fanglomerate. Intrusive into the sediments are
diabase dikes, which occur throughout the basin,
and diabase sills, which are abundant in the Durham
area.
Floodplain alluvium: The floodplains include
those areas that are subject to frequent flooding.
Floodplains in the crystalline rocks are predomi-
nantly narrow. Floodplains broaden in areas under-
lain by Triassic sedimentary rocks and become
more extensive to the southeast as the drainage dis-
sects sediments of the Coastal Plain.
Floodplain alluvium consists of unconsolidated
sediment of varying thickness. The material is
primarily dark-brown to gray silt, sand, and clay with
some gravels and coarse boulders occasionally
intermixed.
Gravels: The terrace d~posits in the Deep River
region include deposits of clay, sand, and gravel.
These units consist dominantly of friable silty or
sandy clay and subordinate amounts of sand and
gravel. Pebbles and cobbles in the gravel consist of
white or gray quartz and occasionally of pre-Triassic
metamorphic rocks and Triassic rocks. The gravels
constitute a small part of the terraces but residual
accumulations of sandy gravel are present where
the terrace materials have been extensively eroded.
Sanford Formation fanglomerate: The fanglom-
erate ranges from jumbled accumulations of angular
and subangular rock fragments with little sand-
stone matrix to scattered, isolated blocks em-
bedded in a predominantly sandstone matrix. The
fanglomerate usually shows little or no bedding.
Fragments of all the pre-Triassic metamorphic and
igneous rock types exposed southeast of the
Triassic basin occur in the fanglomerate. Adjacent
to the Jonesboro fault, fragments up to 8 feet in
6
width occur, but, generally, in a northwest direction
they become finer grained and more regularly bed-
ded. The unit contains lenticular beds of relatively
fragment-free sandstone and siltstone and local
beds of conglomerate.
Sanford Formation: The Sanford Formation is
variable in composition. It contains few distinctive
beds and no subdivisions that can be traced for any
distance. The lower two-thirds of the formation con-
sists of lenticular beds of red or brown claystone,
siltstone, and sandstone, with occasional inter-
layering of beds of arkosic sandstone. The silt-
stones and claystones are mixtures of quartz, clay
minerals, sericite, chlorite, and iron oxides. Sand-
stones consist primarily of quartz and feldspar and
contain a few rock fragments. Coarse-grained sand-
stones and conglomerates are also present. The up-
per one-third of the formation is the fanglomerate
unit.
Cumnock Formation: The Cumnock Formation
consists of claystone, siltstone, shale, and sand-
stone and contains two coal beds; the Cumnock bed
and the Gulf bed. These coal beds, approximately
200 to 260 feet above the base of the formatioQ, are
underlain by light-gray, medium-dark-gray, and
dark-greenish-gray siltstone and fine-grained sand-
stone that contain small amounts of claystone and
shale. The coal beds are overlain by medium-light-
gray to black shale with small amounts of claystone,
siltstone, and sandstone. The shale is irregularly
calcareous and carbonaceous.
The claystones and siltstones are mixtures of
quartz, clay minerals, sericite, chlorite, and iron ox-
ides. The sandstones are primarily quartz and feld-
spar with rock fragments. They are normally uncon-
solidated but, locally, cemented by calcite and silica.
Pekin Formation: The Pekin Formation is strati-
graphically the lowermost of the three Triassic for-
mations. The unit consists of yellowish-gray or gray-
ish orange, medium-or coarse-grained, cross-
bedded arkosic sandstone; red, brown, or purple,
fine-and medium-grained, crossbedded sand-
stone; and lenticular beds of red, brown, or purple
claystone, siltstone, and fine-grained sandstone.
The siltstones and claystones are composed of
quartz, clay minerals, sericite, chlorite, and iron ox-
ides. The sandstones are primarily quartz and feld-
spar, contain rock fragments, and are normally
friable but locally are cemented by calcite or silica.
Pekin Formation basal conglomerate: The basal
conglomerate consists of a heterogeneous assem-
blage of cemented and uncemented masses of con-
glomerate containing local lenses of conglomerate
and coarse-grained sandstone. Grain size, composi-
I
I
I
I
ti
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
tion, color, and thickness of the unit changes abrupt-
ly. The conglomerate contains angular to sub-
rounded to rounded pebbles, cobbles and boulders
of volcanic and igneous rocks and quartz, usually in
a sandstone matrix. One portion of the unit, called
"millstone grit," is a firmly cemented quartz con-
glomerate composed of subangular or sub-
rounded, gray, pink or colorless quartz pebbles and
less abundant fragments of tuft embedded in a
silica-cemented, dark-yellowish sandstone matrix.
Diabase dikes and sills: Diabase dikes of Triassic
age intrude sedimentary rock sequences through-
out the Durham basin. The diabase sills are restrict-
ed to Triassic sedimentary sequences in Durham
County. The dikes exhibit a high degree of
spheroidal weathering, and some can be traced
overland by the presence of spheroidal boulders.
Diabase sills are recognized in somewhat the same
manner with the exception that their outcrop pat-
terns are much more extensive. Size, length, and
thickness of the dikes and sills is varied, and many
are discontinuous along the surface.
The unweathered rocks are black, medium to fine-
grained and are composed of labradorite feldspar,
augite, olivine, magnetite, and some secondary
chlorite, clay, and limonite.
Weathering produces a brown to dark-brown soil
with residual boulders which are easily traceable
where exposed on the surface.
I
Piedmont Rocks
The Piedmont rocks of Region J vary widely in
their types, compositions, ages, and areal distribu-·
lion (Plate 1 ). Low-rank metamorphic rocks of a pre-
dominantly volcanic-sedimentary origin, intruded by
igneous rocks of various compositions and ages,
form a broad northeast-trending interlayered rock
sequence. This 'rock sequence extends from the ex-
treme southwestern corner of Chatham County
through Orange County into the northern half of
Durham County. This rock sequence is but a small
part of a complex belt of rocks that extends for a
length of approximately four hundred miles from
central Georgia to southeastern Virginia. In North
Carolina, this sequence of rocks is known as the
Carolina slate belt.
The rocks located just east of the Jonesboro fault
in Wake County are a complex interlayered and
interfingered sequence of high-and low-grade
metamorphic rocks oriented in a northeast-trend-
ing belt known locally as the Raleigh belt. These
rocks were originally a volcanic-sedimentary
sequence that varied greatly in their types, composi-
tions and areal distribution. Included in this
sequence are phyllites, metatuffs, flow rocks, and
7
mafic and felsic gneisses and schists. Within this
interlayered sequence are a series of altered ultra-
mafic rocks that are located in the northern part of
the county.
This rock sequence reflects several episodes of
deformation during which igneous intrusions of
various compositions, sizes and ages were em-
placed. The most extensive intrusion is a granitic
pluton, the Rolesville batholith, that crops out in
northwestern Johnston County and covers a large
area in eastern Wake County. The metamorphic
_sequence is also dissected by pegmatite dikes and
numerous diabase dikes of various lengths and
widths.
Younger alluvial and marine sediments, many of
which form terraces of different widths and eleva-
tions, occupy much of Johnston County and south-
ern and extreme eastern Wake County.
Floodplain alluvium: The floodplains include
those areas that are subject to frequent flooding.
Floodplains in the crystalline rocks are predomi-
nantly narrow, because of steep gradients, resistant
rock types and rolling topography. Floodplains
broaden in areas underlain by Triassic sedimentary
rocks and become more extensive to the southeast
as the drainage disse_cts sediments of the Coastal
Plain. ,_
Floodplain alluvium consists of unconsolidated
sediment of variable thickness. The material con-
sists primarily of dark-brown to gray silt, sand and
clay with some gravels and coarse boulders oc-
casionally intermixed.
Argil\ites: The light-to medium-gray to brown,
fine-grained argillites are epiclastic rocks with well-
developed bedding, some of which is closely
spaced, imparting a laminated appearance. These
argillites are composed predominantly of quartz,
chlorite, and sericite. Cleavage is both bedding
plane and slaty with the latter being more prevalent.
Sections or slabs 1/,-inch thick can easily be cleaved
from this rock type. The laminated bedding in-
dicates quiet-water deposition below wavebase. The
argillites were apparently derived from positive
areas of pre-existing volcanic flows and pyroclastic
rocks which were then weathered, eroded, trans-
ported, and deposited in a quiet-water environ-
ment.
In outcrop, the laminated argillites weather to a
light-gray to bull-brown color. The cleavage and
foliation planes accelerate the weathering processes
which causes the argillites to form broad areas of
slightly undulating topography.
Arkoses: The arkoses are fine-to medium-
grained, light-gray-to buff-colored epiclastic rocks
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
PHYSICAL FACTORS AFFECTING GROUND WATER RECOVERY IN REGION J
In the area, ground water from all rock types is
generally of acceptable quality for domestic use pro-
vided it is free of surface pollution. Some of the
physical factors which affect the quantity of avail-
able water in the area are described below.
Rock Texture
Rock texture refers to the size, shape, and ar-
rangement of the component particles of a rock.
Coarse-textured rocks generally are more per-
meable than fine-textured rocks and consequently,
may be better aquifers.
Fracture Planes in Rock
The interstices in many of the rocks in the area are
secondary fractures. Wells drilled at places where
fractures or fracture systems such as joints or zones
of shearing are better developed will yield more
water than wells drilled into more massive rocks.
Cleavage and Schistosity
Cleavage planes and planes of schistosity are im-
portant avenues of ground water movement and
storage in the area. They usually dip at some angle
to the horizontal which allows water to percolate by
gravity down dip along these schistose and cleavage
planes. Yields are greater where schistose and
cleavage planes are plentiful, especially where dif-
ferential rock movement along these planes has
caused some degree of separation.
Quartz Veins and Diabase Dikes
Quartz is a hard, brittle mineral that fractures
easily from stress caused by slight crustal move-
ments. Quartz veins in the area are generally more
fractured than the enclosing rock, and hence, are
better aquifers. Generally the veins are vertical or
dip at nearly vertical angles. A well that is to
penetrate an inclined vein should be located away
from the outcrop area in the direction in which the
vein dips. The presence of a quartz vein can be de-
tected even in deeply weathered areas by the train of
loose quartz fragments on the soil.
Dikes are tabular rock bodies of intrusive igneous
rock. They are not usually good aquifers, but often
the host rock adjacent to them may have been made
more permeable by fractures resulting from the
force of intrusion and heat. Many wells near Triassic
diabase dikes in the Triassic sedimentary rocks are
above average producers. These dikes sometimes
form underground dams which obstruct the natural
movement of ground water, causing the water table
to be .closer to the surface on one side of the dike.
44
Topography
T(J h' fh 11··· opograp y 1s one o t e most use u criteria ,n
determining the relative water-bearing characteris-
tics of the underlying rocks.
In general, wells drilled on hills or other upland
areas are less apt to yield the desired quantity of
water than wells drilled in draws or other depres-
sions.
(1) Hills and upland areas readily shed much
water from precipitation as surface runoff. As a
result, there is less seepage into the ground to
become ground water. On the other hand, the
lowlands obtain influent seepage directly from
precipitation and also from upland surface runoff.
(2) The direction of movement of the ground
water is toward the valleys where part of it dis-
charges into streams. In addition, influent seep-
age may occur from upland rock slopes beneath
the residual material. The more impervious the
bedrock, the more readily is water deflected down
the slope along this contact.
(3) Wells located in lowlands may salvage
some of the water that would be lost naturally by
discharge from the underground reservoir. There
the depressed water level resulting from pump-
ing, if near a discharge area, prevents further dis-
charge out of the area.
(4) Wells on hills penetrate the water table at a
greater depth than those in lowlands. When a well
on a hill is pumped, the water table is lowered as a
cone of depression, the center of the cone being
at the well. As pumping continues the cone may
grow larger and deeper but its span is limited
because of the topography and because of the
relatively low permeability of rocks at progres-
sively greater depth below the surface. The yield
of wells under these conditions is not great. On
the other hand, wells in lowlands, even though
penetrating the same rocks as those on uplands,
intersect the water table near the ground surface.
Thus, the water table can be lowered a greater
distance by pumping than in a well of the same
depth on a hill. The fact that the static and pump-
ing water levels lie nearer the ground surface than
in wells on hills results in the pumping level lying
in a more permeable zone; hence the intake area
is broader and the yield of the well is larger.
(5) In many places hills exist because the rocks
there have a greater resistance to erosion than in
the valleys, this resistance being due in many
places to poor jointing. Joints and fractures
facilitate entrance of ground water, which
promotes chemical decay and permits mechan-
ical erosion. Thus depressions such as draws or
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
valleys suggest that the rock underlying the
depressions has more openings through which
ground water can move than the rock underlying
the hills.
Thickness of Weathered Material
Chemical weathering of rock is facilitated by the
infiltration and movement of water. Therefore, a
45
thick mantle of saprolite may be an indication that
the underlying rock has joints, fractures, or pores
which contain ground water. Saprolite is usually
porous, although not necessarily very permeable, so
that a thick mantle of saprolite has a large storage
and recharge potential.
GROUND WATER IN REGION J
General Statement
Water located in the saturated zone of the earth's
crust and supplied by precipitation in the form of
rain or snow is called ground water. Many differing
factors control the amount of ground water available
· from any one location. The two most important fac-
tors are the amount of annual precipitation available .
for supply and recharge and the ability of the rocks
and soils to absorb, store and transmit the precipita-
tion. Other factors which have a direct effect on
ground water supply are rainfall intensity, topog-
raphy, climate and types and densities of vegetation
cover within an area.
Porosity, which is the percentage of the bulk
volume of a rock or soil that is occupied by in-
tersticies. and permeability, which is the ability of
rock and soil types to transmit ground water, varies
from place to place (Tables 2-7). Secondary in-
terstices, such as joints, cleavage, schistosity, and
solution channels, are the most important features
responsible for transporting water in crystalline
rocks. Secondary features afford avenues control-
ling the amount and the movement of ground water
within an area.
The soil type or types within the area have a direct
relationship to the amount of precipitation ab-
sorbed into the ground water zone. Tightly com-
pacted clays act as impermeable barriers ac-
celerating the run-off of precipitation. Loose sandy
loams and sandy clay loams can absorb the
precipitation and transmit it to the aquifers.
In general, the ground water of the region is
steadily moving under the influence of gravity from
recharge areas to discharge areas. In this area, the
ground-water table usually slopes toward the
streams and rarely falls below their level. This af-
fords a continuous discharge which maintains the
flow of the streams during dry periods and adds to
their flow during wet periods. This is also evident in
springs and seeps which could be good sources of
water provided no septic systems or farms are in the
immediate vicinity.
TABLE 2: WAKE COUNTY WATER QUALITY
Water Quality As caco, ppm
(Number of Wells)
Rock Groups Number Average Yield Average Depth Solt Moderately Hard Hard
Of Wells Gal./Mln. (Feet) 0-60ppm 61~120 ppm 120-180 ppm
Intrusive Rocks 77 20 137 Predominantly Solt
Mica Gneisses
and Schists 80 19 147 Predominantly Solt to Moderately Hard
Metavolcanic Rocks 23 27 212 Solt to Moderately Hard
Phyllite 11 14 183 Soft to Moderately Hard
Triassic rocks
(undifferentiated) 57 5 158 Moderately Hard to Hard
TABLE 3: JOHNSTON COUNTY WATER QUALITY
Water Quality As Ca CO, ppm
(Number of Wells)
Rock Groups Number Average Yield Average Depth Solt Moderately Hard Hard
Of Wells Gal./Min. (Feet) 0-60 ppm 61-120 ppm 120-180 ppm
Intrusive Rocks 13 NA• NA' 8 5 0
Predominantly Solt to Moderately Hard
Mica Gneisses 6 1 0 and Schists 7 NA" NA" Solt
Metavolcanic Rocks 16 3 0 (undifferentiated) 19 NA' NA' Predominantly Soft
Coastal Plain 18 NA' NA' 13 5 0
Predominantly Solt
• Data not available 16
TABLE 10: PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF ROCK GROUPS
SUSCEPT ABILITY•• ROCK GROUPS SOIL ASSOCIATIONS NATURAL DRAINAGE TO PERMEABILITY•• SHRINK-SWELL•• EROSION CHARACTERISTICS
Fetsic and Mafic Gneisses and Appling -Cecil Well Moderate Moderate Slight Schists. Granite Gneiss.
Felslc and Malle Gneisses.
Granite Por-pt,yrles and Appling -Louisburg Well to Excessive Moderate Moderele to Rapid Slight Pegmotltes.
Talc-Chlor-lte Schists. Helena -Appllng Well to Moderately Well Moderate to Severe Moderate to Slow Slight Soapstone, Serpentlnite.
Felsk: Flow Rocks. Georgevitle -Herndon Well -Moder a ta to Slow Sllght Pyroclastlcs and Epk:lastlcs.
Mahe Volcanics. Andesltlc lo Tlrzah (Davidson) Basaltk: Flow Rocks and Elland.(Mecklenburg-Enon) Moderately Welt to Woll ModetatetoSevere Slow lo Moderato Slight to Moderote Pyroclastlcs. Geor-govlllo
lntrus.tve rock, Olorttoa and Lignum -Iredell Well to Modor81ely Well Moderate to Severe Slow lo Very Slow Moderate to Severe Gabbfoa. Herndon
Tnas,lcRocks White Store -Ctoedmoor ..........,w .. Severe to Very Severe Slow to Very Slow Moderate to Severe (undifferentiated) Ma)'Odan
Coastal Plain, Poorty Dr.ined. Lynchburg -Rains Well to Poor Sllghl to Moderate Modorate Sllghl Norfolk
Coastal Plain. High Marine Norfolk -Wagram Welt to Excosslve Slight lo Moderate Rapid to Very Rapid Slight Terraces.
Coastal Plant, Side Sk>pea
ModOfately Well to and Lower EJewt1ona or High GUeed Somewhat Poor Moderate Moderetely Slow Moderate Marine Tert""OCea.
Flood F'taln Alluvtum, Chewacla -Wehadkee Som-hot PO()( to Poor Slight to Moderote Moderoto to Slow Sllght to Moderate Low Lying T«Taces. Roanoke
•• TheM .values are determined mDinly by Iha soil's texture, structure and ciey types.
I
I
22
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
PHYSICAL-CHARACTERISTICS OF ROCK GROUPS-CONTINUED
SLOPE STABILITY•
O'to 15' (VERTICAL) AVERAGE THICKNESS OF
MAXIMUM PERMANENT SLOPES DEPTH OF SOIL.SOLUM SAPROLITIC BEDROCK DEPTH TO BEDROCK
NOT REQUIRING PERMANENT (lnc.he9) (Fffl) (FMI)
RET AIMING STRUCTURES ..
1.5to1;over 15ft.
2.5 to 1 18in.to40in. Variable Surface to 100 It. plus
1.5 to 1; over 15 ft.
2.Sto l 12 in. to 40 In. Variable Surface to 100 ft. plus
1.5tol;over151t.
2.Sto 1 141n.to381n. Variable Surface to 100 fl plus
1tol 181n.to40ln. Varlable Surface lo 100 n. plus
1 to 1 18 In. to 40 In. Variable Surface to 100 fl plus
1to1;overl5ft.
210 1 14 In. to40 In. Variabla Surface 10 50 fl
31ol;Speclal
lnvestlgatlonsOvet" 15 n. 18 ln.10 36 ln. Variable Vanable
Individual design req.
21ot;oV8f15fl 30 In. to 42 In. 3101 Variable 5tl.to100fl
2tot;overt5n. 30 In. to 42 ln. 3to 1 Variable Variable
2to1;over15tt. 20 in. to 36 in. 3to1 Variable Variable
2lo1;ovet15ft. 30 in. to 42 In. 310 1 Variable Variable
• 75 lo 80% ol lnlormalion obtained from hfghway slope design. If excesslYe amounts of ground water oecyr. Individual slope
designs are required.
23
FOUNDATION REQUIREMENTS
FOR HEAVY LOAD-BEARING STRUCTURES
1, Pilings
2. Deep Footings 15 tt.
3. Shallow Footings
1. Pilings
2. Deep FooUngs 15ft.
3. Shallow FooUngs
1. Plllngs
2. Deep Footings 15ft.
3. Shallow Footings
1. Pilfngs
2. Deep Footings 15 ft.
3. Shallow Footings
1. Pilings
2. Deep Footings 15 n.
3. Shallow Footings
1. Pilings
2. OeepFoollngslSfl.
3. Shallow Footings
l. Shallow Footings
2. Deep Footings 15 n.
,3. Pilings
1. Pilings
2. Shallow Footings
1, Plllngs
2. Shallow Footings
1. Plllngs
2. Shallow Footings
1. Pilings
2. Shallow Footings
'I
I
I
I
I
:I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 1: SOIL INTERPRETATIONS -GENERAL SOIL MAP FOR REGION J, NORTH CAROLINA
Potential For
Dwellings with
Sewerage Septic Tank Camp Soil Associations Systems Filter Fields Sites
1 . APPLING -CECIL Good Fair: MP Good
2. GEORGEVILLE-HERNDON Good Fair: MP Good
3. WHITE STORE -CREEDMOOR -MAYODAN Poor: LS, SS Poor: SP Poor: SP, C .,.,..,_,
4. NORFOLK-WAGRAM Good Good Good
5. LIGNUM -

I

REDELL -HERNDON Poor: LS, SS Poor: SP Poor: SP, C
6. CHEWACLA -WEHADKEE-ROANOKE Poor: F, W Poor: F, W Poor: F, W
7. HELENA -APPLING Fair: LS, SS Fair: SP Fair: SP
8. APPLING -LOUISBURG Good Fair: MP Good
9. LYNCHBURG -RAINS -NORFOLK Poor: LS, W . Poor: W Fair:W
10. GILEAD Fair: SS Poor: SP Fair: SP
11. GEORG EVI LLE-DA VI DSON-MECKLENBURG Good Fair: MP Good
Good is the rating given soil associations that have soil properties for the rated use. The number of un-favorable properties are minor and can be overcome easily. Good performance and low maintenance can be expected.
Fair is the rating given soil associations that have a moderate number of unfavorable soil properties for the rated use. The unfavorable soil properties can be overcome or modified by special planning, design or main-tenance. During some part of the year the performance of the structure or other planned use is somewhat less desirable than for soils rated Good.
14
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Small Local
Picnic Play Commercial Roads and General
Areas Grounds Buildings Streets Agriculture Woods
Good Fair: S Good Fair: LS Good Good
Good Fair: S Good Fair: LS Good Good
Good Poor: S, SP Poor: SS, LS Poor: LS, SS Fair: LP Good
Good Fair:S Good Good Good Good
Good Poor: SP Poor: SS, LS Poor: LS, SS Poor: LP Fair: LP
Fair: F, W Fair: F, W Poor: F, W Poor: F, W Fair: LP Good
Good Fair: S, SP Fair: SS, LS Fair: LS, SS Good Good
Good Fair: S, RO Good Fair: LS, R Good Good
Fair:W Poor: W Poor: LS, W Poor: LS, W ~ood Good
Fair: S Poor: S Poor: S Fair: S, SS Fair: LP Fair: LP
Good Fair: S Good Fair: LS Good Good
Poor is the rating given soil associations with soil properties generally unfavorable for the rated use. The soils
in these associations generally rnquire major soil reclamation, special design, or intensive maintenance. Some
of these soils, however, can be improved by reducing or removing the soil feature that limits use, but in most
situations it is difficult and costly to alter the soil or to design a structure so as to compensate for these adverse
soil properties.
Legend: LS -Low Strength SS -Shrink-swell
SP -Slow percolation RO -Rock outcrops
S -Slope
LP ~ Low productivity
F -Flooding
W-Wet
15
R -Depth to Rock (Soil shallowness)
C -Too clayey
MP -Moderate percolation
••
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
' I
I
I
.-
"' C r r m --,
%
00 ~
" m 0 r 0 " ,-<
),
% ..,o
" z m "' ), r
"' m ~ 0
C
"' ,.,
m ~
0
~
"' )>
7' m ,.,
0 C z --, -<
BULLETIN 86
NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DIVISION OF LANO RESOURCES
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY SECTION
Corlee
Ref. 18 G. C. ti
.I
' .I
:.I '.•
:.1
ii
,I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'
I
I
•••• ••• •
. :~ .... · ·. .
Bulletin 86
GEOLOGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES
OF WAKE COUNTY
By
John M. Parker, Ill
, Raleigh 1979
••
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'
I
I
COVER PHOTO: FALLS OF THE [)EUSE, WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLI NA
additional copies of this publication are available from:
North Carolina Department of Natural Resources
and Conmunity Development
Division of Land Resources
Geological Survey Section
P. 0. Box 27687
Raleigh, tlorth Carolina 27611
Photographs by Jim Page
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TRIASSIC SEDIMEIITARY ROCKS
General Descrirtion
Along the western side of Wake County lies a thick sequence of red to gray sedimentary rocks of Late
Triassic age. These rocks dip easterly at low angles in most places and are abruptly bounded on the east
by the Joneshoro fault. ·This great fracture extends northeast from near Corinth (in Chathara County) to
Holly Springs, then more northerly to pass between Apex and Cary and west of Leesville, continuing to the
tleuse River where it resumes a generally northP.ast course into Granville County (see pl. l ). The Triassic
rocks extend 12 to 15 miles westward into central Durham and eastern Orange and Chatham counties. This area
of Triassic rocks is the Durham basin. a tenn applied (Prouty. 1928) to that part of the Deep River Triassic
belt lyin9 northeast of its constriction near the Cape Fear River (see 1953 Geologic Map of N. c.).
The Deep River area is one of about a dozen large anct small similar belts in eastern tforth America that
extend northeasb1ard fror:1 South Carolina to fl ova Scotia; additional buri ect Triassic belts a re known beneath
the Coastal Plain. The sedimentary rocks composing them have been named the Newark Group (see Russell,
1892) from their occurrence at Newark, N. J. The Deep River basin has been studied in most detail in the
Sanford (or Cumnock} basin (Ca□pbell and Kimball, 1923; Reinemunct, 1955) because of the minable coal there.
Investigations in· the Durham sub-hasin that are pertinent· in part to Wake County include those of Kerr
(1874 and 1875), Shearer (1927), Prouty (1931), Johnson and Straley (1935), Murray (1937), 1:arrington
(1951), Davenport (1955), Hooks and Ingram (1955), Ballard (1959). Charles (1959), Grannell (1960), Bain
(1966 and 1972), and Custer (1966a, 1966h, and 1967).
The Triassic sediments in the Durham basin were deposited on a land surface fanned by prolonged sub-
aerial erosion of the metamorphic and igneous rocks of the region. Structures and topography that resulted
from mid-to late-Paleozoic tectonic activity were worn down to develop a pencplain extending across the
present Piedmont region. This fairly flat land surface was displaced in late Triassic time by great north-
trending faults that created elongate basins in which enonnous volUI!les of sediment were subsequently trapped.
The sub-Triassic nonconfonnity now separates rocks of greatly contrasting character and age. The noncon-
fonnity is visible along the west side of the Durham basin but is deeply buried everywhere in ~lake County.
Rock Types
The Triassic sedimentary rocks consist almost entirely of elastic types, ranging from comglomerate to
claystone. Most of the sediment is poorly sorted, so that specimens contain a 'tlide range of sizes and kinds
of constituents. Predominant are silty sandstones and mudstones. Ged~ing is irregular in fonn and thick-
ness, and various rock types commonly grade abruptly into one another both laterally and vertically. Coarser
types in many places fill scoured.channels whose bottoms cut sharply across underlying material. Cross-
bedded sandstone is cotl1Tlon.
Cecause of the variability of these sediments throughout ~Jake County and the extensive and general
nature of the present study, it has not been feasible to divide ther.1 into formal stratigraphic units. Sub-
divisions based on gross lithology were made.by Grannell {1960) for a strip extending westward from Raleigh-
Durham airport. In l·Jake County he distinguished the Sanford Formation with upper. conglomerate division and
lower, sandstone division and the Cunnock Fomation nearby in Durha~ County. In the present report essen-
tially the same three lithologic belts are delineated on the basis of distinctive, though not necessarily
dominant, components. The belts recogniz~d are, from east to west, a fan9lomerate belt, a sandstone-mudstone
belt. and a limestone-chert belt. They are proposed for local convenience and may not be valid•at a
distance, though they are consistent with studies in the Sanford basin and with a more intensive investiga-
tion now underway in the Durha~ basin (Bain, G. L., oral comDunication).
44
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Fanglomerate belt. Characteristic of the rocks along the east border of the Durham basin is coarse and poorly sorted conglomerate. It consists of pebbles, cobbles, and boulders of many rock types jumbled to-gether in an argillaceous, silty, sandy Matrix. The rock fragments are subangular, subrounded, and rounded, and consist of vein quartz, phyllite, metavolcanic rocks, epidote-quartz rock, gneisses, and granite. All these types occur within a mile or two east of the Jonesboro fault. The presence in the fanglomerate of many fragile pieces of phyllite indicates they were transported relatively short distances and not subjected to vigorous abrasion in stream beds. The local abundance of any one type correlates with its presence to the east. For example, hematite ironstone blocks have been observed in the fanglomerate only along SR .1837 ; just north of U. S. Highway 70; this is three quarters of a mile west of the iron-rich quartzite in western Umstead Park. Rock fragments a foot thick are common. Prouty (1931, p. 480 and fig. 3) reported boulders more than 8 feet in diameter along Sycamore Creek, a locality now submerged by the upper lake in Umstead Park. Slabs of metavolcanic rocks as much as 8 by 11 feet may be seen along Haley's Branch! half a mile north of Interstate Highway 40 and west of SR 1650; these lie a thousand feet west of their nearest source. Granitic boulders up to 2 1/2 feet in diameter occur along SR 1805 a quarter of a mile north of N. C. Highway 98 in Durham County about three quarters of a mile west of the county line. The best exposure of the fan-glomerate is at a quarry in the southwestern
quarter of a mile north of the county line.
to a mile south of Morrisville.
corner of the county on the west side of Buckhorn Creek a
Exposures are also good along the Southern Railway half a mile
Argillaceous sandstones and mudstones are interbedded with the conglomerate layers, and all grade into one another laterally and vertically. Some sandstone layers include isolated pebbles or cobbles. Bedding is indistinct in the conglomerates and irregularly lenticular in the finer grained sediments. Most of the rock in this belt is red from hematite.
The western limit of the fanglomerate belt (pl. 1) has been placed as far west as layers containing
abundant pebbles were observed; the accidents of exposure have doubtless affected this delineation. Its width ranges from about a quarter of a mile near the northern edge of the county to about 4 miles west of Holly Springs. In the eastern portion of the belt, conglomeratic rock seems to make up more than half of the exposures; to the west this becomes perhaps a tenth.
Conditions of deposition for such coarse and variable red beds are regarded as being those of terres-trial alluvial fans along a steep scarp, where heavy rains alternated with drier tines. The streams are presuJJed to have been intennittent and during flood so heavily charged with suspended fine sediment that slaty rock fragments were buoyed up and protected from complete disintegration during transp~rt of several miles. The coarsest material may have moved essentially as landslides. The relief along this former scarp is discussed later in connection with the development of the depositional basin. The possibility of glacial conditions being responsible was considered by some early workers; Russell (1892, p. 47-53) evaluated and rejected this hypothesis.
Sandstone-mudstone belt. The fanglomerate belt merges westward, by decrease in coarse elastics, into a belt consisting chiefly of sandstone, siltstone, mudstone, and claystone. tlere gray to buff sandstones become common. interbedded with typical red beds. The gray sandstones are better sorted than most of the red ones and contain much feldspar and muscovite mica (micaceous arkose). Gray and buff arkose is especially common in the area west and southwest of Ar~x. where it is a component in the fanglomcratc belt as ,,.,ell as predom-incnt in the sandstone-mudstone belt. Rec1 mudstone and gray claystone are also common. Thin layers of moderately well sortP.d conglomerate containing suhrounded quartz pebbles occur locally. In the southwestern corner of the county laminated clay ond silt and purplish siltstone and shale are noted. The westward trend in Hake County, then, is to,,.iard finer grained and less iron-stained sediment and to more distinct layering. The Silndston~-mudstone belt is 3 miles or more in width and in most places extends beyond the western edge of the county.
45
I
I
I
I
I
I.
'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
An extensive suite of minerals exists in the Triassic sediments, reflecting the wide variety of adjacent ign.eous and metamorphic source rocks. Duh1ing (1955) sampled Sycamore and Crabtree Creeks just west of the Jonesboro fault in Wake County and reported 24 minerals of which quartz was colTU'llonest. Ilmenite occurred in all fractions, while epidote and kyanite ,..,ere ubiquitous in the heavy fraction.
The clay r.iinerals in the red beds are predominantly illite and montmorillonoids (Hooks and Ingram, 1955); kaolin and vermiculite are minor. Hematite is the only crystalline iron oxide mineral present; it occurs as fine particles disseminated evenly in the clay and as irregular coatings on many sand grains. Variations in the reddish brown colors of the rocks are believed to be due to variations in particle size and degree of agglomeration of hematite. Hooks and Ingram (1955} conclude that the sediment was derived chiefly from red lateritic soils and partially weathered bed rock in a deeply dissected region. The depositional conditions for the sandstone-mudstone belt are presumed to have been an alluvial plain along a complex of low-gradient streams with wide flpodplains. The sediments fanned as channel fil-lings, overflow sheets, and natural levees. Study of paleocurrent directions (Custer, 1966a, 1966b; Leith and Custer, 1968), utilizing cross~bedding, imbricate pebbles, and scour channel axes, indicates that the regional direction of stream flow in the Durham basin was to the.northeast.
Limestone-chert belt. A narrow belt containing thin lenses of limestone and chert cuts across the western corner of the county in the vicinity of the conman boundary of Hake, Chatham,-and Durham counties, about 5 miles northwest of Morrisville. The predominant rock in the belt is red mudsto~e with fine-grained red sandstone. Discontinuous thin layers and lenses of impure gray limestone are best developed west and north of Nelson (in Durham County), where they have been known f0r more than a century (Mitchell, 1842, p. 131; Enrnons, 1856, p. 243; and Kerr, 1875, p. 187-188). This limestone has been described by Grannell (1960, p. 26) and Custer (1966b, p. 15-16 and 1967). The fine-grained limestone has numerous brown and red specks. It is exceedingly iMpure, the insoluble residue of quartz, clay, ~ica, and organic matter averaging -32 per-cent. Microscopic curved laminations and round aggregates suggest organic structures. Impure limestone nodules are numerous in the old quarry of the Triangle Brick Company (in Wake County) east of U. C. ~:ighway 55 and in roadcuts along that highway half a mile to the south. The irregular nodules range in diameter up to about 4 inches and occur in layers and in isolated clumps. In the quarry four layers were noted in a 25-foot section of mudstone (Parker, 1966, p. 92). Attempts by the author to trace the limestone west of N. C. Highway 55 failed; the deposit may pinch out here.
The sandstone in this belt has considerable calcareous cement. Hard, little-weathered specimens from the quarry display 0 1uster mottling" as a result of coarse crystallization of the calcite cement. Areas of fOOre than a square inch show a single cleavage surface sturlded with enclosed sand grains. Spherical con-cretions one to three inches in diameter of calcite-cemented sandstone are fairly corrmon in the Triangle Brick Canpany quarry.
Lenses of gray chert and of red-hrown jasper also occur in this belt. Some chert is directly in contact with limestone, but some occurs separately. This s;liceous rock occurs mainly in Durham County, but one locality has been noted 2 1/2 miles north of Morrisville along N. C. Highway 54 and SR 1637. Dark gray to blackish shale is associated 'tilth the limestone and chert in places.
The limestone and chert are presumed to have been deposited in snall, scattered lakes and swamps on the alluvial plain, perhaps through the agency of sir.1ple plants. \Jheeler and Textoris (1971) report alqal structures, ostracodes, and burrows. They regard the limestone as having originally been calcareous tufa fanned in a playa lake.
46
,,;;> .. .
,: .. .
1:,:· 1."':.
----------------------------------... I
I
I
I
I
l 'I
I
I
:I
I
I
I
Foss i1 s
The Triassic sedimentary rocks in Wake County contain fossils in only a few places. The principal
known localities are the quarries of the Triangle Brick Company 3 miles north of Carpenter on both sides of
N. C. Highway 55. Abundant remains of plants and fish are associated with numerous, fragile ostracodes.
Swain and Brown (1972, p. 1-3 and pl. 2) describe three species of the genus Oarwinula, associated with the
conchostracan Howellites berryi.
A cast of part of a psuedosuchian reptile (Stegomus sp.) was found in 1965 in the Triangle Brick
C001pany old quarry east of N. C. Highway 55 (Parker, 1966, p. 92}. This roughly conical segmented fossil is
about 7 inches long and from 1 to 3 inches in diameter. The surface shows parts of nine overlapping trans-
verse curved and laminated plates that are the remains of dennal scutes of the carapace. A few similar
specimens have been described from Triassic rocks in Connecticut (lull, 1953, p. 79-89) and Mew Jersey
(Jepsen, 1951).
Prouty {1931, p. 478 and fig. 4) reported crustacean remains from a locality half a mile west of Nelson;
this is in Durham County about l 1/2 miles north of the county line. These fossils included smooth shelled
ostracodes, as well as phyllopods (branchiopods) of the genus Estheria (Cyzicus). Hope and Patterson
(1969b) rrention the presence of Cyzicus in both the Durham and Sanford basins in the Pekin and Cumnock
Fonnations but not in the Sanford Fonnation.
Plant remains are abundant in the Sanford sub-basin of the Deep River basin in association with.the
Cl.lllnock coal at many localities and in the underlying Pekin Fonnation at the brick shale quarry 1 mile north
of Gulf. They have been studied in considerable detail by Erruoons (1856, 1857), Fontaine (1883, 1900),
Hope and Patterson ( 1969a, 1970), Del avoryas and Hope { 1971 ) , and Schultz and llope { 1973).
Age and Correlation
The flora indicates a Late Triassic age for the rocks of the Deep River basin. The ostracode fauna is
consistent with this detennination. The rocks are assigned a ~arnian, Norian, and possibly Rhaetian age
(Van Houten, 1969, p. 8-9), a duration of 15 to 20 million years.
Correlation of the rocks of the Durham basin with the thrP.e fonnations recognized in the Sanford basin
(Campbell and Kimball, 1923; Reinemund, 1955) will remain speculative until detailed work is done between
the two sub-basins. In the Sanford basin, the Triassic rocks include the Pekin Fomation at the base, the
Cumnock Fonnation -with coal beds -in the middle, and the overlying Sanford Formation. In the Durham
basin th€! limestone-chert belt is likely to be ro11ghly equivalent to the Cumnock Fonnation, and, if so, the
sandstone-mudstone belt and the fanglomerate belt are correlative with the Sanford Formation. The question
of whether the three parallel lithologic belts are really superposed fonnations is to be discussed in con-
sidering the development of the depositional basin.
Regional and ·local dip.
generally eastward (pl.
Structure
The Triassic sedimentary rocks in Wake County and throughout the Durham basin dip
1). Bedding in most places strikes north-northeast and dips 5 to 10 degrees east-
ward. True strike and dip are commonly uncertain because of uneven bedding surfaces, lenticular and grada-
tional layers, channel scours, and _cross lanination. The strata are essentially horizontal in many places.
At numerous scattered localities the rocks strike east-northeast and even northwest, and dips as high as 25
to 30 degrees are recorded. These abnormal attitudes seem not to be systematically distributed and are not
the consequence of folding. They probably result from local drag related to minor nonnal faults (described
later) and to diabase dikes. For example, a dike on rL C. Highway 55 about 1.5 miles south of Upchurch and
0.4 mile north of SR 7601 trends eastward through nearly horizontal strata; the beds north of the dike dip
5 degrees south for about 30 feet. and those to the south dip 15 degrees south for about 40 feet.
47
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Prouty {1931, p. 482) states that the dip is steeper in the west·portion of the basin than;~ the east.
Reinemund (1955, p. 81) found the same situation in the Sanforrl basin. Stewart and others (1973, p. 100)
conclude from their seismic reflection data that the heds at depth below the Triangle Brick Company quarry
in western ~ake County dip eastward at not less than 20-22 de~rees and perhaps as much as 35 degrees but
that the basement surface is horizontal. These conclusions are difficult to reconcile with one another and
with surface observations. Near the east side in the borrler fanglomerates, low dips to the west occur
sparingly.
The average angle of southeastward dip in the basin has been variously estimated as 20 degrees {Kerr,
1875, p. 141), perhaps 15 degrees (Russell, 1892, p. 94). at least 15 degrees near Durham (Prouty, 1931,
p. 484), 15 degrees (Mann and Zablocki, 1961, p. 196), and about 15 degrees (Bain, 1966, p. 90). My own
impression favors an average dip of about 10 degrees to east-southeast.
Form and thickness of the deposits. The body of Triassic sedimentary rocks of the Durham basin forms an
elongate prism with triangular vertical cross-section; it tapers out to the northeast and thins to the
southwest (beyond Wake County). Along its west side the prism thins to zero thickness in most places
where the rocks lie nonconformably on older crystalline basement. On the east side the prism ends abruptly
against the Jonesboro fault. The deposits are inferred to thicken eastward because at the surface the bed-
di_ng planes dip almost consistently in that direction.
The thickness of these rocks is not kno~m anywhere in or near Wake County because no well or drill
holes have penetrated through them. A 285-foot well drilled at Raleigh-Durham airport and a 497-foot well
at Triangle Brick Conpany were entirely in Triassic rocks {May and Thomas, 1968 1 p. 102 and 105). A well
drilled about 1885 in Durham (Venahle, 1887; Prouty, 1931, p. 481) to a depth of 1650 feet did not pass
completely through the Triassic rocks.
An estimate of thickness may be made by considering the width of outcrop and rate of dip, though
several uncertainties affect its validity. The strata in most places dip gently eastward, but the amount
and direction of dip vary consideraCly in places. The average dip is estimated to be about 10 degrees a
little south of east. The old deep well in Durham was some 2 miles from the west border of the Triassic
rocks and hence indicates a minimur., eastward dip of the basement of 9 degrees. The width of the basin being
about 15 miles, a 10 degree dip would give a thickness at the east side of about 141 000 feet. As pointed
out by Prouty (1931, p. 484). the normal faults that are known to be prese~t may have repeated beds and
increased th~ apparent thickness. Further, the beds t:iat crop out in the western part of the basin may not
continue down dip to the east side, but instead they probably grade into others. Hence, the true thickness
may be more or less than 14,000 fe'et. McKee and others (1959 1 pl. !::i} give the maximum thickness in the
Durham basin as "10,IJOO .:!_ feet".
Two gravity profiles have been run across the Durham basin in Wake County (Mann and. Zablocki, 1961)
along U. S. Highways 70 and 64. Interpretation of the residual anomaly values indicated that the maximum
thickness of sediment near the east side of the basin was 3100 feet along U. S. Highway 70 and 6500 along
U. S. Highway 64. Some uncertainty existed whether the value employed (0.1) for the difference in density
between Triassic rocks and the metamorphic rocks outside the basin was appropriate, so the absolute thick-
ness values may be in doubt. The data do imply that the thickness doubles in about 11 miles between the
two traverses.
Stewart and others (1973) made a seismic measurement of depth to basement-at the Triangle Brick Company
quarry at the western ed9e of Wake County. Their results, though tentative owing to uncertainty as to
velocity values for the rocks, indicate the thickness of sediments at that point to be 6000 !:_ 500 feet. If
this thickness of 6000 feet is accepted, the rate of thickening from the west edge of t:1e Triassic rocks to
this point is about 860 feet per r.iile. This is almost the same as the minimum value indicated by the old
48
------------------------------.... llll!ll" I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
deep well in Durham. If this thickening rate is projected eastward to the Jonesboro fault, the thickness
at the east side will be about 12,500 feet. More recent investigation by seismic reflection-refraction
traverses {Bain and Stewart, 1975), however, indicates that the thickness adjacent to the Jonesboro fault is
6000-7000 feet and that the maximum thickness, probably in excess of 9000 feet, appears to be in the middle
of the basin rather than along the east side.
The Triassic sedimentary rocks, then, probably are 12,000 to 13,000 feet thick in the vicinity of the
Raleigh-qurham airport. The thickness must grarlually decrease northward along the east side of the sedi-
mentary prism into Granville County where the rocks taper out. To the southwest the thickness seems likely
to be about the same through much of Wake County until the constriction near the Cape Fear River is
approached. Reinemund (1955, p. 38-39) estimated that the sedimentary wedge along its southeast side in
the south end of the Durham basin on the east side of the Cape Fear River must be at least 6000 feet thick,
ranging between limits of 5300 and 7100 feet.
Jonesboro Fault. The great fracture that borders the Triassic sediments on the east was named by Campbell
and Kimball (1923, p. 55-60) for the town near Sanford in Lee County. They seem to have been the first to
have recognized explicitly that the eastern boundary of the Newark rocks is a fault. Maps, sections, and
texts of Enrnons (1856), Kerr (1875), and Kerr and Hanna (1888) do not refer to the matter or do not make
clear whether a fault or an unconfonnity is intended. Russell (1892, p. ·94) states that the Newark ro,cks
1 1/2 miles west of Cary are "dipping westward and resting on the crystalline terrane from which they were
derived." This seems to imply a non-conformity, not a fault contact.
The fault passes in a generally northeast direction some 38 miles completely across Wake County; it
extends, in fact, nearly across the whole state. Its cOurse in Wake County has two major changes in direc-
tion; the northern part (5 miles) north of the Neuse River trends northeast, the middle section (26 miles)
north-northeast, and the southern portion (7 miles), southwest of Holly Springs, northeast again. Some
stretches of as much as 10 miles appear to be straight or gently curving, but elsewhere short, sharp zigzags
interrupt its course.
Angular bends in the border fault are especially well exposed in the vicinity where U. S. Highway 70
crosses the fau 1t, at the intersection of SR 1837 (fig. 8). Though the pos iti.ons of the fault trace as
, mapped may not be completely accurate, exposures are so closely spaced that only minor revisions are
possible. The effect is an indentation as if the Jonesboro fault were offset westward about 900 feet along
two transverse faults striking east-northeast and southeast. Th.e inferred fault lying southwest of U. S.
Highway 70 probably extends southeastward to displace the magnetite quartzite in northern Umstead Park.
Both the Jonesboro fault and the quartzite show left lateral horizontal offset of about 1200 feet. No
evidence has 'been detected for continuance of the inferred fault north of the highway into rocks west or
east of the Jonesboro fault.
'Irregularities are also clearly evidenced in northern Wake County along the tleuse River, Beaverdam, and
Little Beaverdam Creeks. The trace of the border fault in much of this stretch lies beneath floodplain
alluvium, so its exact position cannot be mapped. tlorth and west of the Neuse River and Beaverdam Creek,
from the county line to a point half a mile north of the junction of Little Beayerdam Creek, all exposures
are of Triassic sediments. while to the south and'east all are crystalline rocks. The fault boundary here
takes several sharp bends, including a three-quarter mile stretch striking south of east.
The structural picture here is cooplicated by the mP.rging from the southwest of the Lick Creek fault
(Charles, 1959, map and p. 28, 34, 36) fror.1 within the Durham basin. Chief evidence for this fault is a
prominent topographic lineament along Lick Creek in Durham County and Smith Creek in Granville County
(though these two streams are not directly aligned). The courses of the Lick Creek fault and the Jonesboro
border fault, thus. seem to coincide across the northern nP.ck of Wake County. Charles suggests that the
Lick Creek fault offsets the Jonesboro fault about 9 miles northeastward in this area. The abrupt zigzag
49
,.
' ii f. i 'I !
j
' , .• i • l
pONO
)
Figure 8.
. ·-....... . . ,.,,,,,,,,.~
11001
' I 60
I
I
I
500 ,000 1500 J.,.,,
LEGEND
• HORIZONTAL BEDS
"V STil.lkI AHD DIP OF FOLIATION
JI! STII.IKl: OF VERTICAL FOLIATION
,.,/ FALL T DASHED ~ER£ INFERRED
.,,. OUTCROP
""' TIUASSIC FAHGl.OMERATE
CJ=.== =-f '7";: = ---~ ~ --~~ ~ ~ ""-"-c,..;l>jt.:;!:-=-----~-=-----
Geologic map of trace of the Jonesboro fault in the vicinity where
it crosses U. S. Highway 70, at intersection of SR 1837, western
Wake County, N. C.
11
' I
,,I
'i ,,.
i' i
'I
bends in the border fault. however, argue strongly against significant strike-slip displacement here.
Resolution of this problem is beyond the scope of this report since it involves extensive study in adjacent
counties.
Russell (1892, p. 94) cited a notch in the outline of the Newark rocks as mapped by Kerr (1875) near
Cary that Russell thought probably indicated faults. This notch was eliminated, however, in Holmes' revi-
sion (1887) of the map (Kerr and llanna, 1fl88). This area was later investigated by Goldston and Stuckey
(1930); their results are considered later under topographic features. The course of the fault at this
locality is now mapped as straight.
Although sm11e of the ahrupt bends in the Jonesboro fault may have been caused by cross-faulting, it
is likely that mosf of them, especially those at small angles, reflect irregularities in the original
tensional fracture that initiated faulting.
The actual fault surface is exposed almost nowhere. Its trace was mapped (pl. l}._between exposures of
Triassic sediments (to the west} and those of variolls metamorphic and igneous rocks, spaced a few tens to
a few hundreds of feet apart. Thus, in many places considerable latitude remains for revision of its loca-
tion and details of form. Its position is readily observed, however, in the ditches on SR 1837 about 500
_feet northeast of U. S. llighway 70 (fig. 8) and along SR 1435 northeast of Apex.
The best exposure of the fault that is known is at the bend in SR 1902 in Durham County. 0.7 mile west
of Wake County and about 500 feet east of Laurel Creek. Here shattered-mctavolcanic rocks may be observed
in contact with steeply tilted Triassic pebbly sandstone and mudstone. The fault plane dips 80 degrees west
over a vertical exposure of about 5 feet; no other site was found where its dip could be measured, though
it is clearly near vertical. The fault contains 4 to 5 inches of clay goug~. The Triassic rocks abut
sharply against the fault surface, where they are nearly vertical. 1:owever, within 20 feet to the west they
dip about 35 degrees west, and within 1000 feet the dip is 5 degrees west. At this site the Triassic strata
are clearly cut off eastward by post-depositional faulting. Thou9h the basin of deposition is regarded as
due to faulting -on the evidence of the fanglomerates, as discussed later -it is clear that some further
displacement followed the laying down of the strata exposed here.
The minimum amount of dip slip on the Jonesboro fault is indicated by the thickness of Triassic sedi-
ments adjacent to it, some 12,000 feet in west-central Wake County. This value must be increased by what-
ever thickness of rtewark rocks may have been eroded since their deposition, which may be considerable,
though no basis of judgment seems to be available.
Evidence of strike slip is scanty. The possibility of extensive horizontal offset along the postulated
oblique lick Creek fault in northern Uake County (Charles, 1959) has been noted. Further, in Chatham
·county a mile east of Corinth and 3 miles southwest of l•!ake County near the crossing of fl. C. Highway 42
and the florfolk Southern Railway a large north-northwest striking diabase dike appears to have been offset
right laterally about 1000 feet. {This locality was brought to the writer's attention by J. L. Stuckey.)
Whether the diabase constitutes severed segments of a single dike, or two s~parate dikes each ending at the
fault. has not been proven. If the former interpretation is correct, the observation documents a kind of
tectonic episode hitherto unrecognized in the reaion.
Faults within the basin. The tlewark rocks are visibly displaced by small fat:lts at several places. and
similar unexposed faults of various magnitudes are likely to be numerous. Observed faults are confined
to single outcrops and cannot be traced along strike. They seem to be steeply dipping normal faults. and
most strike nearly north or west.
A good exposure may be seen in western \!ake County in the parking lot of Hennis Trucking terminal on
the southwest side of U. S. Hi9hway 70 half a mile east of the county line. The fault strikes tL 85° W.
and dips 83 degrees north. Correlation of the strata on the two sides of the f.-:iult is not certain, but the
51
hanging wall (north side) seems to have dropped about 12 feet. The strata strike N. 35° W. and dip 4 degrees
southwest on the hanging wall and 14 degrees on the footwall. This abnormal attitude where faulting is
known leads to the inference that such orientations elsewhere probably are local disturhances resulting
from faulting or intrusion of diabase dikes.
Another small nonnal fault with dip slip of about one foot is exposed in a road cut on SR 1624 one
mile west of Carpenter (on N. C. Highway 55).
An east-trending nonnal fault was uncovered during excavation at the Shearon Harris nuclear power plant
site near the southwest corner of the county. The strata here dip 10-15 degrees eastward, and the fault
dips about 75 degrees to the. south. Several diabase dikes have been displaced as well as the Newark strata.
Dip slip is reported (Carolina Power and Light""Company. 1975, p. II -7-8) to be between 80 and 100 feet and
strike slip between 0.5 and 13 feet. This fault has been traced by trenching . .fq_i::.mo.re .. than a mile along
strike.
Bain and Stewart (1975) deduced from seismic surveys that the bottom of the Durham basin is broken into
horsts and grahens a mile or more in extent and having relief of more than 1000 feet. These faults probably
also affect the overlying Newark rocks, which are considerably faulted.
~-The Mewark rocks in Wake County are broken by a multitude of fractures. Though some exposures show
many good joints, systematic jointing is on the whole poorly developed. In more firmly cemented sandstone
layers some joints are approximately planar for a few feet. but these conmonly merge into curved and irregu-
lar surfaces. Fractures in mudstone and claystone are curved and short. The range in strike and dip is
usually considerable in any one outcrop or small area. No joints were observed that displayed plumose
surfaces.
Watson and Laney (1906, p. 231-232) report that exposures of sandstone northwest of Morrisville have dis-
tinct sets of joints (N. 60° H., N. 45° E., and N-S at one place, and ti. 30° W. and rL 60° E. at another).
Likewise, Prouty (1931, p. 483) stated that two rectangular systems of joint sets exist in the Durham basin,
namely, N. 15-35° E. and N. 45-70° W. and a less important one N. 65-70° E. and N. 10-15° IL Grannell (1960,
p. 37-40) described a numerous and consistent set of vertical joints near Lowes Grove (in Durham County) that
strikes N. 15° W. Throughout the rest of the area he mapped, mainly in Durham County, scanty data showed
much scatter in strike with two Concentrations at N. 45° E. and ti. 80° E. My own experience indicates that
the regularity of jointing in the Newark rocks in Wake County is too slight to merit detailed investigation.
The generally poor development of joints is probahly accounted for by the high clay content of even
the sandstones, Which makes them less brittle, and because the region has been subjected to vertical warping
movements since the flewark rocks were deposited rather than compression, which would be evidenced by assoc-
iated folds.
Development of the Depositional Basin
The elongate basin in which the Triassic sediments were deposited is regarded as having resulted from
faulting. It seems to have been a half graben produced by intermittent dropping of the block west of the
Jonesboro fault relative to the stationary or upraised block to the east. The sinking block tilted downward
to the east and may have been -recurrently bowed up along its western side. Rapid erosion of the higher
lands both east and west of the half graben supplied sediment to fill the lowland. lntennittent slip on
the bounding fault renewed the differences in elevation that energized the transfer of rock material from
adjacent higher ground into the trough.
The possibility that the trough of deposition was produced by down-bending of the crust rather than by
faulting has been stressed by Campbell and Kimball (1923, p. 60-61). Under this proposal, displacement on
the Jonesboro fault post-dated all or most of the period of deposition. P.ad this been the situation,
52
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
however. the Newark sediments must have first filled the bottom of the downwarped trough and in time must
have spread farther and farther out to west and east dipping toward the basin axis. Furthermore, downwarp-
ing could hardly have produced the strong local relief needed for developing the fanglomerate known all
along the east side and not elsewhere. Had the basin been a downwarped trough split lengthwise by post-
depositional normal faulting, the upthrown eastern half being eliminated by later erosion, no possible
location of the boundar:y fault through the center or eastern half of the basin would have resulted in the
observed relations. that is, fanglomerates to the extreme eastern margin, finest sediment near the middle,
and· coarser sediment again on the west side. The coarse a·nd poorly s·orted sediment along the entire east
side of the Durham basin clearly points to an abrupt scarp. The fanglomerate at the northern end of the
basin in Granvi"lle County where the Triassic rocks thin out must be stratigraphically lower and older than
that in central Wake County. The continuity of the fanglomerate along the east side of the basin seems to
imply continuity of a scarp throughout the depositional period. Hence, it is argued that the basin was in-
augurated and maintained by faulting. This interpretation is based, of course, on features observed at the
present land surface. Should future data from depth indicate some different kind and sequence of deposits
in the subsurface, modification of the half-graben concept will be required. A similar close dependence of
sediment type on tectonic activity is described by Randazzo and others (1970). in the l~adesboro Triassic
basin some 80 miles to the southwest.
let us assume, then that the basin was initiated by faulting vlith a steep scarp along the east side,
that it remained stationary for a long or short time while sediment accumulated, and that as time went on
the basin was abruptly deepened or renewed many times by recurrent slip along the Jonesboro fault. During
any one period of stability the basin would tend to fill up with coalescing ·alluyial fans spreading westward
from the scarp, with finer fluvial and lake deposits in the middle, and with elastics of intermediate grain
size on the gentle west slope (fig 9-A). As the succeSsive scarps were reduced by erosion, the alluvial fans
must have extended up on the margin of the upthrown block, but renewed faultin9 would have cut off these
extensions along the fault line and their material would subsequently have been redeposited in the basin.
The increment of sediment accumulated between times of faulting should be thickest in the east, and probably
thicker in the middle (the low part of the basin) than on the west, where some earlier deposits would tend
to be eroded and shifted farther into the trough. Original dips should be westward on the east side,
horizontal in the middle, and eastward along the west flank. Renewed slip on the east border fault would
tilt the trough down to the east and provide space for another similar incremental wedge of sediment on top
(fig. 9-n}. This inferred rotation of the trough, rather than a vertical drop, would steepen the eastward
dips, lessen riT i--ever·se the westward dips {Prouty, 1931, p. 485}, and tilt horizontal beds eastward; this
accords with observations at the present land surface that the strata dip generally but variably eastward.
The Durham basin, then, would have been filled by the stacking of a series of similar incremental wedges of
varying thickness. The wedges are likely to have extended farther an~ farther westward with time as the
basin filled but to have been cut off sharply on the east by the fault. Post depositional displacement on
the Jonesboro fault seems clearly to have occurred also, as was described earlier. Discontinuous faults
along the west side of the Durham basin ·(see Harrington, 1951) are presumed to be of this date.
According to this concept of the depositional and tectonic history, the stratigraphic division of the
Triassic rocks in the Sanford basin into three fonnations (Pekin. Cumnock, and Sanfor1) "vmuld not apply in
the Durham basin as time units. Each would be ·a 1ithofacies grading laterally into others and persisting
upwar<l through the whole sediment prism across time boundaries. The apparent superposition of the units, as
now indicated by the generally eastward dips, would be an effect of progressive tectonic tilting during
deposition. The eastward dipping sandstones at the west edge of the hasin are no doubt older than those a
little to the east that dip the same way, but it is sug9ested that those western layers do not persist
across the bottom of the basin as components of a sandstone time stratigraphic unit. Instead it is felt
53
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
:1
! I
ii I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
}
PEKIN
FACIES
CUMNOCK
FACIES
A. First depositional increment
SANFORD
fACIES
PEKIN CUMNOCK SANFORD I
FACIES FACIES FACIES
,------A------v-----___j,.----,r----~-:=,--,=-:==-, I 7
\ \
B. Multiple increments and,post-depositional erosion
Figure 9. Serial cross sections representing probable conditfons of
deposition of Triassic sediments in Durham basin. N. C.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
that ut each time level in the sequence "Pekin" focies grades eastward into "Cumnock" facies and that in
turn into "Sanforri" facies.
Peneplanation during later Mesozoic and perhaps su~sequent times has heveled the Triassic deposits and
removed an unknown thickness. Harrington (1951, p. 155) concluded from an analysis of normal faults along
the west border near Chapel Hill that a thickness of 1300 to 1800 feet of Triassic rocks had been removed
at that point. McKee and others (1959, pl. 9) indicate that 2-3000 feet were eroded from the ~:ewark rocks
in the Ourham basin.
55
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
POST-NEWARK (POST-TRIASSIC) DIABASE DIKES
Dikes of dark igneous rock fill fractures in many of the metamorphic rocks, in the Rolesvill€ batholith.
and in the Triassic sedimentary rocks. Cretaceous and younger sediments overlie some or them unconformably.
These dikes. then, record an episode of crustal fracturing and intrusion of basic magma during a time of
crustal extension that occurred after accumulation of the Newark sediments and prior to their being eroded
and transgressed by Coastal Plain deposits. Annstrong and Besancon (1970) give K/Ar dates for most of the
dikes, sills, and flows studied in eastern f-lorth America of about 200 m.y., though some were older. This
makes them Triassic and contemporaneous with sedimentation, a situation not confinned hy local observatfons.
Paleomagnetic studies (De Boer, 1967) indicate that the dikes were intruded during the Jurassic period, a
conclusion concurred in by Sutter (1976).
Though many of these intrusions in steeply dipping foliated rocks are locally conformable, sill-like
bodies, all are here referred to as dikes because the general character of the group is discordant to older
structures. Sills have not been observed by the author in the Triassic sedimentary rocks in Wake County,
but they are known nearby in Durham and Granville Counties and in the Sanford area.
Many diabase dikes have strong positive expression on the aeromagnetic maps, some are only faintly
expressed, and some have no effect. These relations are described in a separate section of this report.
The aeromagnetic maps have heen invaluable in tracing many dikes between widely spaced outcrops and through
sediment-covered areas.
The dikes are generally distributed across the county. They seem to be equally numerous in the crys-
talline and Triassic areas, though large dikes are most coJlJTlon east of Raleigh. Their locations are shown
on the general geologic map (pl. 1) and on figure 10, which also records measured thicknesses. Some two
dozen major dikP.s have been recorded, and many other thin ones have been noted; many more can be found.
Most of them trend north-northwest though a significant number strike north and nearly east-west. Without
exception. thP.y dip almost vertically.
Thicknesses range from less than a foot to as much as 200 feet. The largest dike discovered has been
traced along a smoothly curved, northward course through Garner, east Raleigh, and Millbrook for a distance
of 15 miles. Its thickness varies from about 50 to 200 feet. Its southern end is in adamellite, but for
most of its length, it lies in various gneisses to the west of the pluton. In Garner along U. S. Highway
70 several small dikelets a few inches thick parallel the east contact within 10 feet of it. At least three
dikes in the Rolesville batholith are 100 feet thick in places. The longest dike known extends N. 1n° W.
from the Johnston County line near Shotwell for 18 miles to near Wake Forest.
No dikes have been traced to or across the Jonesboro fault in Hake County. However, a south-trending
dike at Morrisville has been traced to within a mile of the fault. An east-trending dike north of Apex
extends within 2 miles or less, and a south-trending dike in easternmost Durham County just north of N. C.
Highway 98 extends to within at least a mile of the fault and may possibly cross it.
Most dikes are tabular with locally uniform thicknesses. Individual dikes show marked but gradual
variations in thickness along strike. A few thin dikes in granite are irregular in fonn, having right angle
bends in one or both contacts. Offshoots a few inches thick are not uncommon. In a few localities two or
more nearly parallel dikes occur within a few feet of one another, probably the result of oblique splitting
of one dike into two. Actual intersections of dikes have not been observed, but several instances of near'by
dikes with strongly divergent trends indicate that this may occur, though forking seems more likely. Inclu-
sions of wall rock are comparatively rare.
The diabase is black, massive, and generally fine grained; in the larger dikes the texture is medium
grained, and in the thinner ones it is aphanitic. Large dikes have aphanitic borders and coarser interiors.
The rock is distinguished from other dark rocks in the area -such as hornblende gabbro and arnphibolite -
by narrow, lath-like crystals of dark feldspar whose cleavage surfaces in fresh rock may be recognized with
56
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Htllll
a hand lens. All exposures are weathered~ and the diabase sapro1ite is typified by concentrically exfoli-
ated rock spheroids embedded in dark brown, plastic clay. Most spheroids contain remnant cores of fresh
rock. The outcrop strips of the dikes are marked discontinuously by dark spheroidal boulders in and on the
soil that range in diameter from a few inches to several feet.
Diabase consists chiefly of plagioclase feldspar~ pyroxene, olivine, a,d opaque minerals. Preliminary
microscopic study indicates that labradorite originally composed about 50 percent of the rock, augite 30 to
35 percent, olivine 10 to 20 percent, and magnetite-ilmenite 3 to 5 percent. Secondary alteration has pro-
duced varying amounts of serpentine and chlorite at the expense of olivine and augite. The texture is inter-
granular or subophitic, with anhedral pyroxene and olivine lying between or partially enclosing tabular
plagioclase. Radiating groups of feldspar crystals are common.
Hennes (1964) has shown that dolerite (diabase) in the Deep River basin varies greatly 1n composition.
He recognized four classes; in these, olivine range~ from Oto 54 percent, au~ite from 5 to 49 percent,
p1agioclase from 34 to 70 percent, micropegmatite from Oto 27 percent, and opaque minerals from 2 to 6·
percent. Weigand and Ragland (1970) distinguished four chemical types: (1} olivine nonnative; (2) quartz
n.onnative with low Ti02; (3) quartz normative with high Ti02; and (4) quartz nonnative with high iron.
Variations in Wake County diabase have not been investigated in detail, but judging from preliminary petro-
graphic study, minor color differences in saprolite, and marked differences in magnetic effects, they also
rrust have a ·wide range of composition.
All dike contacts are sharply distinct. Contact metamorphic effects have been noted only near dikes
in Triassic sedimentary rocks. The typical red color of sandstone, siltstone, and shale has been changed
to black at and near the contacts: The effect is most markerl near the dikes and gradually dies out at dis-
tances equal to about half the dike thickness. This is readily observed a-Ctti~ dike that crosses N. C.
Highway 54 a quarter of a mile.southeast of Morrisville. The change presumably is due to recrystallization
of hematite pigment in the sediments to magnetite under higher temperature.
A dike 2 miles northwest of Apex that crosses N. C. Highway 55 at a point 1.3 miles north of U. S.
Highway 64, includes a slab of sandstone that has been partially recrystallizerl. The vertical dike strikes
east-west, is about 20 feet thick, and cuts throu9h Triassic brown pebbly arkose and laminated claystone.
The sandstone inclusion is 8 to 12 inches thick and stands vertically in the middle of the dike. It has
been bleached white and is now a hard hornfels in which original elastic texture is still obvious. The
fine-grained matrix, however, has been recrystallized so that sand 9rains an~ quartz pebbles are completely
surrounded by fine fibers of sanidine radiating from their surface; small flakes of chlorite (?) fill the
intervening space.
Detailed petrographic and chemical studies of similar dikes in neighboring counties to the west and
southwest have been made by Hennes [1964), Justus [1966), Ragland and others [1968), Reinemund [1955), Singh
{1963), and Weigand and Ragland (1970). Sills or possibly buried lava flows in Triassic sedimentary rocks
in Granville and ~urham Counties have been described by Koch (1967a; 1967b). A vein of laumontite about 4
inches thick is reported {Furbish, 1965) in a dike 3.5 miles west of Wake County.
The diabase dikes in the county show little consistent relation to other structures. The commonest
joints in the metamorphic and igneous rocks are near east-west, while most dikes strike north-northwest.
The dikes also seem independent of foliation, though in places they are concordant. In the Triassic rocks
the dikes parallel the local joints in small areas but show llllCh greater regional consistency in orientation
than does the poorly developed jointing. This lack of consistent parallelism suggests that many or most
joints {except those filled with quartz veins) were not present until after the tirrie of dike intrusion. As
previously suggested, jointing probably occurred at various times during recurrent regional uplifts.
The distribution of Triassic dikes in the eastern Uniterl States and their re9ional variations in
orientations have been described by King (1967; 1971). He showed that between Alabama and North Carolina
57
I
)
j
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
the dikes strike northwest, while farther to the northeast they swing consistently clockwise through north
to northeast. They are sharply discordant to a11 earlier trends, even to Triassic trends. The Wake County
dikes fit this regional pattern.
The presence of numerous north-trending dikes implies a suhstantial east-west extension of the earth's
crust in this region at the time they were intruded. Tabulation of 22 principal dikes in a 10-mile wide
strip extending 38 miles from east to west across the middle of the county g_ives an aggregate dike thickness
of 945 feet. This total thickness indicates an average crustal expansion of 24 feet per mile (or 0.5
percent). This fracturing and extension i~ believed to be an aspect of continental rifting as North America
and Africa separated when the Uorth Atlantic ocean basin was initiated during the Jurassic period {De Goer,
1967; May, 1971).
59
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Pleistocene epoch. The highest of these terraces is limited on the west by the Coates scarp with toe eleva-
tion of about 255 feet {Daniels and others, 1966, p. 178-180). This scarp on the uplands lies east of Wake
County though fluvial counterparts extenrl up the Neuse drainage into the county. The presence of this
marine topographic feature so near Wake County raises the possibility that still higher stands of the sea
may have been responsible for erosional surfaces and upland sediment across Hake County. Though this con-
cept cannot be rejected, the fluvial origin is favored by the variable elevations and heterogeneous
character of the sediment.
A thorough investigation of terraces on upland ridges and valley sides> together with their superficial
sediments> is needed to elucidate the erosional and perhaps tectonic history of the region during late
Cenozoic time. All these features are aspects of the development of the existing valley system and are
remnants of earlier landscape stages having different stre~m positions. The higher level surfaces are the
older, and the formation of lower levels has involved partial Ciestruction and modification of earlier land
fonns as the shifting drainage cut deeper into the peneplain. Much of this valley shaping occurred during
the Pleistocene epoch when stream gradients and base level of erosion varied with sea level fluctuations
controlled by waxing and waning of the continental glaciers.
Topographic Divisions
Though the land forms across Wake County seem generally about the same> closer observation shows inter-
esting differences related to the four principal geologic sub-areas. Some of these differences are readily
apparent to an observer outdoors, while others require the larger view provided by contour maps. Each area
has some distinctive features not shared by the others. These geomorphic divisions generally grade into one
another though sharp boundaries are evident locally.
Metamorphic area. The central and northern parts underlain chiefly by metamorphic rocks are a little more
hilly than elsewhere. Local relief is corrrrnonly as much as 100 feet from upland to adjacent stream, and
many slopes are steep. The highest areas in the county are irregular patches veneered with upland fluvial
{?) sediment {pl. 4 and fig. 14) rising above 500 feet at Apex, Cary, Leesville, Six Forks, and Purnell.
They are situated along the western side of the metamorphic area, Cary and Leesville being just east of the
Jonesboro fault and Apex just west. They 1 ie in a belt some five miles wide that trends about N. 35° E.
The belt joins the Cape Fear-Neuse divide at Apex {.elevation 510 feet), making an angle with it of about 40
degrees. No other areas reaching 500 feet are with_in 12 to 20 miles westward, on the west side of the
Triassic area. The significance of these remnant topographic highs is uncertain.
Some small tributary streams ln the metamorphic area tend to flow along north-northeast lines parallel
to the foliation of the rocks; examples include much of House Creek and Beaverdam Creek in west Raleigh.
Lower Barton Cree~, and Richlands Creek west of Wake Forest. Their positions and courses probably are con-
trolled by strongly contrasting resistence to erosion of adjacent rock layers. Larger streams and many
smaller ones, however, flow across the foliation direction.
Adam Mountain at Bayleaf is a small monadnock in this belt that results from a partly silicified soap-
stone body. It is isolated by small cre~ks on the east, west. and north sides above which it rises over 200
feet to a summit elevation of 478 feet. This height, however, is only about 40 feet above the level of the
general upland nearby. Although soapstone is mechanically soft, it is resistant to chemical weathering.
This body contains much siliceous rock, thus pennitting it to project above more thoroughly decomposed
feldspathic gneisses. Iron Mountain back of Stony Hill Church is a similarly steep knob resulting from
limonite-rich siliceous rock in an ultramafic body.
Triassic sedimentary area.
also a topographic lowland
The Triassic area in western Wake County is not only
as was recorded long ago by Mitchell (1842, p. 130).
79
a structural basin but is
Elevations along the west-
I
I
I
11 I ~
11
I
I
-j
I
I
ern side of the adjacent metamorphic belt corrmonly exceed 500 feet, while within the Triassic basin few
uplands reach 450 feet, and most of the area lies below 400 feet. The hiqhest points in the Triassic area
in Wake County are about 510 feet at Apex and about 500 feet at a point 2 miles north-northwest of Leesville.
Both of these points are just west of the Joneshoro fault; the former is also on the Cape Fear-Neuse divide
(fig. 14). Elevations of the upland surfaces within the Triassic basin in anrl near Wake County decrP.ase
regularly westward, while those in the Metamorphic and granitic areas decrease eastward. This can perhaps
be partly accounted for as general slopes toward the major rivers, but the belt of highs north of Apex does
not coincide with the drainage divide. These isolated topographic highs may be remnants of a,fonner drain-
age divide between the areas underlain by metamorphic and Triassic rocks. Their significance, however, re-
mains an enigma whose solution will require regional study.
A sharp topographic break marks.in places the Jonesboro fault, the eastern limit of the Triassic rocks.
Crabtree Creek has a floodplain half a mile wide northeast of Morrisville in Triassic rocks, but after cros-
sing the Jonesboro fault near 1-40, its valley narrows to a rocky gorge in the metamorphic rocks. like-
wise. the Neuse River in northern Wake County meanders through a floodplain a mile wide in Triassic rocks
but becomes a narrow, steep sided valley in the metamorphic rocks. In this vicinity several streams follow
the Jonesboro (or lick Creek) fault; these include the upper part of little Beaverdam Creek, the lower part
of Beaverdam Creek, the Neuse River at N. C. Highway 50, lower lick Creek, and lower laurel Creek. A dis-
tinct fault-line scarp exists for l 1/2 miles north and 2 1/2 miles south of the point where the Neuse River
crosses the fault. Small streams that drain westward down this scarp have unusually steep gradients in the
crystalline area and extensive outcrops of hard rock. The dam site for the. reservoir on Beaverrlam Creek
extends across the Jonesboro fault just north of the Neuse. This ~nvolves contrasting foundation conditions
along the northeast and southwest oarts of the dam, as well as the remote possibility of earthquake damage.
A fault scarp 2 miles west of Cary was described by Goldston and Stuckey (1930), but this is not con-
firmed by the writer's recent work. The earlier observations were made without the benefit of a contour
base map. The Jonesboro fault in this vicinity cuts M. 20° F.. rliagonally across Coles Branch, the ridge to
the west, and also northward across the unnamed valley north of N. C. Highway 54. No topographic expression
of the fault is detected here or elsewhere to the southwest in Wake County except for the probably fortu-
itous coincidence of the primary drainage divide with the fault between Apex and Holly Springs and the fact
that Jim Branch near Burt nearly follows the fault trace.
The significance of the general lower altitude of the Triassic lowland, the abrupt changes in topo-
graphy along the Neuse River and Crabtree Creek valleys where they cross the Jones~oro fault, and the belt
of sediment-covered hilltops above 500 feet elevation near the west side of .the crystalline area is presently
unclear. The Triassic rocks are ccmnonly regarded as more readily eroded than the crystalline rocks and
hence may have been worn to a relatively lower level. The great depth of saprolite on the latter suggests
that they also should be readily eroded. Outcrops of hard rock, however, are common along streams in the
crystalline areas but essentially absent in the Triassic. A greater rate of erosion in the Triassic should
produce a subsequent drainage pattern with streams parallel to the belt. Major tributaries of the Cape Fear
River in the basin have this relation. In the wide expanse of lower country between the 500-foot elevations
east and west of the basin, at sites 0.5 to 6 miles west of the Jonesboro fault, patches of upland sediment
lie on ridge crests at elevations ranging from 330 to 370 feet. Though this might suggest downfaulting of
the basin since peneplanation, it may instead indicate it was worn lower during that process. Regional
study is required.
Granitic area. The eastern granitic part of the county is somewhat subdued, rolling country. Hilltops tend
to be broad, gently sloping. dome or shield shape~. local relief is corrrnonly less than 100 feet, and steep
slopes are rare. little River, Buffalo Creek, Marks Creek, and Poplar Creek, all in granite, have straight,
BO
. Collection of.• .. ·•
G. c. Nicholson
. · .. ciiitectiono~'l
G. C. Nicholson
Ref. 19
GEOJ_,OGY AND GROUND-WATER RESOURCES·
. . .
IN THE RALEIGH AREA
NORTH CAROLINA
DIVISION OF GROUND WATER
GROUND WATER BULLETIN NO. 15
North Carolina
Department of Water Resources
RALElGt_,
NOVEMBER
1968
·~:
.-;-r,
·<-:.:.;-,.,,'.'.··. C • /)_;•
··~ <'. 1~;.·/:-,-,
. ':'r_-
·::··:_·.1~
· --~i\~,,,_,z2ut1Jt._~~A?4'r}YM·,'"':W""-::~""-: .. "'ih"!"';~.;R~t:P#/4t··":Ne.1.i~~•~~~-f;1f!.«§~W.*'#t~~:~,~,~%~1~t~;'?fr~~?1:1Mt;ttx~;zg~~¥fl~r~~?w1~r?~~~\\:~
GEO]~OGY AND GROUND-WKfEJl RESOURCES
IN rrIIE RAJ~EI Gil Al{EA
NORTII CAROLINA
By
V. JEFF MAY
HYDRAULIC ENGINEER, U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
CHEMICAL QUALITY OF WATER SECTION
By
J. D. THOMAS
CHEMIST, U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
GROUND WATER BULLETIN NUMBER 15
NORTH CAROLI NA
DEPARTMENT OF WATER ANO AIR RESOURCES
George E. Pickett, Director
Division of Ground Water
Harry M. Peek, Chief
PREPARED COOPERATIVELY BY THE GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
AND THE NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF WATER AND AIR RESOURCES
I .-
GEDLOGY
TRIASSIC ROCKS
Triassic sedimentary rocks underlie large areas in western Wake and
cou~hern Granville Counties. The rocks comprise part of the Triassic
iJ :rhiJJJ1 basin which is one of the three sub di visions of the Triassic Deep
ii,·-,er basin as divided by Prouty (1931). Triassic rocks in the Raleigh
,,,·,,a include buff arkosic sandstones, red to maroon argillaceous sandstones,
: -iffJ)l.e to maroon shales J and coarse fanglomerate. The source areas for
~,.,,0c sedimentary rocks were the pre-Triassic metamorphic and granitic rocks
west of the basin for the interbedded sediments, and the pre-Triassic rocks
east of the basin for the fanglomerate. The Jonesboro fault forms the
eastern contact of Triassic rocks with pre-Triassic rocks. In Granville
County the western contact is an erosional surface.
Interbedded sandstone and shale can be seen at location WK-8 (figs. 5
and 13). Here the sandstone is essentially composed of quartz, feldspar,
and iron oxide. The thick interbedded shales have weathered to a dark-red
clay leaving the thinner sandstone beds as nearly horizontal ledges. The
sandstone beds range in thickness from less than 1 foot to about 3 feet and
can be traced for several miles along N. C. State Highway 55 north of Apex.
Figure 13.--Interbedded Triassic sandstone and shale,
8 miles north of Apex, Wake County.
Buff arkosic sandstone (loc. G-9, fig. 5) is the predominant Triassic
rock type in Granville County. Angular fragments of feldspar and subrounded
to angular quartz grains are the chief constituents of this rock. Mica
composes about 5 percent of the rock. The angularity of the quartz and
feldspar indicates a relatively close source area, perhaps the granodiorite
-31 -
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
GROUND WA'rER IN THE RALEIGH ARFA
which borders the 'rriassic on the northwest side of the basin. The com-
position of the arkosic sandstone also indicates that granodiorite was the
chief source rock.
Basal beds of arkosic sandstone interbedded with maroon to purple
shales unconformably overlie pre-Triassic rocks along the western edge of
the Triassic basin in Granville County. Angular fragments of shale are in
the lower part of the sandstone beds where the sandstones overlie the shale.
At places the sandstones contain conglomeratic lenses of small, well-rounded
pebbles.
Fanglomerate crops out along the eastern edge of the Durham basin forming
a belt that is as much as l mile wide in places (loc. WK-9, fig. 5). It is
composed of angular rock fragments and rounded to subrounded boulders, cobbles,
and pebbles in a heterogeneous mixture. Boulders l foot in diameter a:re
common. The interstices between the larger fragments and boulders are filled
with dand,·silt, and small pebbles.
Dense black diabase dikes intrude the Triassic sedimentary rocks. They
strike at small angles east and west of north and range in thickness from a
few inches to several tens of feet.
At some localities in Wake County, Triassic rocks are unconformably
overlain by unconsolidated sands and clays which at one location are cross-
bedded. These sands and clays are thin and may represent outliers of Coastal
Plain sediments of Cretaceous age.
The Triassic sediments were deposited in a subsiding basin, probably
during a period of moist to humid climatic conditions (Reinemund, 1955, p. 53).
The Triassic beds dip towards the Jonesboro fault at an average of 12
degrees, and strike approximately parallel to the fault plane. Vertical
displacement of the fault is at least the maximum thickness of the strata.
This was determined by Reinemund (1955, p. 27) to be about 10,000 feet. The
thickness of Triassic rocks that has been removed by erosion is unknown, but
the maximum vertical displacement was no doubt much greater than the maximum
thickness of the strata now present. The-fault plane dips west and northwest
at about 65 degrees.
Soils formed from weathering of the shales are blackish-red to purple
clay-soils. The arkosic sandstones weather to light-brown, sandy loam-soils
that resemble soils formed from felsic intrusions. Fanglomerate weathers to
dark-red soils which can be recognized by the abundant residual cobbles.
TUSCAIDOSA FORMATION
SmH.h and Johnson (1887, p. 95-116) proposeci the name Tuscaloosa for
sediments of Cretaceous age exposed at Tuscaloosa, Alabama. Cooke (1936,
p. 19) first applied the name Tuscaloosa to Cretaceous equivalents in North
Carolina.
-32 -
GR0UNDcWATER JIYDR0I/JGY
In general, ground water is steadily moving under the influence of
.·,a'.city from recharge to discharge are3,s. The rate at which it moves ranges
: .•. 0 ,,1 a few feet a day to a few feet a year (Meinzer, 1942, p. 449), va,rying
:,~;·ectly with the hydraulic gradient '1nd with the size and arrangement of
·~::-2 interstices.
Ground water may be discharged naturally by several methods. In humid
:.,.;·eas, such as the Raleigh area, where the water table slopes toward the
screams and rarely falls below the level of them, there is a continuous
seepage which maintains the flow of the streams in dry periods and adds to
a:,e flow 'during wet periods. Where the water table is close to the surface,
~:,ere is heavy discharge by evaporation and transpiration during the spring
and summer months. Springs and seeps are also areas of natural ground-water
discharge.
THE OCCURRENCE AND MOVEMENT OF GROUND WATER
The amount of water that can be stored in the rocks and soil is con-
srolled by the size, shape, and number of pore spaces they contain. The
rocks of the earth's crust, including soils and other weathered materials,
contain pore space or interstices that are filled with water in the zone of
saturation. These interstices range in size from the microscopic pores in
clays to cavernous openings in some limestones and dolomites. Unconsolidated
sediments, such as gravel, sand and clay, contain primary pores between the
individual grains. When these sediments are consolidated, such as the
Triassic sedimentary rocks, the total volume of pore space is reduced by
compaction and cementation of the sediments. In crystalline rocks such as
granite, schist, and gneiss, the volume of primary pore space between
individual components is very small. Most of the water in these rocks is
contained in secondary interstices which were formed after the rock was
lithified. The most important secondary interstices in the Raleigh area
include joints, planes of cleavage and schistosity, and solution channels.
In the igneous and metamorphic rocks that underlie most of the Raleigh
area, many of the interstices are formed or enlarged by normal weathering
processes at or near the earth's surface. Wi t_h_depth, the size and abundance
of interstices decreases, consequently most ground water is in the upper
100-to 200-foot-zone of the earth's crust. Several.types of intersticea
are shown in figure 14. The path of water along interstices in some rock
types is shown in figure 15.
Porosity is the ratio of the volume of the interstices to the total
volume of the rock expressed as a percentage. The porosity of different
rocks is variable. Clays commonly have a porosity of 50 percent or more.
In some crystalline rocks such as granite, the porosity may be less than
1 percent.
Specific yield is the ratio of the volume of water a saturated rock
Will yield by gravity to the total volume of rock and is usually stated as
a percentage.
-35 -
--- -
·A-Primary interstices in
well-sorted sedimentary
deposit.
--- - -
B-Primory interstices in
poorly sorted sedimentory
deposit.
-- --
·C-Primary interstices in
sedimentory rock. Porosity
hos .been 9reotly reduced
by cementing material.
-- --
0-Secondary intertices as
solution cavities.
E-Secondary_ interstice;
OS fractures. . ..
F-Secondary interstices as
froc·tures formed·. by
in t_rusiorL
G -Secondary interstices
olorig foliation planes.
.:·Figure 14, --Diagram illustrating severa.L types of interstices.
-
A.--Water i-noves olong fractures
formed by intrusion
B. --Water moves along
in rock
GROUND-WATER HYDROLOGY
Well
C.--Water moves a long foliation
planes and joints
Figure 15.--Diagrams illustrating movement of water along
secondary interstices.
A rock unit or formation that can yield usable quantities of water to
wells is called an aquifer. The relative ability of an aquifer to transmit
water is called its permeability. Porosity and permeability are not
necessarily related. The porosity of a rock depends only upon the volume
of the interstices in relation to the total volume of the rock, whereas the
permeability depends upon the size and shape of the interstices, the degree
to which these are connected, and the size and shape of the interconnections.
Clay with a porosity of 50 percent may yield little or no water because the
pores are so small that the water is held in place by molecular attraction.
On the other hand, clean well-sorted sands or gravels may have less porosity
but yield larger quantities of water because the pores are larger and
interconnected. The permeability of sands or gravels is greatly decreased
when clay or silt is mixed with them, or when they are consolidated by
compaction and addition of a cementing material.
The top surface·of this zone of saturation is known as the water table.
The water table is not a stationary, flat surface, as the name implies, but
is a fluctuating, irregular surface that locally parallels the topography.
The general relation of the water table to the topography is shown in
figure 16.
Rocks or unconsolidated material that contain unconfined water in the
zone of saturation are water-table aquifers. An artesian aquifer contains
water in the zone of saturation that is confined under pressure, the pressure
being greater than atmospheric pressure. Brown (1959, p. ·16, 17) explains
ground-water occurring under artesian conditions as follows: "Water entering
an artesian aquifer where it crops out or is overlain by permeable material
percolates downdip by gravity, eventually passing a line beyond which the
aquifer is filled to capacity and is both overlain and underlain by relatively
impenneable beds. Because the weight of the water updip in an artesian
aquifer exerts pressure on the water downdip in the same aquifer, the hydro-
static pressure increases progressively in a downdip direction. Thus the
water level in a well that taps an artesian aquifer stands above the top of
the aquifer and the weight of the column of water in the well counterbalances
-37 -
GHOUND WATEH IN THE RALEIGH ARFJ\
Dikes are tabular rock bodies of intrusive igneous rock. They are not
usually good aquifers, but often the host rock adjacent to them may have been
made more permeable by fractures resulting from the force of intrusion and
heat. Many wells near Triassic diabase dikes in the Triassic sedimentary
rocks are above average producers. These dikes sometimes form underground
dams which obstruct the natural movement of ground water, causing the water
table to be closer to the surface on one side of the dike.
Topography
Topography is one of the most useful criteria in determining the relative
water-bearing characteristics of the underlying rocks.
In general wells drilled on hills or other upland areas are less apt to
yield the desired quantity of water than wells drilled in draws or other
depressions. The reasons for this are stated by LeGrand and Mundorff (1952,
p. 18-19) as follows:
"(1) Hills and upland areas readily shed.much water from·
precipitation as surface runoff. As a result, there is less seepage
into the ground to become ground water. On the other hand, the low-
lands obtain influent seepage directly from precipitation and also
from upland surface runoff.
"(2) The direction of movement of the ground water is toward
the valleys where part of it discharges into streams. In addition,
influent seepage may occur from upland rock slopes beneath the
residual material. The more impervious the bedrock, the more readily
is water deflected down the slope along this contact.
"(3) Wells located in lowlands may salvage some of the water
that would be lost naturally by discharge from the underground
reservoir. There the depressed water level resulting from pumping,
if near a discharge area, prevents further discharge out of the area.
"(4) Wells on hills penetrate the water table at a greater
depth than those in lowlands. When a well on a hill is pumped, the
water table is lowered as a cone of depression, the center of the
cone being at the well. As pumping continues the cone may grow
larger and deeper but its span is limited because of the topography
and because of the relatively low permeability of rocks at pro-
gressively greater depth below the surface. The yield of wells under
these conditions is not great. On the other hand, wells in lowlands,
even though penetrating the same rocks as those on uplands, intersect
the water table near the ground surface. Thus, the water table can
be lowered a greater distance by pumping than in a well of the s8l11e
depth on a hill. The fact that the static and pumping water levels
lie nearer the ground surface than in wells on hills results in the
pumping level lying in a more permeable zone; hence the intake area
is broader and the yield of the well is larger.
-44 -
Unit
"' "'~
0 " <J> 0 0
;:::! .--t ·.-I
0 "' .µ " u al u U> E C: ;:::! ),...j
-1-..l E--1 0 Q),...,.. lxJ
H
0
0. U> Cl ."' 0
U H 00
p:; ."'
u I-<
•rl al
"' :>
(/J " al z
·rl~
H
8
· ROCK UNITS AND WATER-BEARING PROPERTIES
I Table 11.--Summary of the principal map units and their
water-bearing properties
Description
Gray to white sands, in
places arkosic, with inter-
bedded clay lenses. Pebbly
beds at base at some local-
ities; Maximum thickness
in Wake County about 80
feet.
Includes buff colored arkosic
sandstones, and red to
maroon argillaceous sand-
stones and shales. Coarse
fanglomerate near the
Jonesboro fault forms the
eastern boundary of the
basin.
Light to pinkish gray medium-
to coarse-grained biotite
., granite .. Associated with
the granite are many.
coarse-grained dikes which
have intruded the host
rocks;
Coarse-grained porphyritic
biotite granite showing a
weak gneissic structure of
rudely aligned orthoclase
feldspar crystals and
biotite. Feldspar crystals
up to 2 inches in length
are set in finer-grained
groundmass of quartz and
biotite.
Water-bearing properties
Water stored in primary interstices
between sand particles. Yields
adequate amounts for domestic use
to dug and bored wells. Water
commonly contains objectionable
amounts of iron.
Rocks made impermeable by compaction
and cementation. Water is' stored in
and moves along joint and fracture
planes. Difficult to obtain adequate
amounts of water for domestic use at
many places. Most favorable loca-
tions for wells are in proximity to
diabase dikes. AveraRe yield of 84
drilled wells is 6 gpm. Fifteen of
the 84 wells yield 1 gpm or less.
Water at many places is moderately
hard to hard.
Water is stored in and moves along
steeply dipping joints and nearly
horizontal sheeting fractures.
Aiequate domestic supplies can be
obtained from drilled wells at most
places. Favorable locations may
yield small industrial and municipal
supplies. Average yield of 217
wells is 17 gpm. Water is soft and
low in iron; quality suitable for
domestic and most industrial pur-
poses.
Water circulates through widely-spaced
joints and sheeting fractures. Has
about the same water-bearing pro-
perties as the finer grained biotite
granite described above. Average
yield of five drilled wells is 16
gpm. Water is soft and low in iron.
,. -55 -
I
I
I
I
I
GROUND WA'rER IN Tl!E MIBICll AREA
WAKE COUNTY
(Area: 864 square miles; population in 1960: 169,082)
GEOGRAPHY
Wake County, in the southern part of the Raleigh area, is the largest and most densely populated county in the area. It is bounded by Johnston, Harnett, Chatham, Durham, Granville, and Franklin Counties. Raleigh, population 93,117 is the capital of North Carolina, and largest city in the area of investigation. Other population centers in the county include Cary, Apex, Garner, Wendell, Zebulon, Fuquay Springs, Rolesville, Wake Forest, and Holly Springs.
The county is the most industrialized county in the area, and most industries are located in or near Raleigh. Major industries are in the fields of electronics, research, textiles, lumber and wood_products, iron and steel, and food and drink processing. Raleigh is the center of State government and several colleges are located in the city. Income from the sale of farm and dairy products is important to the economy of the rural areas of the county; tobacco is the chief crop.
Wake County lies mostly within the Piedmont physiographic province, an uplifted and partially dissected peneplain. The topography is gently rolling and interstream areas are usually broad and flat. The most rugged topography is near the larger streams where relief is generally between 50 and 100 feet per mile. No hills stand out prominently above the general upland surface. The Fall Zone, a boundary between the Piedmont and Coastal Plain provinces, passes through the southern part of Wake County.
The Neuse River and its tributaries drain about 80 percent of the county. The remaining 20 percent in the southwestern part of the county is drained by tributaries of the Cape Fear River. The Neuse River and many of its larger tributaries are antecedent streams which flow in a southeastern direction. The directions of the smaller stream courses are controlled primarily by ·regional structure and relative resistance to erosion of the underlying rocks.
GEOLOGY
Rocks of the mica gneiss unit are exposed both east and west of the· large granite pluton. The largest area underlain by these rocks is a north trending zone through the central part of the county west of the granite. The rocks consist principally of biotite-feldspar gneiss, quartzitic gneiss, garnetiferous biotite gneiss, and interbedded gneiss and schists. Near the main mass of granite, the biotite-feldspar gneiss is prominently banded. Light colored bands are composed mostly of orthoclase feldspar and quartz; darker bands are composed of biotite, quartz, and minor amounts of feldspar. The banded appearance is accentuated by textural differences; the biotite-rich zones are consistently finer grained than are the feldspar-rich zones. Quartzitic gneiss is exposed west of the banded gneiss as a northeast-trending zone that underlies most of the western part of the city of Raleigh .
. -98 -
. COUNTY DESCRTITIONS
The gneiss is composed of disseminated granular quartz and biotite mica.
Schists are interbedded with the quartzitic gneiss and some of the schist
bed~ ·are graphitic. Garnetiferous biotite gneiss interbedded with biotite
schist and gneiss crop out extensively in northwestern Wake County.
Foliation and bedding strike northeastward and at most places, dip to
the northwest.
Two northeast-trending zones of hornblende gneiss are interlayered
with rocks of the mica gneiss unit. A third unit underlies a small area in
southern Wake County. The gneiss is composed of hornblende and feldspar,
but also contains accessory amounts of quartz and mica. The two larger
units appear to be conformable with rocks of the mica gneiss unit, and
perhaps are metamorphosed mafic extrusives or sediments. The small horn-
blende gneiss unit is a coarse massive rock in which gneissic texture is
poorly developed. It is not conforniable with enclosing rocks and is most
likely a metamorphosed mafic intrusion.
Several elongated soapstone bodies crop.out in northwestern Wake
County. Typically the soapstone is a massive to schistose pale-green
rock composed of talc, chlorite, and several iron·and magnesium bearing
accessory minerals. Many of the bodies are aligned so that apparently
they are thicker masses of one continuous body. The suite of minerals in
the soapstone is common to ultramafic rocks that have been hydrothermally
altered.
A relatively narrow northeast-trending belt of metavolcanic rocks is
exposed in the western part of the county. These rocks have been metamorphosed
into low-rank phyllites, but fragments are discernible within some of the
rocks and on their weathered surfaces. The rock is a white to cream metatuff
in which quartz grairu, (beta quartz?) are prevalent. Interlayered with this
rock type are thin.zones of green schistose rock which contain no visible.
primary features. All of the rocks have well developed cleavage which strikes
northeast and dips steeply northwest.
Green to light-tah phyllite crops out as a narrow tongue extending north~
ward from beneath Coastal Plain sediments in southern Wake County to near the
center of the county. Phyllite also underlies a small area in northeastern
Wake County. The rock ·is composed predominantly of fine sericite, chlorite,
and argillaceous material. Foliation is parallel to uniform color banding
which appears to be relict bedding. Foliation and bedding strike northeast.
The thick mantle of soil which overlies the phyllite at most loca.lities
obscures the contact relationship between it and adjacent rocks. The
phyllite may be part of the Carolina Slate Belt of volcanic and sedimentary
rocks with which it has been previously mapped (N. C. State Geologic Map, 1958).
Medium~grained biotite granite, probably of Paleozoic age, underlies most
of the eastern one-half of the county. It is part of a large granite pluton
that underlies most of Franklin County, and parts of adjacent counties which
are not included in the area of investigation. A smaller granite body is
exposed underlying Cretaceous sediments in southern Wake County. Typically,
the granite is light to pinkish gray, and is composed chiefly of orthoclase
feldspar, biotite, and quartz. Plagioclase feldspar is a common accessory
mineral. In Wake County the granite has intruded rocks of the mica gneiss
-99 -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
GROUND WA'rER IN THE RALEIGH AREA
unit and many coarse-grained dikes associated with the granite extend into these rocks. Sheeting, joint fractures, and exfoliated granite boulders are common. A veneer of light-colored granular saprolite covers much of the area underlain by the granite.
A small body of crystalline rock which is composed predominantly of plagioclase feldspar, chloritized biotite, and quartz crops out in north-western Wake County. In composition, the rock is more closely related to the granodiorite which is exposed north and northeast of the body than to the granite to the west.
Interbedded sandstone and shale of the Newark Group of Triassic sedi-mentary rocks underlie large areas in western Wake County. The beds occur within the Triassic Durham Basin and dip gently eastward toward the Jonesboro fault which forms the eastern boundary. A coarse fanglomerate composed of boulders, cobbles, pebbles, and angular rock fragments forms a belt along the eastern edge of the fault. Vertical displacement of the fault is at least the maximum thickness of the strata in the basin which was determined by Reinemund (1955, p. 27) to be approximately 10,000 feet. Many diabase dikes, probably of Late Triassic·age, have intruded the rocks. Near Bonsal in southwestern Wake County, a thin mantle of unconsolidated sands and clays of Cretaceous(?) age unconformably overlie Triassic rocks.
Coastal Plain ·strata unconformably overlie metamorphic and intruded rocks in southern Wake County. No fossils were found to occur in these unconsolidated sediments; they have been designated as part of the Tuscaloosa Formation of Cretaceous age on the basis of lithology and stratigraphic position with respect to sediments of known Cretaceous age outside of. the Raleigh area. The formation in Wake County is composed predominantly of gray to white sand, and interbedded lenticular lenses of clay. Quartz and concretions of iron oxide are common at the top of clay lenses.
A mixture of shell fragments and sand occurs over a small area one mile north of highway U.S. 70 at the Wake-Johnston County line (oral communication, Dr. J.M. Parker, III, of the N. C. State College Geology Department). According to Richards (1950, p. 14), this outlying deposit is part of the Castle Hayne limestone of Eocene age.
GROUND WATER
Raleigh, Apex, and Wake Forest obtain their municipal water supplies from surface sources. Outside of these towns, all domestic and industrial water supplies are obtained from ground-water sources. Seven towns and several residential developments use wells as a chief source of water supplies.
Dug and bored wells are common sources of domestic supplies in the rural areas. Yields of 10 to 15 gpm can be obtained from the saprolite overlying granite or from the unconsolidated Coastal Plain sediments. The soil over-lying Triassic rocks generally will yield 3 to 5 gpm to dug or bored wells.
;I
COUNTY DESCRi:PrIONS
Data on 286 wells in Wake County are given in table 27. Average yields,
depths, and other pertinent infonnation for 2GO drilled wells are compared
below in table 26.
TGble 26.--Summary of data on wells in Wake County
Map
Unit
Hornblende
Gneiss
Nwnber
of
wells
12
Mica Gneiss 80*
Phyllite 11
Meta-
volcanic
Sequence 23
Granite 77
Triassic
rocks 57
All wells 260
Hill 55
Flat 129*
Slope 49
Draw 27
*Includes one well
ACCORDING TO ROCK TYPE
Average
depth
(feet)
199
147
183
212
137
158
157
Yield ( gpm)
Per foot
Range Average of well
1-50 17 0.09
.5-295 19 .13
4-2S 14 .08
2.5-150 27 .13
0-82 20 .15
0-20 5 • 03.
0-295 17 .11
ACCORDING TO TOPOGRAPHIC LOCATION
134 0-75 15 0.11
161 0-295 15 • 09
133 • 5-50 13 .10
223 1-150 36 .16
275 feet deep, tRsted , at 295 gpm.
Percent of
wells
yielding 1 gpm
or. less
8.3
6.2
0
0
2.6
16
6.5
9.1
7.7
2.0
3.7
According to table 26, the rocks of the metavolcanic unit, granite, and
rocks included in the mica gneiss unit·, in that order, are the best aquifers.
The ·average yield and yield per foot of well for wells in these rock types
in Wake County are considerably higher than the same averages for all wells
in these rock types in the area of investigation. This is because most
industries and municipalities which use ground water are located in Wake
County and most·obtain their water from these rocks. Triassic rocks are
the poorest aquifers, having an average yield of 5 gpm and an average yield
per foot of well of 0.03 gpm. The relatively less penneable nature of the
Triassic rocks is shown by the large percentage (16 percent) of wells that
yield 1 gpm or less. Wells which yield 10 to 20 gpm are common in all of
the rocks in the county except the Triassic rocks. The reported yield of.
several wells was greater than 50 gpm. However, in most instances the yield
was detennined by bailer tests of snort duration and, consequently, may be
somewhat inaccurate. In general, wells penetrating granite or metamorphic
rocks will at most places yield adequate amounts of water for domestic use.
Where larger yields are desired, wells should be located where ground-water
conditions are most favorable. Visible features which indicate favorable
ground-water conditions include fracture zones, quartz veins, deeply weathered
areas, intruded dikes, and topographically low areas such as draws or depres-
sions. The best yielding wells in Triassic rocks are located near diabase dikes.
-101 -
I,
,,
0 N
:::; en ::,;
w > 0 m
385
380
375
370
A
H-10
378.94
T
SILT AND CLAY
Jt'EATHEREO SILTSTONE
H-7
374.25 ." M-6
372.58
365 <
I-
__________ y _________ _
w w 360 !!,
z 0 355 H I-< > w 350 ...J w
345
340
NOTES
M-10 -HELL DESIGNATION
378. 94 -ELEVATION ,---
Jt'EATI-ERED
SILTSTONE
HORIZONTAL SCALE (FEET) r:=-
0 200
H-5
370.02 M-4
368.74
T H-3
366.39
T
SILT AID CLAY
Jt'EATHERED
SILTSTONE
H-2
371.49
T
A'
385
380
375
:::; en
370 ::,;
w > 0
365 m <
I-w
360 w
!!,
z
355 0 H I-< >
350 w ...J w
345
340
~ -h'ELL SCREEN
.?OX VERTICAL EXAGGERATION
THIS CROSS SECTION OV'ICTS S(JBSIJAFACE CONDfTIONS
,U LOCATIONS SHOJIN 8AS£{) ON SIT£ Ilt'V£'STI6ATIONS.
SI.BSURFACE COMJITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS HAY OIFF£R
Fl10II CCNJJTia-lS OCCI.RRING AT THESE SITES.
----

-
---

-
--
FIGURE
GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION A-A'
RALEIGH. NC
KOPPERS COHPANY. INC.
--

-
-

-
--
B-11
B 3B4. 00
T 385
380
375 SILT ANO CLAY
~ en ::,; 370
UJ > 0 OJ 365 ..,
B-7 8-B
374.00 374.00 :-7,
KOOO CHIPS KOOO CHIPS
H-9
372.05
B-12~ · 370. 00 8-15 ~ 358.00
\I
sri.T
AND
CLAY
f-KEA THERBJ SIL TSTON£
UJ UJ 360 !!,
z 0 355 H f-..,
> UJ 350 .J UJ
345
340
NOTES
B-11 -h'ELL DESIGNATION
384. 00 -ELEVATION ~ -h'ELL SCREEN
THIS CROSS SffTICW DEPICTS SUBSlRF,ICE CO'-IOITIONS AT LOC-'TIONS SHONN BASED ON SIT£ INV£STI&ATIONS. SIJ8SlRF,IC£ COMJITIONS AT Ol7£R LOCATIONS HAY DIFFER FRON CONOITIONS ocet.mIN6 ,1T THESE SITE'S.
.. --- --
HORIZONTAL SCALE {FEET)
Cl!I
0 200
20X VERTICAL EXAGGERATION
--- -
K£ATH£RE0
SILTSTONE
- -
I
I
H-1
370.00
T
B'
385
380
375
370
365
360
355
350
345
340
FIGURE
~ en ::,;
UJ > 0 OJ <
f-UJ UJ !!,
z 0 H f-< > UJ .J UJ
GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION B-8'
RALEIGH. NC
KOPPERS COIQ'ANY, INC. B512151
- --- - --
rl
N
4--i &
liliil
o ..
" " '\
- -
i
PROPERTY BOIINOARY
- --
/'-lb
I r-a-,, a r \ )
I I I I
:D\ I /
I
I ,
" i I I I ,,
I
'
-
CEHETARY~
SCALE lFEEn
0 100 200 300
- -- - -- --
0
FIGURE 1
lt'Ell
LOCATION
RALEIGH/NORRI;illE.
KOPPERS COMP,1.N'l', ' INC.
- -
" --
liiiil -
Q,,
JI
JI 1\
-
c:::J
c::::::J
c:::i
- --
I I
I ,---I/Jo
I :F-,, \
I l_l, I
I I ,D: I I
I -
I
I I
L,' I\
I \
--
CEHETARY~
SCALE (FEET)
100 0 100 200 300
- -- -- -
CJ
Q
o.
LOCATION
RALEIGH/NORRI,;':;LLE.
KOPPEAS COMPANY • , INC.
- -
'
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TO:
FROM:
KE:
File
Pat DeRosa PD
Koppers Co., Inc.
NC JJ0032UU383
24 April 19B7
I spoke by telephone with Ed Berry, Hydrogeology Regional
Supervisor, Raleigh Regional Office, Groundwater Section, NC Division of
Environmental Management [phone], regarding hydrogeologic condit.ions
within 3 miles of the subject site. Mr. Berry provided the following
information:
1. Depth to groundwater -The average depth to groundwater is
approximately 10-20' below land surface (bls) in the area of the
site.
2. Depth of residential wells -Bored wells have an average depth
of 30-35' and are 20-30" in diameter. These wells are generally
concrete pipe-cased and water enters through the joints in the
concrete. Drilled wells average approximately 150' deep. These
are generally steel-cased down to rock (approximately 20'-30')
and open-hole for the remainder of the well.
3. Continuous confining layers -There are no distinct confining
layers below the site which are continuous over a 3 mile
radius. The underlying Triassic sediments have relatively low
permeability except in those zones where diabase dikes and
fractures occur. Diabase dikes within 3 miles of the site
provide a hydraulic connection between the land surface and the
various water-bearing zones throughout the aquifer. Open-hole
wells and improperly filled abandoned well holes also connect
the water-bearing zones.
PJJ/tb/U374b
Ref. 22
I
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TO:
FROM:
RE:
File
Pat DeRosa //)
Koppers Co. Inc.
NCD003200383
May 4, 1987
I spoke by telephone with Marty Schlesinger, Keystone Environmental
Resources, (KER) [phone] regarding the subject site. Mr. Schlesinger
is Assistant Program Manager handling Koppers previously operated properties.
Mr. Schlesinger provided the following information:
1. Depth of casing for wells Wl-W8 -approximately 20 ft.
2 Volume of former lagoons -
50' X 50' X 2.5' = 6,250 cu. ft.
30' X 45' X 2.5' 3,375 cu. ft.
Total = 9,625 cu. ft.
3. Containment-Lagoons were unlined with no diking, no diversion
system, and no leachate collection system.
4. Use-The total volume deposited is unknown, however, it is
estimated that the lagoons were filled at least one time.
PD/pw/0384b
Ref. 23
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TO:
FROM:
RE:
File
Pat DeRosa /?I)
Koppers Co., Inc.
NCD003200383
May 5, 1987
I spoke by telephone with Rick Jones, Water System Operator, Town of
Cary, [phone], to confirm information from our earlier conversation
regarding Cary's water distribution system. Mr. Jones indicated that Cary
purchases approximately 3.5 mgpd from Raleigh and uses an additional 300,000
gpd from wells. Each well is chlorinated at the well head and treated water
is piped directly into the distribution system. A water line from Raleigh
runs through Cary to serve Morrisville. This water line continues up Hwy. 54
to Airport Blvd. out to RDU Airport. The water carried by this line does not
mix with well water entering the system in Cary.
PD/pw/0384b
Ref. 26
., ' ' > . '
I "1
i'''
i '·
i .. ,,·-'
' '
i ' • ' '
I •
I
I
._, '
' . '·
·.'' i . -·
' "1 .. ' ' : .. ' ., : '
"
"
'.,;
' .. •,,
-r: ,,,
'. ! : . -· .. ' .,. ' '
·: I .•
•· . '. ·., ·,,
•', ,I
(
I •.' '
/J
.·.~ . I -.. -:_. ._.., . ' ,_-.· .. ' ' -. ' ' , , ta I ,· • '•'·-·: ". '_. 11' ' ' '<
' '
'• . ;. : ' ' .
' . ·"
·1·
, -· '
' . ', 't, ., :
~\-
··: '\" •... • .. 'I ·1.: . . .
' . !
'', ·,
' ' . '
,,; . '
. " . ., . ' "
,' ;' '
I
' , .. '··. ',.
I
\. 0
I '
;
'
!· '
.
,
' ' I
'
. i
I
I
I
z " le C c o a 0" C ~-'.I
W '-'l h; OD 00 W•
I
I
)'. '
i '
,I,.
··-··-•·--·i I
'". w : ...
'' ·, I ,
' '/ . :i I c:_ ~: :
I~ ·IL fi ·• ~~. I~ I
s ~\G~. .·
i '
' '
' !,'
i-.
I,, ,
I
i
•
i
' "''" . '
. ..
i "''
.· ;
i _; '\
I •
I
. !
' .
! .
i
. I
~1~
.·.i
' ' · :· ., . ,[
'
I
I
I
I I .
I
',, ''
11
0
0
0 -
i
' !
i
' ' .
I
I
' !-···
f_~)\\i(j i !;Z :' .. _',-e',i v: :· ·1 ff ~>/?'1 . It:.· •: .1. f:,/;I, 1 · ,:•. 'I .' ·J·-i }·:-/,'.' i" :c ·. j' 1)X."1 · I>' . '1 ··•f:·;'.I• t ' '; I: :I . t· ·<.; . .,-:.] . .. , .-,~ '· ' ' .. ,,, 1 ' (·····,1 · j, :,i . I
····1' ; :• ( I ;1 ;
··Cl: i . ' : .. ,,. t(· ·.;"
f,': . •<1 I
·,."{ '
' i ';I L<·-· ., ' ' [,:._·.. :1
L · '.l,
?H· ••' ._, • ',1 < ... -_. ,·1
j · c:1
.· 1:f?"j!
Ii
·~,il
' I . 1''., .e,:,,
L/.-:._---ri · r' . . '
. 1"'1 •1 .. ,., , . .,.,I ,., . ' . ' . '
';;:,.:-:· :.·'. ,:, . \.' . f·" ._,>(
_ F<t;::)1 ! (::c:,/1
.. 1,,,;.,::J
' • : . . , I . ··.i/\:1·
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TO:
FROM:
RE:
File
Pat DeRosa ff)
Koppers Co., Inc.
NCD 003200383
April 30, 1987
On April 14 and April 30, 1987, I spoke by telephone with Peter Bine, Town Administrator, Town of Morrisville, [phone], regarding the source and extent of the Town of Morrisville water supply system. Mr. Bine indicated that Morrisville purchases water from Raleigh which draws its raw water from Falls Lake Reservoir. Water is piped from Raleigh through Cary along Hwy. 54 to Morrisville. All residents within the town limits of Morrisville have access to city water. North of Morrisville, the water line continues up Highway 54 and turns onto Airport Road (SR 3015)* to RDU Airport. Any homes along this line may access city water.
Morrisville's line has also been extended from Hwy. 54 to serve the Belk's Warehouse on Church St. (SR 1637) and Adam's Concrete on Koppers Road. This extension, however, does not serve any additional residences. The Mobile City MHP off Hwy. 54 is also served.
*Note that SR 3015 and SR 1002 have exchanged names since the 1981 photorevision of the USGS 7.5' quads.
PD/pw/0384b
Ref. 28
,. I
,. I
'
,. I
,. I
,, I
,, . l
t
I
/
~,
' ~ -~~ ----------------' --------~ ~
-\
'
,')-
~~
~~ \
'
'
~,1 ---
/
--.,...., \\
~~~\__S;:_.:. ,,
--~~
°%;,'o
,rn
:.--\\\ ff' -~~~~
G) rh!,:-·
_.,,,
~~-/ ~ -\0 .,, \~ \-A . '
f"? : ... ._ . -i]
--._, ; '
\~
I ---:::.=..---:::--'\)?-\\I t. "
t.p..?-S -s .
:: i -----------.. . · Ii', .:..L -~
LEGEND
-=------PROPOSED WATER
WATER
MAIN
---EXISTING MAIN
-
SURE
ED~C~~G ~
STA~
,i
I
\ r'
'-'I C,
0 : ~
!Di
I
C ' c·:
:; -1
C I -1
' ' I
\ \
-. ·. ; -. ~:-:t!>:"~
-., >-.~ ._ _____ -· :-=-~..,,:-L.
..
INDEX SHEET
I
I.
Ref. 29
I
--j
I I
I \ I
I
Pr11mi y h15-h\~ay
hard surface
~ ~
Secondary h 1gh nav
hard surfa:::e
,~· ~,
LCX:AT IUN
dland r ompllf'rl in r:,~or,Prnt1,.n with
m aeml photog-:ph3 tn~en 1980
n not f1e l::I checked 1/ap edited 1981
Un1mpr01,ed rua d ______ _
S Ruut1= (~) State R:ute
CARY, N. C.
SE/4 DURHAM SUL. TH 15 :J.JAOR~NOLE
N3545-✓"'7845/7 5
1973
::,HOTOREVISED 1ue1
D\fA 5255 JV SE-SERIES V84 2
I
g
u
D
D
D
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TO:
FROM:
RE:
File
Pat DeRosa
Koppers Co., Inc.
NC D003200383
24 April 1987
I spoke by telephone with Mike Cable, Engineering Section, City of Durham Water Supply [phone] regarding the extent of water distri.bution lines within 3 miles of the subject site. I described the area to Mr. Cable and he said the only service in that area was on Old Raleigh Road to 1000 ft. south of Hwy. 54. No lines branch off that road to serve adjoining areas. The only other line from Durham goes to the RDU airport and has no residential service.
PD/tb/0374b
Ref. 31
0
u
0
u
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TO:
FROM:
RE:
File
Pat DeRosa ~
Koppers Co. Inc.
NC DOO32OO383
14 April 1987
I spoke with Don Williams, Environmental Engineer, Water Supply
Branch, NC DHR, [phone] regarding community water supply systems in
Wake County within 3 miles of the subject site. Mr. Williams confirmed that
Cary's water lines run through Morrisville to RDU Airport. Morrisville is
served by Raleigh through Cary. Mr. Williams said that the only other
community system within 3 miles is located at Howards Rest Home on SR 1624
approximately 3 miles west of Morrisville. This system uses groundwater from
wells which lie within 3 miles of the subject site. He indicated the location
of this system on the USGS quadrangle map.
PD/tb/O373b
Ref. 32
I
D
D
E
m
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TO:
FROM:
RE:
File
Pat DeRosa f?\>
Koppers Co. Inc.
NC DOO32OO383
14 April 1987
I spoke by telephone with Bob Hallisey, Environmental Engineering
Technician, Water Supply Branch, NC OHR, [phone] regarding community
water supply systems in Durham County within 3 miles of the subject site.
Mr. Hallisey said that the only community system which might serve that area
is the City of Durham Water Supply. He suggested I contact Billy Walker, City
of Durham, Engineering Section, for additional information about the extent of
water distribution from Durham.
PD/tb/O373b
,
Ref. 33
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TO:
FROM:
RE:
April 30, 1987
File
Pat DeRosa />-J)
Koppers Co., Inc. NCD003200383
I spoke by telephone with Mr. Troy Howard, owner of Howards Rest
Home near Carpenter, N.C., [phone], to verify groundwater usage. He
said that the well currently used is 160' deep with 48' of galvanized steel
casing to rock. The well serves approximately 75 people. The well was
· drilled by Acme Well Co. out of Durham, N.C., [phone].
PD/pw/0384b
Ref. 34
I
R
D
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3 April 1987
TO: File
FROM: Pat DeRosa \~
RE: Koppers Co., Inc. NC D003200383
On March 19, 1987, a meeting was held to discuss the results of
groundwater water samples collected from off-site wells surrounding the
Koppers Co., Inc. site in Morrisville. A summary of these results and a list
of attendees at the meeting is attached. Due to conflicting data, it.was
decided that the NC CERCLA Unit would resample the off-site wells previously
sampled, along with some additional wells. Samples would be split with
Koppers and the State's samples would be analyzed by the North Carolina State
Laboratory of Public Health.
Residents or representatives at the 10 previously sampled locations
were contacted by phone on March 19, 1987 to request permission to collect
additional well samples on March 20, 1987. Permission to collect samples was
obtained for all 10 wells, plus 1 new well, listed on the attached sheet.
Residents were notified that they would be contacted in 2 weeks with the
sample results.
On March 20, 1987, NC CERCLA Unit personnel Pat DeRosa and Mary
Giguere met with Marty Schlesinger, Keystone Environmental Resources and
Serraphino Franch, Wake County Health Department to conduct off-site well
sampling around the subject site. The 10 wells previously sampled were
resampled along with the following 3 "new" wells:
Well No.
10
11
12
Name
Deli Box Restaurant
Watson Burroughs residence
L.A. Lyons
Person Contacted
Scott Beerman
Gladys Burroughs
Barbara Lyons
The locations of these additional wells are marked on the attached
map.
Samples were collected by the NC CERCLA Unit using containers
provided by the State Laboratory of Public Health. Wells were purged for
15 minutes except at the Crowe residence at the owners request. Four 40-ml
VOA bottles and 2 - 2 liter jars wrapped in foil were used to collect water
samples at each well. Samples were split with Koppers. All samples were kept
on ice in coolers until delivery to the labs. Koppers samples were delivered
to Compuchem in RTP for analysis. The State's samples were delivered to the
State Laboratory of Public Health for analysis.
PD/ tb/0210b
Attachments (6)
Ref. 35
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ref. 36
19 /.hrch 1987
TO: File
FROM: Pat DeRosa ~
RE: Koppers Co., Inc. NC D003200383
Residents or representatives at the following 11 homes or businesses
were contacted by phone to obtain permission to collect well samples on
/.hrch 20, 1987. Permission was granted.
Well No.
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
PD/tb/0210b
Name/Phone
Louis Barbee residence
[phone]
John Medlin residence
[phone]
Geor'e Harding residence
(919 467-7621
Mack Baker residence
[phone]
Roy Medlin residence
[phone]
Triangle Materials
[phone]
[phone]
Wilkerson Construction Co.
[phone]
James Crowe residence
[phone]
Shiloh Baptist Church
[phone]
[phone]
William Barbee residence
[phone]
Deli Box Restaurant
[phone]
Person Contacted
Cheryl Barbee
John Medlin
George Harding
Mrs. Baker
Roy Medlin
Phil Ritchie,
Triangle /.h ter ials ·
Bob Ritchie,
Carolantac Realty
Dot Strickland
James Crowe
Nathanial Mayo
Mrs. Barbee
Scott Beerman
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
15 December 1986
TO: File
FROM: Pat DeRosa P't
RE: Koppers Co., Inc.
I spoke by telephone with the following residents to obtain permission
to sample their wells. These residents or businesses use groundwater from
wells surrounding the subject site.
1. John Medlin residence -467-7621
Mrs. Medlin said she would be glad to have us sample her well
providing we would send her a copy of the results. The Medlin well
is located south of Koppers and serves 1 house and 2 trailers.
Mrs. Medlin said she would try to find out the total depth and
casing depth of the well.
2. George Harding residence -467-8445
Mr. Harding gave us his permission to sample the well at his home.
Mr. Harding's home is located at the end of Church Street,
southwest of the site. The total depth and depth of casing in the
well was unknown.
3. Mrs. Baker residence -Could not obtain phone number.
4. Roy Medlin residence -Could not obtain phone number.
5. Triangle Materials -469-2222
This business rents the property from Carolantac Realty, 832-0594.
The receptionist at Triangle Materials indicated that some
employees there do use the well water for drinking. They also have·
bottled water available. Mr. Bob Ritchie at Carolantac Realty gave
us his permission to sample the well at Triangle Materials.
Mr. Ritchie did not know the depth of the well, however, he
suggested I call Reliable Pump Co. (266-5792) since they had
recently worked on the pump. Reliable did not know the well depth
but estimated it to be at least 220 ft. The well is southeast of
the site along Hwy. 54.
6. Wilkerson Construction -467-1829
I spoke with Joe Wilkerson concerning the use of well water at his
facility. He said that well water was used for washing equipment
and flushing toilets at Wilkerson, however, it was not used for
drinking. He estimated the well on site to be 400-450 ft. deep
with a 2,000 gallon storage tank. He said the well pumps about
1/2 gallon per minute and is cased down to 20-30 ft. Currently,
however, the pump is broken and therefore we could not sample the
well at this time. The well is east of Koppers just across from
Hwy. 54.
Ref. 37
...... ~
I
•
I
•
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'\_
7. James Crowe residence -467-8603
Mrs. Crowe gave us permission to sample the well at her residence
on Hwy. 54, east of Koppers. She estimated that the well was
180-200 ft. deep but said it was a "weak" well. She asked that we
not purge her well for fear that it would run dry •
8. Shiloh Church -Did not contact.
9. William Barbee residence -467-0876
Mr. Barbee gave us permission to sample the well at his home. He
estimated that the well was approximately 100 ft. deep and cased
down to 25-30 ft. Mr. Barbee's well is located northwest of
Koppers on Church Street.
PD/tb/0323b
1973
PHOTOREVtSEO 1981
OMA 5255 IV SE-SERIES 1/842
w co
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TO:
FROM:
RE:
File
Pat DeRosa \(1>
Koppers Co., Inc.
NC DOO32OO383
5 December 1986
I spoke with William Paige and Gary Babb (NC RCRA Unit) about the current status of this site. They have received no further information beyond the renotification filed by Koppers in February 1986.
I spoke by telephone with Charlie Beck, former plant manager at Kopper's Morrisville [phone]. Mr. Beck indicated that Koppers sold part of the property to Unit Structures, Inc. (as of September 5, 1986) for whom Mr. Beck now works. The part of the site where the treatment and contamination occurred is still owned by Koppers Co., Inc. To the best of his knowledge, Mr. Beck indicated that Koppers had removed contaminated soil from the site and shipped it to SCA in July-August 1986. He did not know whether post-cleanup soil and well sampling had been conducted. He said that city water was not yet available at the site and he believed neighboring residents were still on wells. Unit Structures is still using the old Koppers wells for process water and toilets. However, bottled drinking water is brought in. Mr. Beck suggested I contact Mike Dvorsky [phone] or David Kerschner [phone] at Kopper's Pittsburgh, PA office for further information.
PD/tb/O176b
Ref. 39
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TO:
FROM:
RE:
File
Pat DeRosa@
Koppers Co., Inc.
NC D003200383
May 6, 1987
On April 28, 1987, I spoke by telephone with Bob Stewart, Plant
Manager, Unit Structures in Morrisville, NC [phone] regarding the
subject site. Unit Structures operates the old Koppers plant and Mr. Stewart
recently replaced Charlie Beck as plant manager. Mr. Stewart has worked at
the site since the 1960's. Of the entire 52 acre property, Koppers retained
10 acres and sold the rest to Unit Structures in September 1986.
The Koppers pond is currently hooked up to supply the hydrant and
sprinkler system for fire protection at Unit Structures. It has no
recreational or process water uses. The pond is approximately 3 to 4 acres in
size and 6-7' deep in the middle. It was originally a low area which was
dammed on the southeast side to form a pond. The overflow outlet in the
southwest corner of the pond empties to a ditch which flows south under
Koppers' road (SR 1635) to the John Medlin property. Flow from the pond is
non-continuous.
Bottled water is currently used for drinking water at Unit
Structures. Well #1, near the main office, supplies water for toilets and
non-drinking usage. Well #2, northwest of the old laminating plant is used in
the manufacturing process and for plant toilets.
On May 6, 1987, I spoke with Mr. Stewart again to verify ownership
history of the site. Mr. Stewart said that Unit Structures originally
purchased the-site from Cary Lumber Co. in 1959. Cary Lumber operated a
sawmill on site. Unit Structures operated the sawmill and glue-laminating
process on site from approximately 1959-1962. The property was sold to
Koppers in 1962.
PD/tb/0374b
Unit Structures, Inc.
P.O. Box 23215
1413 Evergreen Rd.
Louisville, KY. 40223
Ref. 40
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TO:
FROM:
RE:
File
Pat DeRosa }'1)
Koppers Co., Inc.
NCD 003200383
May 1, 1987
On April 30, 1987, I spoke by telephone with Victor Lynn, County
Extension Chairman, Wake County Agricultural Extension Service [phone],
regarding irrigation within 3 miles of the subject site. Mr. Lynn said he was
not aware of any irrigation wells in Wake County. He was also not aware of
any irrigation from Crabtree Creek between Morrisville and Umstead Park.
On May 1, 1987, I spoke by telephone with Toby Bost, Agricultural
Extension Agent, Durham County [phone] regarding irrigation wells
within 3 miles of the site in Durham County. Mr. Bost said that irrigation in
that area is generally from ponds. He was not aware of any groundwater use
for irrigation.
PD/pw/0384b
Ref. 41
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
April 29, 1987
TO: File
FROM: Pat DeRosa ff)
RE: Koppers Co. , Inc.
NCD003200383
I met with David Hedberg, Statistical Research Analyst, Wake County
Planning Department [phone], to determine whether a significant
increase in population within 3 miles of the subject site·had occurred since
1981. Population data from the Wake County Tax Department Real Estate File,
updated January 20, 1987, was used. A circle representing a 3. mile radius
around the site was overlain on the Wake County property maps. The total
number of residential units within property maps intersected by the 3 mile
radius were summed. Units within incorporated areas served by municipal water
system were subtracted. The remaining number of units was determined to be
535. By multiplying 535 units x 3.8 persons/unit, the total population using
groundwater was estimated at 2,033,
PD/pw/0384b
Ref. 42
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TO:
FROM:
RE:
File
Pat DeRosa f}b
Koppers Co., Inc.
NCD 003200383
April 30, 1987
I spoke by telephone with Mrs. John Medlin regarding usage of the
Medlin pond, [phone]. She said that her pond receives seasonal,
non-continuous overflow from Koppers pond. Overflow from the Medlin pond is
also non-continuous, occurring only in the winter months. The Medlins fish
from the pond and also use the pond to irrigate a 2 acre field and garden
space in the summer months.
PD/pw/0384b
Ref. 43
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TO:
FROM:
RE:
File
Pat DeRosa f>j)
Koppers Co, Inc.
NCD003200383
May 1, 1987
I spoke with Dick Caspar, Water Supply Branch, NC DHR, [phone], regarding water supply intakes on Crabtree Creek. He said there were no intakes along Crabtree Creek downstream of Morrisville. The nearest downstream intake is on the Neuse River more than 40 miles southeast of Morrisville. This intake serves the City of Smithfield in Johnston County, N.C.
PD/pw/0384b
Ref. 44
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I-
I
I
.. -..•
I
United States Depart111ent of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
ENDANGERED SPECIES FIELD STATION
100 OTIS STREET, ROml 224
ASHEVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA 28801
June 21, 1985
Ms. Pat Derosa
Solid and Hazardous Waste Management Branch Environmental Health Section
North Carolina Department of Human Resources P. · O. Box 2091
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602
Dear Ms. Derosa,
In response to your telephone conversation with John Fridell on May 30, 1985, we are enclosing the following items of information:
A.
B.
C.
D.
North Carolina county distribution records of Federally listed,· proposed and status review species,
map of the critical habitat of the threatened spotfin chub (Hybopsis monacha),
map of the critical habitat of mountain golden heather (Hudsonia montana), and
copy of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service interagency Section 7 consultation process guidelines (included for your information)
Ref. 45
The abbreviations following the species names on the North Carolina species distribution records (A. above) indicate Federal status, i.e., E -endangered, T -threatened, PE -proposed endangered, PT·-proposed threatened and SR -under status review. Status review species are not legally protected under the Endangered Species Act. However, they are subject to being listed and agencies should be cognizant of their potential presence in a project area.
Since additions and deletions are made to the list of species on a regular basis, questions regarding updates of the list should be made to this office.
We hope this information will be of use to you. If we cah be of any further assistance,-please call John Fridell or Nora Murdock at [phone].
Sincerely yours, \ \.. :'\ n, t1 Vvl'J,'l... \. '(~
Warren T. Parker
Field Supervisor
I ,,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
5/78
NORI'H CAroLINA -Critical Habitat
Hyb:Jpsis 11Dnacha, "spotfin chub"
1-'a=n and Swain Counties. Little Tennessee River, ITl3.in channel fran
the backwaters of Fontana Lake upstream to the North Carolina-<;eorgia
state line.
" S••'" ~.:---=-.v, .---M;;;; Co.
:'>ORTH_ CAROLl:-.A
GIWRGIA
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
rt
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ji?
I
NORTH CAROLINA -Critical Habitat
Hudsonia montana, "mountain golden heather"
Burke County. The area bounded by the following: on the west by the 2200' contour; on the east by the Linville Gorge Wilderness Boundary
11/80
north from the intersection of the 2200' contour and the Shortoff Mountain Trail to where it intersects the 3400' contour at "The Chimneys"--then follow the 3400' contour north until it reintersects the Wilderness Boundary--then follow the Wilderness Boundary again northward until it intersects the 3200' contour extending west from its intersection with the Wilderness Boundary until it begins to turn south--at this point the Boundary extends due east until it intersects the 2200' contour.
4 t llhlH to
PISGAH
L -. ___ __J
~ ''. -. . --.. ,, ~, ... , .,.,
8,' \. .. , ~ rJA,\;. ,.,
~"(', ',
4 J
j; •: t:Ha'f,t:l·!'I
ATIONAL
- - -
Spotfin Chub
---
Mountain Golden
Heather
-
l inch= approx. 53 miles
-- --11!!!!1 l!!!!!!!I l!!!!!!!!!!I
CRITICAL HABITATS OF FEDERALLY LISTED
ENDANGERED SP~CIES 'IN NC
SURRY SfOKES ROCKING•
HAM
A.DIC IN ORS,YTH GUllfORO
KOPPERS CO., INC.
NC DOO32OO383
l!!!!!I I!!!!!!!
I
I
I
.I
I
:1
I
:1
:1
I
'I
12 August 1986
TO: CERCLA Unit Staff
FROM: Pat Dekosa ~
Rh: Critical Habitats of Federally Listed Endangered Species in N.C.
I spoke by telephone today with John Fridell, US Fish and Wildlife Service [phone] to request an update on critical habitats in NC: Mr. Fridell informed me that the only change since our previous correspondence of June 21, 1985 has been a "Proposal to List the Cape Fear Shiner as an Endangered Species with Critical Habitats" in NC: (FR Vol. 51, No. 133, July 11, 1986). A copy of the proposed rule is attached for your information.
PD/tb/0221b
Federal Register / Vol. 51, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 1986 / Proposed Rules 25219
II c= ·
IJR =-Coe x 100 fa1.. 15A-A
7. Bibliography
I} 1. American Society for Testing and
IJMatcrials. Annual Book of ASTM Standards.
Part 31: Water, Atmospheric Analysis.
Philadephia, Pennsylvania. 1974. p. 40-42.
I z. Blosser. R.O., H.S. Oglesby, and A.K.
Jain. A study of Alternate S02 Scrubber
Designs Used for TRS Monitoring. National
Council of the Paper lndustry for Air and
Stream Improvement. Inc., New York, New
•
York. Special Report 77-05. July 1977.
3. Curtis. F., and C.D. McAlister.
Oenlopment and Evaluation of an ·
Oxidation/Method 6 TRS Emission Sampling
Procedure. Emission Measurement Branch,
•
Emission Standards and Engineering
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina· 27711. February 1980.
I 4. Cellmnn, I. A Laboratory and Field Study
of Reduced Sulfur Sampling end Monitoring
Systems. National Council of the Paper
lndustry for Air and Stream Improvement,
Inc.. New York. New York. Atmospheric .
•
Quality Improvement Technical Bulletin No.
81. October 1975. · .
5. M"'lleson, J.H., J.E. Knoll, M.R. Midget~
B.B. Ferguson. and P.J. Schworer. A Manual
•
Method for TRS Oetennination. Journal of Air
Pollution Control Association. 35:1280-1Z86:
December 1985.
[FR Doc. 86-15268 Filed 7-10-86; 8:45 am]
BfUJWG CODE '5560-S(M,I
I DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
•
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and Threatened Wlldllle •
l and Plants; Proposal to List the Cape
Fear Shiner as an Endangered Species ·
with Critical Habitat
AOENCV: Fish and Wildlife Service.
•
Interior. ·
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: The Service proposes to list
•
the Cape Fear shiner (Notropis
mekistocho/as) as an endangered
species with critical habitat under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
•
amended. This fish has recently ·
undergone a reduction in range and
population. It is currently known from
only three small populations in the Cape
•
Fear River drainage in Randolph, Moore,
Lee, and Chatham Counties, North
Carolina. Due to the species' limited
distribution. any factor that degrades
habitat or water qua!ity in the short
•
river reaches it inhabits--e.g., land use
changes, chemical spills. wastewater
discharges, impoundments. changes in
stream now, or increases in agricultural
l;uno~f-could threaten the species'
survivial. Comments and information
I
pertaining to this proposal are sought
from the public.·
DATES: Comments from all interested
parties must be received by September
9, 1986. Public hearing requests must be
received by August 25, 1986.
ADDRESSES:.Comments and materials
concerning this proposal should be sent
to Field Supervisor, Endangered Species
Field Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, 100 Otis StreeL Room 224,
Asheville, North Carolina 28801 ..
Comments and materials receivCd will
be available for public inspection, by
appointment. during normal business
hours at the above address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Richard G. Biggins, at the above address
(704/259--0321 or FrS 672--0321).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Cape Fear shiner (Noropis
mekistocholas), the only endemic fish
known from North Carolina's Cape Fear
River drainage, was discovered in 1962
and described by Snelsori {19n);This ·
fish has been collected from nine stream
reaches in North Carolina [Bear Creek,
Rocky River, and Robeson ·creek,
Chatham County; Fork Creek, Randolph
County; Deep River, Moore and
Randolph Counties; Deep River, ·
Chatham and Lee Counties; and Cape
Fear River, Kenneth Creek, and Parkers
Creek, Harnett County (Snelson rnn,
W. Palmer and A. Braswell, North
Carolina State Museum of Natural
HistOry, personal commtinication igas;·
Pattern and Huish 1985, 1988), Based on
a recently completed Service-funded
· study (Pollem and Huish 1985, 1988)
involving extensive surveys in the Cape
Fear River Basin (including all historic
sites) and a review of historical fish
collection records from the C8pe Fear,
Neuse, and Yadkin River systems, the
fish is now restricted to only three
populations. The strongest population
(101 individuals collected in 1984 and
1985) ls located·around the junction of
the Ro_cky River and Deep River in
Chatham and Lee Counties where the
fish inhabits the Deep River from the
upstream limits of the backwaters of
Locksville Dam upstream to the Rocky
River then upstream from the Rocky
River to Bear Creek and upstream from
Bear Creek to the Chatham County Road
2156 Bridge. A few individuals were
collected just downstream of the
Locksville Dam, but because of the
limited extent of Cape Fear shiner
habitat at this site. it is not believed this
is e separate population. Instead. it is
thought these fish represent a small
number of individuals that periodically
drop down from the popul~tion abov~
Locksville Dam pool.
The second population, represented
by the collection of a specimen near
State Highway Bridge 902 in Chatham
County, is located above the Rocky
River Hydroelectric Dam. This
popula lion was historically the best, but
the area yielded onlY the one specimen
after extensive surveys by Pottem_and
Huish (1985). The third popula lion was
found in the Deep River system in
Randolph and Moore Counties. This
population is believed to be small ·
(Pottem and Huish 1985, 1986). Three
individuals were found above the ·
Highfalls Hydroelectric Reservoir; one
in Fork Creek, Randolph County, and.
two in the Deep River, Moore County. .
The species was also found downstream
of the bighfalls Dam_ However, the . .
extent of suitable habitat in this stream
reach is limited, ·and ii is thought that .
these individuals likely result from .. ·
downstream movement from above the
reservoir where Cape Fear shiner
habitat is more extensive~ .
The Caper Fear shiner is s~all, rar~ly ·
. exceeding z inches in length. The fish's
body is flushed with a pale silvery .. ·.
yellow, and a black band.runs along its
sides (Snelson 1971). The fins are
yellowish and somewhat pointed_ Thei ·
upper lip is black, and .the lower lip .
be.ars a thin black bar along its,margin,
The Cape Fear shiner, unlike most other
memb.ers of the large genus Notropis, ··
feeds extensively_in plB.0t m~terial, an~
its digestive tract i5: mo4i:fied for this.:~
diet by having ail elongated. convoluted
. intestine. The species is generally
associated with gravel, ~obble, and
boulder substates and has been
observed lo inhabit slow pools, riffles,
and slow runs (Snelson rnn, Pottern •
and Huish 1985). In these habitats, the
species is typically associated with
schools of other related species, but it is
never the numerically domin~nt _species .
Juveniles are often found in slackwater,
among large rock outcrops in mid-
stream. and in flooded side channels .. ,
and pools (Pattern and Huish 1985). No
information is presently available on
breeding behavior, fecundity, or
longevity.
The Cape Fear shiner may always
have existed in low numbers. However,
its recent reduction in range and its
small population size (Pattern and Huish
1985, 1986) increases the species'
vulnerability to a catastrophic event,
such as a toxic chemical spill. Dam
construction in the Cape Fear system
has probably had the most serious
impact on the species by inundating the
species' rocky riverine habitat. Dams
:::i;
!1•.
i
l·l,,!I
I'
\ I
r,·.
.;
,I I .. I
25220 Federal Register / Vol. 51, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 1986 / Proposed Rules
presently under study by the U.S. Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers (COE), for the Deep Ri\'er and changes in flow rcgulc!,tion at exist;!lg hydroelectic facilities could further threaten the species. The deterioration of water quality has likely been another factor in the species' decline. The North _Carolina Department of Natural
Resources and Community Development (1983) c!assified ""'ater quality in the Deep River, Rocky River, nnd Dear Creek as good to fair, and referred to the Rocky river below Siler City as an area where their sampling indicates
degradation. That report also stated: "Within the Cape Fear Basin. estimated average annllal soil losses from cropland ranged from 3 tons per acre in the lower basin to 12 tons in the headwaters." The North Carolina State Division of Soil and \Vater Conservation · cOnsiders 5 tons of soil loss per acre as the maximum allowable.
. The Cape Fear shiner was one of 29 · fish species included in a March 18, 1975, Notice of Re,iew published by the Service in.the Federal Regis.ter (40 FR · 12297). On December 30, 1982, the Service announced in the Federal··· Register (47 FR 58454) that the Cape . Fear shiner, along with 147 other fish species,·was beillg cOnsidercd for··. possible addition to the list of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife.· On April 4, 1985, the Service notified Federal, Sta.te, ·and local governmental agencies Bnd interested parties that the Asheville Endangered Species Field Station Was reviewing the spf,!cies' status. That notification requested . · , infonnation ori the species' s!atus·and · threats to its continued existence.
Twelve responses to the April 4, 1985, notification were received. The COE, Wilmington District; North Carolina Division of Parks and recreation, Natural Heritage Program; and the North Carolina State Museum of Natruar History provided for the species. . Concern for the species' welfare was also expressed by private individuals: : The other respondents pro,·ided no information on threats, and did not take a position on the soecies' status. The Cape Fear shiner Was included in the Services' September 18, 1985, Notice of review of Vertebrate Wildlife (50 FR 37958} as a category 1 SP.ecies, indicating that the Service had substantial
biological data to support a proposal to list the species as endangered or threatened. ·
Summary of FaCtors Affecting the Species
Section 4(a)(l) of the Endange:ed Species Act (16 U.S.C.1531 el seq.) and regulations (50 CFR Part 42.4}
promulg;:itcd to implement the listing provisions of the Act set forth the procedures for adding species to the Federal Lists. A species may be determined to be an endangered or threatened species due to one or more of the five factors described in section 4(a)(l), These factors and their applicaticn to the Cape Fear shiner (Notropis mekistccholas) are as foUows:
A. The present or threatened destructioh; mod1fication, or. curtailment of its habitat or range. A review of historic collection records (Snelson 1971, W; Palmer and A. Braswell personal communication 1985), along with recent survey results (Pattern ar.d Huish 1985, 1986), indicates that the Cape Fear shiner is pres~ntly restricted to only three populations (see "Background" section}. Three historic populations have apparently been extirpated (Pottern and Huish 1985, 1986). Robeson Creek, Chatham· County, was believed lost' when Jordan Lake flooded part of the creek. The reasons· for the loss of .populations from Parkers Creek and· Kenneth Creek in Hamett County are not knoWll. The shiner has also not been · recollected (Pollem and Huish 1985) · from thC Cape Fear. River in Hamett: CoW1ty.·However, review of historical and current collection records rev"eals that onlY. One specimen ha's ever been collected from this river, and the fish likely was a stray individual from an .upstreain or tributary population. Since much of the Deep, Haw, and Cape Fear Rivers and their major tributaries has been impounded for.hydroelectric, . power, and· much Of the.rocky shoql habitat inundated, other populations and populatio·n segments that were never di~covered _have likely been lost to these reservoirs ..
, Of the three remaining populations. only the one located around the · confluei-ice of the Deep and Rocky Rivers in Chatham and Lee Counties (inhabiting a total of about 7.3 river
-mile.S) appears strong (Pattern and. Huish 1985). The second populatioll in the Rocky River. above the Rocky River hydroelectric facility, was· !he source of the type specimens used to describe the species (Snelson 1971). Historic records {W. Palmer and A. Braswell. personal com:nunication 1985} reveal that collections of 15 to 30 specimens could be expected in this stretch of the Rocky River (State Route 902 or Chatham County Road 1010 Bridge) during a sampling visit in the late 1960s ar:.d early 1970s. Pattern and Huish {19_85} sampled the Rocky River throughout this reach on ncmerous occasions and were able to collect only one specimen. The reason for the apparent decl!ne in this
population is unknown. The third population. located in the Deep Ril·e;-system in Moore a"nd Randolph Counties, is represented by the collection of six individuals (Poltern and Huish 1986). Three individuals were taken from below tte dam. As the available habitat below the dam is limited. it is bel:eved these fish are migrants from the upstream population. -Potential threats lei the species and its h2bit2t could come from such activities as road construction, stream charulel · modification. changes in stream flows for hydroelectric power. impoundments. land use changes, wastewater
discharges, and other projects in.the watershed if sUch activities ·are not · planned and implement w:ih the sun'l.val of the species and the protection of ~ts habitat in mind. The . species is also potentially threatened by two U.S. Army Corps of Er.gineers .. projects presently under re\-;ew for the Deep River. The Randleman Dam project would consist Of a reservoir of the Deep River in Randolph County,'· · · above known·cape Fear shiner habitat The Howards Mill Reservoir w·i,uld be· on the Deei, River in Moore' Bnd Ra.ndolph Counties and would flood presently used Cape Fear shiner habitat. B. Overuti!ization for com.m.ercia/, . recreational, ~cit1r.tific, or eductilional pllrp0si!s_. Most_ of the present ral'lge· of. • · the Ca"pe Fear shiner is relatively
inaccessible and o,·erutilization of the. species has not be"en and is not . expected to be a problem. . . , C. Disease or predation. Although the Cape Fear shiner is undoubtedly consumed by predatory animals, there is no evidence that this predation is a_ · threat to the species.
D. The inadequacy of existing
regulatory mechanisms. North Ca!'olina State law (Subsection 113-272.4) prohibits collecting wildlife and fish for scientific J)urposes without a State permit. Howe,·er. this State Jaw does no·1 protect the species'. habitat from the potential impacts of Federal actions. Federal listing will provide protection
for the speC:es under the Endangered
Species Act by requiring a Federal permit to take the species and requiring Fede!'al agencies to cor.sult with the Service when p:oje:::ts th~y fund. authcrize, or carry out rn.?y affect the species.
E. Other natural or mar.made factors affecting its contim:ed existence. The major portion of the b€st Cape Fe2r shiner population is located at the juncticn of the Deep and Rocky Rivers in Chatham and Lee Counties. A mrijor toxic chemical spill at the U.S. Highv:;iy 15-105 ilridge upstream of this site on
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Federal Register / Vol. 51, No. 133 / Friday, July 11. 1936 / Proposed Rules 25221
the Rocky Ri\'er could jeopardiZe thi·s population, and as the other populations
arc extremely small and tenuous, the species' Survival could be threatened. The Service has carefully assessed the best scicr.lific a:id commercial
information available regarding the past, present, and future threats faced by this species in determining to propose this rule. Based on this evaluation. the preferred action is to list the Cape Fear shiner (Notropis mekistocho!as) as an endangered species. Because of the species' restricted range and
vulnerability of these isolated
populations to a single catastrophic accident, threatened status does not appear to be appropriate for this species (see "Critical Habitat" section for a discussion of why critical habitat is being proposed for the Cape Fear . shiner}. ·
Critical Habitat
Critical habita~ as defined by section 3 of the Act means: (i) The specific areas within the geographical area occupied by a species, at the time it is listed in 8ccordance with the Act. on which are found those physical or biological · features (I) essential to the conservation· of the species and (II) that may require
special management considerations or protection, and (ii) specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by a species at the time it is listed, upo~ a determination that such areas are essential for the conservation of t~e · species. -. . . Section 4(a)(3) of the Act requires that critical habitat be designated to the maximum extent prudent aµd. determinable concurrently with the determination that a species is endangered or threatened. Critical habitat is being proposed for the Cape . Fear shiner to include: (1) Approximately 5 miles of the Rocky River in Chatham County, North . Carolina: (2) approximately 8 miles of Bear Creek, Rocky River, and Deep River in Chatham and Lee Counties, North Carolina: (3) approximately 6 miles of Fork Creek·and Deep River in Randolph and Moore Counties, North Carolina.
(See "Regulation Promulgation"
section for this proposed rule for the precise description of critical habitat.) These stream sections contain gravel, cobble, and boulder substrates with pools, rifnes, and shallow runs for adult fish and slackwater areas with large ;ock outcrops and side channels and pools for juveniles. These areas also provide water of good quality with (:Jntively low silt loads.
Section 4(b)(8) requires, for any µ:\Jposcd or final regulation that
designates critical habitat, a brief
description and evaluati□-n of those activities (public or private) that may adversely modify such habitat or may be affected by such designation.
Activities which presently occur within the designated critical habitat include, in part, fishing,·boating, Scientific
research, and nature study. These activities, at their present use level, do not appear to be adversely impacting the area.
There are also Federal activities that do or could occur within the Deep River Basin and that may be affected by protection of critical habitat. These activities include; construction of impoundments (in particular, U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers reservoirs under study for the upper Deep River), stream· alterations, bridge and road
construction, and discharges of municipal and industrial wastes, and hydroelectric facilities. These activities could, If nolcarried out with the
protection of the species in mind. degrade the water and substrate quality of the Deep River, Rocky River, Bear Creek, and Fork Creek by increasing siltation. water temperatures, organic pollutants, and extremes in water flow. If any of these activities may affect the critical habitat area and are the result of a Federal action, section 7(a)(2) of the Act, as amended, requires the agency to consult with the Service to ensure that actions they authorize, fund, or carry
. OU~ are not likely to destroy or . adversely modify critical habitat -Section 4(b)(2) of the Act requires the Service tO consider e·ccinomic and other impa"cts of design-ating a paiticular area as critical habitat. The Service will consider the critical habitat designation in light of all additional relevant information obtained at the time Qf final rule.
Available to Conservation Measures
Conservation measures provided to species listed as endangered or threatened under the Endangered
Species Act include recognition, recovery actions. requirements for Federal protection, and prohibitions
against certain practices. Recognition through listing encourages and results ·in conservation actions by Federal, State, and private agencies, groups, and individuals. The Endangered Species Act provides for possible land acquisition and cooperation with the States and requires Iha t recovery actions be carried out for all listed species. Such actions are initiated by-the Service following listing. The protection required of Federal agencies and the prohibitions against takirig and harm are discussed, in part, below.
Section 7{a) of the Act. as amended,
requires Fcderal"age~cics to evaluate" their actions with respect to any species that is propOsed or listed as endangered
or threatened and with respect to it critical habitat, if ariy is being proposed
or designated. Regulations i_mplemcnting this interagency cooJ)eration provision of the Act are codified at 50 CFR Part 402 (see revision at 51 FR 19926; June 3, 1986). Section 7(a)(4) requires Federal agencies to confer informally with the Service on any action that is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a proposed species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of proposed critical habitat. If a species is subsequently listed, section 7(a)(2j requires Federal agencies to ensure that activities they authorize, fund, or carry out are not likely to jeopardize the continued eX.istence of such a species or to destroy or adversely modify its critical habitat If a Federal action may affect a listed species or its critical habitat the responsible Federal agency must enter into consultation with the Servic~. The Service is presently ·aware of only two Federal actions under consideration (Randleman and How8rds Mill Reservoirs) that may affect the species and the proposed critical . habitat The Service has been in contact·. with the U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers concerning the potential impacts of: · these projects on·the species ·a:nd its:· habitat. The Act arid implementing,,.'
regulations fqund at SO CFR 17.21 set· forth a series of general prohibitions·_and· exceptions that apply to all endangered · wildlife. These prohibitions, inpart, .. . inake· it iUegal .fol' ally person subject· to the jurisdiction of the United States to take, import Or export, ship in intef_state · commerce in.the course Of commercial -· · activity, or sell or offer for sale in interstate or foreign commerce any· listed species. It also is illegal to . prossess, sell, deliver, cllrry, transpOrt. or ship any such wildlife that has been taken illegally. Certain exceptions . · · would apply to agents of the Service and State conservation agencies. · ·
Permits may be issued to carry out otherwise prohibited activities involving endangered wildlife species under certain circumstances."Regulations
governing permits nre at 50 CFR 17.22 and 17.23. Such permits are available for scientific purposes, to enhance the propagation or survival of the species, and/ or for incidental take in connection with otherwise lawful activities. In some instances, permits may be issued during a specified period of time to relieve
undue economic ~ardship that would be suffered if such relief were not available.
•
:1
Im
i .. II
I
',
ii
I
!
ii ,1,
!:I .,
' 1,. i'· l'I ~. ·,::
I
I
25222 Federal Register / Vol. 51, No. 133 · / Friday, July 11, 1986 / Proposed Rules
Public Comments Solicited
The Service intends that any final
action from this proposal will be as
accurate and ilS effective as possible.
Therefore, any comments or suggestions
from·the public, other concerned
governmental agencies, the scientific
community, industry,_or any other
interested party concerning any aspect
of this proposal are hereby solicited.
Comments particularly are sol.lght
concerning: ·
(1} Biological. commercial trade, or
other relevant data concerning any.
threat (or lack thereof) to this species:
(2) The location of any additional
populations of this species and the
reasons why any habitat should or
should not be determined to be critiCal
habita.t as provided by section 4 of the
Act;
-. ·(3) AdditionBl info~ation·~onceming
the range and distribution of this
species; : · .
(4) current or planned activities in the
sllbject area and their .possible impacts
on this species: and
(5) Any foreseeable economkand ·
other impacts resulting from the.
-proposed designation.of critic.al habitat
Final promulgation of the regulations
on_this sp·ecies will take into . · · .. -:
· consideration ·the comments and any•· .
additional information receiVed by the •
Service, and ·s_uch communications may.
lead to adoption of a fina!regulation
that differs from.this proposal. .
eonwnonname Scientific name
,..,..,
The Endangered Species Act provides
for a public hearing on this proposal. if
requested. Requests must be filed within
45 days of the date of the proposal. Such
requests must be made in writing and ·
addressed to the Endangered Species
Field Office, 100 Otis Slreet, Room 224,
Asheville, North Carolina 28801.
National Environmental Policy Act
The·Fish and Wildlife Service has
determined that an Environmental
Assessment. as defined under the
authority of the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969, need not be prepared
in connection with regulati0ns adopted
pursuant to section 4{a) of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended. A notice outlining the
Service's reasons for this determination·
was published in the Federal Register on
October 25, 1983 [48 FR 49244).
References Cited ·
North Carolina Department of Natural
Resources and Commu~ty oevelopmenl
1983. Status of Water Resources in the
Cape Fear River· Basin. 135 pp.
Pattern. c.B .. end M.T. Huish. 1985. Status
sti.rvey of the CaP,e Fear shiner {Nolropis
mekislocholas). U.S. Fish end Wi_ldlife ..
Service Contract No. 14-16--0009-is~:44 ·
pp.
Pattern:. G.B., end M.T. Huish. 1986.
SupplCmcnt to the status survey of the ·
Cape Feaishiner (Notropis mekislocho/aS).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Contract ~o.
14-1~1522. 11 pp.
Snelson, F.F. 1971. Notropis mekistocholas. n
new cyprinid fish endemic to the Cape Fear
River bnsin. North Carolinn. Copein
19i~ :449-462.
Author
The primary author of this.proposed
rule is Richard G. Biggins. Endangered
Species Field Office, 100 Otis Street.
Room 224, 'Asheville, North Carolina
28801 (704/259--0321 or ITS 672--0321).
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened.wildlife;
Fish, Marine· mammals, PlantS ·
(agriculture).
Propos~d Regulations Promulgation.
PART .17-{AMENDEDJ
Accordingly, ii is hereby proposed to
amend Part 17, Subchapter B of Chapter
I, Title 50 of the Code of Federal
. Regulations, as set forth below: ..
1. The authority citation for Part 17-, ·
continues to read as follows:
Authority: Pub. L 93-205, 87 Stat 884; Pub.
. L 94-359. 00 Stat 811; Pub. L 9!H13Z92 Stat
3751: Pub. L -159, 93 Stat 1225; Pub. L 97-
304, 98 S_tat .1411 (16 u.5..c. 1531 et seq .. ~ • ·
2; It is. proposed to amend § 17.ll[h) .
· by adding the following, in alphabetical
· order tinder '.'FISHES," to the List of· ·. '
Endangered and.Threatened Wildlife:_
§ 17.11. Endangered .;,d threatened
· wildlife.
• • • •
""""'" range
. . Vertebrate
""""'""" --. endangef'Gd Of ........ ·.When listed Critical . habitat .
threatened
Shinor, Cape Foar,-~-,---Notropd '"81cisrrx;n1~"~---~.$A (NC), _______ . Entir,._ ____ E---17.95(e) NA
3: It is furth~r pr~posed to ~-mend
§ 17.95[e) by adding critical habitat of
the "Cape Fear shiner," in the same.
alphabetical order as the species occurs
· ,.-· Deep River, th~n dowilstream in th·e ·
. in § 17.ll[h). . .
§ 17.95 Critica"I habitat-fish and witdllfe.
[e) • • •
Cape Fear Shiner·."
{Notropis mekistocholas)
[1) North Carolina. Chatham County.
Approximately 4.1 niiles of the Rocky
River from North Carolina State ·
Highway 902 Bridge downstream to
Chatham County Road 1010 Bridge;
(2) North Carolina. Chatham and Lee
Counties. Approximately 0.5 miles of
Dear Creek, from Chatham County Road
2156 Bridge downstream to the Rocky
River, th•m downstream in the Rocky
River (approximately 4.2 miles) to tho
Deep River (approximately·2.6) in ·
Chatham and Lee Counties, to a point
0.3 river miles below the Moncure, North
Carolina, U.S. Geological Survey Gaging
Station; and . ·
[3) North Carolina. Randolph and
Moore Counties. ,Approximately 1.5
miles of Fork Creek, from a point 0.1
creek miles upstream of Randolph
County Road 2873 Bridge downstream to
the Deep River then downstream
appoxiffiately 4.1 miles to the Deep
River in Randolph and Moore Counties,
North Carolina, to a point 2.5 river miles
below Moore County Road 1456 Bridge.
Federal Register / Vol. 51, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 1986 / Proposed Rules 25223
IJ Constituent elements include clean I streams with gravel, cobble,.and boulder
substrates with pools, riffles, shallow
runs and slackwater areas ~ith large
I rock outcrops and side channels and.
pools with water of good quality with
relatlvelY low silt loads. . .·
IJ DatCd: May 30, 1980.
IJP-Daniel Smilh." .
Ac Jing Assistallt Secretary for'Fish and. -
Wildlife and Pai-ks.. . .
I (FR Doc. 86-~5643 Filed ~-1~:· 8:4~ e~J
811.JJ_N~ CODE 4310·~~ :· _ . , . '· ...
I
I
I
I .
. . .,_.
; ..-: . ; .
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
(\.:\·-:; ·._, . -
· .. ;:::_;, ::-•;
--~-~
:\~~~~\:·:· ,:.-~;:?,!
,~, ·.--:--· ."?,i . ..:. "
. --~.r-ji{~;j(:.;?;}
,,':,, ~-~:::~~--'°'' <· ..... . :.._ .. ·:-:-. .,_ ... , .. -. __ ,:.;
. ·'':···.:~•-~ .. --.~->-:-_,-·: ..
' . -.~;!ct· ;,_,:[
·-.-··>,id/ -··, --·-
I
I
I
I
I;.?·' "";j
'\le}/
\ ~;.,·
I
WELL RECORD
~•II ling Contr1~lo•
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT Of WATER AHO
DIVISION OF GROUND WATER
B Bill 271148 • ltALEIGl, N. C.
I c1 t•I 'f( n Reg. 110.
I. ro-~-Li.a..~~~------
2. Lout lo" _,_._,,. .. ~~M~-----------------'-
Sho" a •~•lC!rl ot loc ■tlon on b1ck of fora
I,
••
°""•• L~wi11 Sf .. ,.,~hri~on
lddru, 5.2.l . --. \ ; ~ -. ·--
trout: />1ptl'I
Quadr1ngle llo,
! ,,oa 'l ___ lo 32.._,t. ~ c,. ·:.,n t ~::=~ i ~---'=-~·c ~~j)~s~--
. "--·-+---➔•---111) ,.
"·
". "·
sc, .... : _V~£~
"---"·
hP' and ope~ ir I --~------
---j---------
1----.J' -----·------
~-
1b9v.e· ft. bel6w top of cuing --1
,i,ld (go .. ~_..!,_ __ tiMthod of t .. tlng __ ,Acicr.___
rt. after __ c._1 ____ _
! ~-=t
, __ ·I ~rs. ·-----r
wtilch 1, _ _J ___ ft. above Lu1d ,urface. flev. ------o,h _.2=---1..8:~7L'c.• _______________ _
I•· •ater ?u a 1 it 1 J.-.peratllre (°Fl------l\----t----f-------------
1 !i. l'tll st~rili11tion .. ethod __ a[.:0•1.,Jao.u.r;iaDLICC...--------tt----t---+-------------1 II. P'tr•1ner,t P~,.,: __ T,pe ______ MIii.i _______ ~---+---+-----------
Ref. 46
:,
\t-, ··. ·:!_::/:.
I
'.{/:'>,
!\ .
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
?:
;:~·l'
•,:·,~1,, (:.~"ii* 1>1,f••~!"l'll ('!' HA1n~~I. ~r·.,,,,~,1~ ,_ '''"""1"11( l'l'.'1('1/'\f:::
!•IV!~.}?'< {JI fllV!Q(,,.,H,.lAI -,Ari/lGU•l!IT, i;~OUlll•WATtP 5fffl0/, 0
1',U. <'U< llf,a, ~ALUC.", N.(. :1:tl\
u:;,. UI WLt,l : __ Qff l c e_ ----·-Ul,T,: '-.il..::.ll:.l.B__ _.9_ ---.. -1~
4,. toOt::, THJ:; ..-~.LI ~t'.!'l.11,;t; Ml t:XISTltl1; Wt:LJ.l_!!Q_____ ____ .. }8 ___ 400
T'(ifAL Ut:l'1U: ~~JC ·1·n·t: VI• :a1,:n;.-,1,, U i T ·--
f,,om ___ t·,
'-'·'~",'( ·~ .l
~-1,.:.J,(,;i,-,,, .J/.4
,o ----
Ir;~ 1.I,· ;,,, Ii : to1,:I ..
1,;t,t/ l t.
tyµH
,,.,1
.,1... ;,,,.-f
•· .. _b19.\i.
IITII
--~-ar~~ --~~ .. ~}'. __ '·
__ ~ !1:!_l C
:.r:'~. :.!f
if 91
., ; ., .. : ' ,,, 'e,•,· :·, ,·, ·r:·:e.,,.-,,c,~''\~':/"''.'·'·''''::'·"'.'.''''''""''~'• -,•.~q,,, .. ,,-,s,,,,,·.~.,·,'/."''.,c "'-'" . ' . . .,,,., ... ,
I
I
I
t ,.
I
/ .,
I fr , .
,\
i \ j .: ,.
"I• - • . .. ~.
..-/l :,,-
:;.~. ii
~~.,..;i;:.i!:.:~:.;_:. -, ·::-... .. ,I
. . .
COUNTY
I
I
I
·1
I
Qi.ELL RECOR□ I
l!i.i\UL.l:V\ !1!,!',·,1:1:··::11 !{ 11r,Jlii'hi. t..:; ftl:'.i:1''.ii"
ll!VIS!rm or (liV]RfJ!lf\[UlAL ,"J,-\(\1,[f'J_:n
GROUN~I/Al[R S[CTION
P.O. BOX 27637 -Rf1L(IGH, !l,C. :'.i'&li
Heater Well Co. n:G. 110.
Sorrell's Grove Rd. near Airport
(110 .. d,Con..,unity or Slll><livl,ion and Lot ~o, 1
1_ <!Wilf:H, Triangle Crate
J. .o.uoRJ:ss, 304 Cary St.,
Repair Service
Cary, N.C. 27511
pr,Pfl!
)_:.
~-. I
;1}
~ va \ Ji,·,' ,,slope, h; 11 l<lp, f l,H (,:irclo,
Office or..Tt:, 8-29-77
-fii~ --w--______ FOF./'l:.T 1,,i,1_ !l~,<;C:1111'1'10.'l ••.•
, . n:s ___ -i:o __ _
ln~i,l•• ...:~ 11 ! t, 11·>,
(Jj ...
r,o .. _0_1 ,, 21-fl L.l.L4 ... ,;fj /ft. 8-S tee 1
10. r;POIIT: _..,.,! hod
r,o,._Q___ t,,..2.0_!, ~
HTU
_____ :r ... 1•r;a;,;,:r,r,
11(,-: ,1,,·
;,1., .,,.·· .rE.i'.:..:_
0 111r1nd clov
.20
' .. ·i' \
>:';,=:r rctc>:7t.::'!-,,'.. :~/'?'~~-~?'? r'":~f'":', ~'.~""P';,''.rt':-':, ::•~';'.-,.(-~~ ~•~~?_'J."! T
I
I
I , ,,a,•t'•~ ' : ~;; ; :·t:i -, ,.•.
• l f-··
,,.
'
f 1. i \';
~ • ' :1. ~ ,·~·
•· 1G%~rt/iJ1~: ..
I
',0''111 CAROLINA DEl'ARTMEIH OF NA TUHAL ANO ECONOMIC RESOURCES
lv,£1.L RECOR1~
OFFICE OF WATER AND AIR RESOURCES
GROUND WAfER DIVISION
P. 0. BOX 27687 -RALEIGH, N. C. 2i611
AOl,fc(ss·_B..~.!.~ Box 255, Morrisville,_
To,,(IGft.vwr· J•••. •ol1-,, !!!f:!.i. "llnop, llc,1 p--,\Aiililt.Jl~-
ust or Wf:LL: ___ .• ..llQ;llle......._ om: _ J0-29-76 .1f--□~+~l-~S-+-_c_l~•~v· ________ _
t, 00t S ,..,s Wf:ll ,l(pt,\C[ .t.N [JJSTING wt.LL? no 15 lf;o shale
TOUL D(l"TH, _ _.!!.Q__ fllG ll'PC OR MCT>tOO: air
". fOR••.r.T,ON uw.rs COLL[C'TED· o,cs No.ol tlo;t, ____ 11----t----t-----~---------
12!J I" Q,o.,. r, _ _Q__ .,ll__. ,, ~
,, GPOUT: 2.!i'~ t,191 .. ,01
Woll IJ,idt .. J::fili' 1¢ -ll.La_dlec-,arreetr--·---t--------------
i..,11,og
,, _ __Q__ '"· ----1.Q_ ,, ~ t blowing -------
" SCA( [ N kn~ -"""-
"
I] C,R..t.ll[l" , ..... ___ . ___ "
1) WIIAT[III lOl>tES!do;•II>\"
70'
" STIITIC "'"fCALIV[L ____ ,, "'°"· ,., ..
1u1loco .
. , _______ ,..
hu a~ll QQll!!t!lli
!!!!.!!!!!.
'r. , ..... oot ...... TION: 1,P•--~'"'T~"--""'"'"''-------111---· :-----r-·
---f B;--~~-glE~?t---
•-·--· · t-:: 1 ··-------·'. ---,.
~ --:·-·:.~ -·-I1't r· --
I
I
I
I
I
/
COUNTY
I
I
--
~-;.
5>'..i ~;t "1 , .. ,, ........ • .,
I
I
I
HORlll Cfl!WLl;IJ', (l!:.(',\!'.H'DIT or 1/1\Jl/P.i,1_ A;i[I [(O:iG!",I( P[50UP.([S !ll'IISl/11; or [1N!ROWiLrilAL /".MW1[,~l.ri1
[ ·UL R[[OROI GROUilD'Al[R S[CIIUII I 1/ f.6 Q f3 P.O. ROX 21687 • R/,L[l[,H, IL(, 2/G!l \_\ /1,_ I'./ /
::,• ,, ,,.,1 Tu"n, _Martls.vill.e._ ____________ _ .::ount ;•: __ Wa.kL __ ---------·-•-·
-·--_ 1636 ----------
(l'n.,,1,c, ...... 1:ni tr or Su1~livi~1on ,on•J Lvt :,10.1
S601 Lrunbshire DR ... .-fulle.u:b....JiC
ti r.,-,, "•' l l<:\', sic,~"· hi l Jtoi,. ! J.,t (~~7JlP~neJ
,. us~ or "''Lt.,_aHeP•••ec... __ P"n:, -"7"•"2.5,·.lcl~---
~. f•11::; Tn11: 1-U.L !ll'J'l.ll1T l<!! 1:~.ISl"IW: "t:1.1.? ___,Neo,_ __
7. TOT,.I, J11:r·,u,....2QQ..__111,; TYi'~ Ok ~fll(II!: Air
'-1'1"' o>
r,.,_.,. _O_t,, _n_1 ·. ---2.i_ "'" <•tht/ft.
--ll--B steel
JO. 1;h~:7, !><•1,tn .. ,,t,•ti,,I .• , ..... J
f'"'•" _a_ ,,,--2.Q_,t Granite lil.ol!l=•---
-----• I (St,,
A,,,<,,mt _____ _
'Ju,1dr~n,1J., No. ____ ~f_'/-_b:.__'y~---
1 .... ,--/" ::.,._I :.:..
,... _ _.,_n __ ~ '"--L---~<.A.D.,t ct riv
'>""'-D ,,I ,l •'"~
~----------·------
) . /~_1./ ~. (:
i_,'
•--
,,
I
I
I
I
I
I
ToP'OQPIA.f'\,ff' 1•-. , ... ..,. lloP•,<E!, flOII ~ 01 ftfll._)~-----04T(' _l-L1....::::....l.L_
DOtS T~!i'llrtll l<l':.4CI ,.,_ f.orSTI~ -..ILi! ~: IOT4l Cit. .. : .. _L:, v~--l'tlG lTP£0'11,1£n,oo·a~!<!i~"'--"-H----I-----I-------
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
=:ru-Q!i_L._Jj)___ __ --10fil•AI10N.DCSl:RleJJQti __ _ -f~ ·-~~-~&P eJ
• 10'1w.AJI() .. 'J,.l,I.W'l.{S COLLr,CT(O Qns No.or 1109,, ___ ,,_ ___ L--
----,.---1------J----------·-·----•O. GAOL'-· r_!e ,.., ... _(;,_ ,o_,Le__
--------------
---lc..---1-----l----------.
l'f, ~11 ... ,>.( .. r PVWP_()"o'" o •• ..,~,. o! ••II heod O" ba(• ,,, fo,m) 09t• '"""''""----•---T,oo _______ w.,,, _____ ,, ____ _ ______ (gp,,,) HP---------[L __ _
:,r:•A,.;u,•,•·, '-· .·,,~''-'l•,I',
.,f .. ~ .. •~: ··-~-"",,,c__
... , .. ,
. Ji; · : ·: •.,i. r;· .. ,. · 1<·'•"': ---,-,.-.. -..,., ··:c ,_,,.-r-:.i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
;•, .'.F;:r"-.' \tELL I!~) OJKPi.ETl(tlh l)r,.w I tik,;Wh o! thn wo.ll t-(l rit,tl'\olll"' c.,-!11t, p•~i I :1.:,it,
a.al•~ veut.11, acoooct par\.,_ .i;rout. and .001011~,.,..
WEU L CJ.TI0N1 DI'aw a 1)0.lltion aket.ch ahw1ng th~ dlrttd lon a, .. J ,ll•Ut>':• or U.•
well to ,t l.ea1t tvO (2) naa,.rby "r•ron<:'• ;,,intr, •ui:t, •• rr...,1!11.
1nteroect.1cna &nd atr.&Jld. ld•nt11)' rUAi!o .11th ::t..A.t• 111(hw•) r,..,.,1
iderit1!1catlon Uber·,.
I
I
I
I
I
irnrn II c11no1 IIM OLl'Ali!MENT ur NATUIIAL ,\/HJ ECONOM!C RESMIRCES
IW1,LL RECORD!
OFFICE OF I/ATER ANO AIR RESOURCES
GROUND WATER DIVISION
I'. 0-BOX 27687 -RALEIGH, N. C_ 27611
~~,~ 1 1'-G___;_~~~;>~, .. ""'.,Uc.:i. Li.: ;,~.\·~~-r;_o,... __ ,_~=--'""'''-'">os·--'---•••'e"""''oa•a'aar H JCTION rt w,or NO
,,
~ll ~.:::,~,;.,"'s':'""J~QfJ:\o~YJ.l~: ~" 1>0c• _,_,_,_.,_•_• ____ ----~--Co""''" Wul,,:,e~-~------. 0l'f:.!.lfff;..-h~,.Xii1¼£-d-;~,~,._:·;,;.fTii11iOl-:· _____ Q..iod•anQle No.--~~ (......._It .Ot.t.o .. Lyans ________ --·-·-. ---··-···---------==·-------=-_c___-=::-=-:::::-:-~::-,
.o.i,v"f.w . ...Rt .... l ,_11orr is.\' i..U~ •. J!.~__£756
OAH 5-:2.:::.13__.
::~r.'! 0' --'> __ 2-5 __ _
.!!!,._::-_ ~•.:2.! . ~!!!b:E. __ o_,. __ 20 __ . ..£..":!_Yl..2_J1~----"p~w=~£-r··-·-
''""
D.BJ.~!.,,,G,_ _____ _
____ _f.QtiM,\llilll .D[SCR!f'HON.
· liJ.Y __ ..a.i..d_g:r.ani tu. ..
ranitc· _________ .. ______ _
.l: 10. 1,>.m •. 2Q_!Jl-!Jll
..... ·-; ~,:.:·,::,//,>/ -;~ ----
~~F. v_.._. ····----·-----~ --~-_-:___· ---~ f~-~ --_
-----·----~--------
-;,,~.([ ~ ~ ~ ·-----•-·---'"'"·
"'~II fl l'J,.,lS1<1,p,~1: __ ,_,JJC,_ft.. ---------~-·· -• ··--·----
"", """''" /0 __ •. ":'.;;-~:~:~ :: • .-. --r-----
Co,.,,q .,._ ... _l __ ,, "~'"• 1·,~o ,,.,,,,,, fl f'v. _____ ,__ r• [lr.n: Ml ASurl[!)
.,,,r,.1~~• ... 2Q .. _ "l 1,•0~, .. ~~--;,~\~:.::-~b1o~i;;;~~--~~ t~=~-_
I
I I I.
.-,~ !f-:~:~~~:~f ii[\7°:\c-.) f
'
I
I
I
I
I
I
\./ELL !E:D G0!1J·1!:TJ.Oll: !ir.1-.: ~ ei:.ut.ch o:· t)1t1 .,_.ulJ 11cul t,1,:.,,,,11'+; r:i,r.l:.,.·, p.11~1, 1-:
8'd:1ls~ Yonts, llCC~ttD port, grout.. •t ,t al)Cl"PUl-0.
\lEU L(CATION:.• Draw a lJcatlon akotcb 11howing the direct.ton and dillt.onco or U,o
well to st leaat two (2) oaarby refenn~e point.a euch u road11,.
intersections a.nd atre.&¥. Idtultl.fy road• with Stat. Hichwa7 ro-d
idez:ittfiCatton aumbera. /.,,..-, _,
i
I
\
j)•:
( I
. ;-,·~"
·A-.. '.~~---='.:~~.,.,,,_,, ... _:i:-::-:;-:::.-:i r~ r{--t\-.,,:··-~ :-1,~f:0":~7!-'}'f,~--; r-~P-:t--, x,::~~~~?'3'~"{·"!,~;,:~-;r::'"'!~--~·~,:'"~.P!'.~-,:'-?;:~~~~~~,~,!::,, .... <•Ff,,-~f(,.
I
I
I
I
I
1/0Rlll CAROi.ii/A DEPARTMENT OF NAl URAi. AND ECONOMIC RE';OURCES
OFFICE OF WATER At/0 AIR RESOURCES
!wELL RECORD! GROUND WATER DIVISION W f: ;i_ ~-' :1, :J-
P, 0. BOX 17687 ~ RALEIGH, N. C. 27611
~••11; CC>HTil,1,CTOA
J. Wl!LL LOCA?,:»,r· IS'-o ,Mlcl'> ol Th '!cot,on on l>_<if:k 9f la•"'IJ .
...,..,0 , r-, _11llr..r..1s.Y.11 !hJio.r..trL...\.dl..Un,~-------Co1in1,: ~Weflckc•a•--~----
Near Ko_efi;r Co. . ------~------Ouod•on9lo t-.o. T LVl.-u_ 1_Roa Co,i,......-.1, 0,:1:;;;o,r,;,.,.,,, ond Lot No I ~" __Qtis K. llnton
AC.CHtcss:~!. __ /_!~.L Horrlsvflle 1 N. C. 27560 oou , JN(,~•s.:ns,•Gs,_ _____ _
.
1,;S( or W(LL __ h_,_•mc~----
~"""'--1-_J'"el,,-.J---_j".lll -· MAllilN.DL!i~Je.IlON ____ _
l0-25-72 O 22 clay
DAT[; --------11>----·-___ , __ ,__~-------------
DOI\ THIS 'IIO(:Lt fl[f>LAC( Ari E•ISTlHG Wl:LL? 22 150 shalf
,ouL D[PTH_......150_• __ "'G nPC oA ,..CTHOO: _..,,,r ____ 111---+---+---__________ _
e. ro,u,u,fl()N SAMPLES COLLECTED' C] YES N<:1, of 80~•·---·I c---f----f----· L-'--r"-~'---" )c...·c:)c... __
lf----1----1----~----~~-◊----~ , .. ,.., ___ u __ 10 ..2{j,_ r, !'-'! ---&41..Y. ~------·;,11, l
10. Gll~uT: Q.!(!!!! ~ l,IJ!Aoa i._ __ _
r,om __ o ___ •c.~ 1, ~t ___ .tPc""c:,Pc... ___ l
"
2..!..e!.!! ,,~,., ______ ,o ____ r,
:.11.TIC llrlAfll'l LE'(LL ____ l.5_11
to1ln_9 ,1 __ ! __ ,, ~;-Q,~ land
c)Llf lol£ASU!ff0
.....
-----------···--·
T !PS 9114 Q91ning ..___ __ L---------------------
----~--1----------------------~---
-------if----+---+---------------
•op ol ca1ing
EL(\/. ____ _ -·--· -----------
1----------· ,~ •:Eu•:1~•"1 ..• 1 ____ •;(r,,oo m IE'.it:Nr. _llbSlsoOWL ___ _ Test h"lmc: :00
,., P•J>,!P,,;C, "'A'! I> Ll.'Jll: ___ !, or,., ------'M)~•, -+----
:10 gfim ~• --------~~m
Hlil 14 tablets L,___, ______ :~9 f:P~---------' r. ,: .. LOll,,..A,IIQN 1,p. ______ Amo..n1_.:_c..::::::.:.:..:.~ : '.Jtl gpm
IB. "'llTffl Ot:AuT•: _______ T(l,IP(flATUflE("Fl __ ~---------·--·•-------·· __ . •••--·------
"
H:
·:·,,,,,,,,,,, v .. ; ot.r;
.·.• .. )
' ,.
~lt1 & ./i/li
. ··-/La,v,,H-r
: O W.!lc, & •'I/ lit1,uu,"(,~1 ·--...~ ~~lr1gl1_ N. ,:
~-·--.... ~'--~ ··i. :· ·:\_-!;''r;.;:':-n· .'t'"-'?~trts~_!-.:.~-]i::;'!?~~::\,~?t:ttB?~'"irf~::,rE~ff~~~I{.?: f~?51'"~~~:y:~; r :i!'~.!7 ~'7~:~rr';?~·->:-'..:J;::·:-::~·•:":":.-
I
I
I
I
t,,,c:YWi
~-..
"'
I
wELL HEJ.O COHPLE'I'lON; Dra1-1 • eketcb of t))I) veil t»nu r-hwil'lf! i:u1r~:, J'l.ltllr t•IJ•lr-t,
seala, v~n~s, aooo11a port, irout, o.n-·.1 erwlooun.
WELL LO'.ATION: Drav a l001ti:>n atetch abowing the dlreclion and d!Dtance ot· t))4
veil to at lei1.1,t tvo (2) uaarby ro!erou:a polnh 1:1ui:h u r~d•,
intenectfona and atreama. IdentHy roada with St.ate lHM:hvliT rc..d
identification mmbera.
I
I
I
, , i 'I
·-·-.:..:.: ..
~--1---+--
Ltl'>~'!l..
I•<>-. i----;,--, --+-----------
----------If-.... , . I -------------
! I t--·r·-··----------------------
----
-••• "•01 on boc• o! t~,,.,1
___ .,o••----·--·---1···-
··--______ '.;p,·! "''-----·-----;
:>,;,1~ --·-···--·---···--A,,,,n• O•~rh ·----•---r ·· , .. ,o ...... t(I '"( W[ll ~,..,i',fl> 00f r .. r 1.L-·~-·-~/!:~--l! ---.t{;' :_,,--:.' -~ .. _.
:,.-
.... • i
I.
I
I
I
I
\J"l:.LL !El) COMPI.ETI01-'t Draw a rikotoh of U.e weU t--. .. d ribowln£ t•n1:111-..·, i,1.11-1• 11,,:,~:.
IU•al l1 .vento, ftCCMU5 }'.OI"t. r.rout, IIIYI Clj.O)OPur.i,
WELL LC :ATION:
N;-ne
Draw a Joc11tlon sketch sho'-'1ng th~ ,11 n/\n 11.1.-l •11r.:.,.~,,:,, ,,:--11, ..
veil to at le&et tvo (2) nearby r1:-•. ;,J-\_ •.1 nu,:ti •• r,,..1.,
... + ......... ~,~ ... , .. •P'lti .. tl"''v"''"'~ t.-1 .. ,-...-·,,. ,. "'i_,.,,., H1vt,._. .. ., .... ,.., . ~"-~ ~-
I
I
I
I
y
tltrt ?:~tfl .. r;;t; \f,Y!l
I
•..:..:.
Aci· ... :J..c.
~
:..::-. ,.
---~ ----
:-:i•:1:'.
c..i1 .. n.µ ..
.,, ..
J.LL.iAirt ..
1~/~,_~/ __
'0i:.=.l
.'/·'i'l ,<.• L __ _
__ , __ f;_i?. ! ... {
--------r-
"1-',
--.t .. ~-.-.,., • .j ,, __ i, _____ ,, ,<·'.-, ,,,~-] ii!,'
:.HI ... , ~•;, "' ;, . '.!F~ ~./: _ _/ .J.. t]e,-:· {~-~~-----·-
_ u.r::. ...... •·····
.... :<l .. .::~.: .. ----·•(•~·
'" ..I U.1I: ..... , ... , ...
1·
?•,"·,0.1cG·-_ r--,-·
l r"f'flU.;1U"l\'fl _____ t-··-·•
~•uJ '"· ,.,,, <1! f~.,~l t'···
-. _... : .. ,.
. j
' ' I"
I
I
I
I
I
WELL '...O<ATION: Drav a ][)Ct~tlon 11ketch abovlng ·thtt diroctl..,n u,,1 dln~oi:U uf U,111 veil to (It least tvo {2) ·nearby rerura,.ce pol r,t.1 riud, u r,,.,J•, intersec1.Jc.l8 a.nd atrea.m,. Identify roadu 1.1lU1 St.lei l!ltetN•y r,_...d
identifke.1:if')n numbera.
I
I
I
I
I h'<t:LL RECORD]
i'ICWII'. U·,hOLl\;h lJLi'idilf.'.l.!;1 or !UJU!Ud_ MW LCOiWU!C RlSOllHCES OFFICE OI-W/iTER AIW AIH RESOURCES
GROUND WATER 0I'/ISION
P. 0. BOX 27687 -RALEIGH, N. C. 2761 l
• ,.,., IJitAlmU..QCSJ;filfUOti __ _ US( or WCLl __ h~o _____ _ DAT[: ----=•~-~·~•--~7~2;__11--"o---f---"'=•-1--_.ccc~l=•,_Y ________ _ • OO(S T'11S wt'.lL kt:PL~C( AN (,;tSTING IW[LL~ no l 9 250 shell rock
TOT.lL OCPTH:_2.SQ____ RIC TTP( OR 1,1cn-,,oo _,a0l,r~--ll-----,l-----f--,----__ 7 ll0• _______ _ )-FORMA.TION SAlo!P\..[S COLL[CT[O: C)l[S No.of Bo~---ll----+-----r----------'-·-'-•-----
,._) .. ~ D,atn 6l •••~htlltj !le r,..., __Q_ __ ""~-r, 'f. ~11-----l r . ,J
t I SCRl(N Ires gnd o...,,;,,q f,o.., ___ ,. ___ "
12. GRIW[!.:
r,om ___ ••---"·
lop ol ca,,110.
ELCV. _____ lf---•------•• DAT[ M[ASUR[I)' ____ . __
f----1-·. -1--------·--,----,t, l'IJW+NG wAT(R LlVH : ____ 11 or .. , ______ hOYt> 4: 10 3 gprn •' _______ Qpm 1-----+----l-----'--------
IJT!l _ __:>~-•:._~l~•~b~lc.'11r----i------,l,4~,~2:0_-__ 3 __ gp111 _______ _
•.'· C"L0R<Nlil!ON' T,p, ______ Amoun! _
t8. *"''ER QUII.LIT"------·---·-·---T[WPERATURC("f"l __ ll-----f-----jl~4~; _)_Q_-] 8P}Il ---------------
Dot• in1•<>1loa _____ T,po _____ Molo _____ ,f-----<-·--·-Cu1>oc,1, ______ (;pi,,j HP-------IL __ Into•• Doptn _________ Airllnt Dop!~ -----11 -·
H4VE YOU INfOR.,.fO T.,f "'[LL O""N(R Of HIE
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
WELI HEA.l CO~li'"'l.E1'10JI: Dr11\.I ~ tikf,\.Ch
ee.11la,·ven~~,
o!·. U1e,-wcL. lr.,ac 1;;.,o..,l,.f. t;:;ll:r'i:, 1•:1t'J'
EICCtW8 porl, g;oul, und 1:111t:lo~Uf"':1,·
' '
.-,/
VEL:, L□,::ATION: Drav a location sketch Shoving the diroct1on and dilltanco· o"r th•
well to ~1t .Leaet two (2) nearhy reference point11 ouch ae roada,
1ntereect1o.18 and etr&UUI. Identify roade with State H1chwa)' .. r.oad
identificatlo~ numbere.
I
I
I
I
rw1rn1 CAl<OLINA OErAR1MENT OF NATURAL AND ECONOMIC HESOJRCES
lwn L RECORD!
'.lt:l l i I
2U
OFFICE OF WATER AND AIR RESOURCES
GROUND WATER DIVISION
P. 0. BOX 27687 -RALEIGII, N. C. 27611
W(Ll COi'tSI::>CllON P(HM\I l'tO
llo.ke
~
1,._ ___ _
' ;
--+---·---------------
-----,------
----------C-----'-----'·---
w:.itu /,)-.(',1.,-~ .. : ____ so•---------~--'------... --------
llTI! •H_,_.
· ---·.-·01<·--------1
l"p ~! ,a,,~~
tilV _,_
\t. talilcts
A ... o,.nt -··-·-·----·•-C----
T,•.<l'tllAlUl!l("FI
,.
i
I
2 gpm
(I: !U • 2 gpm -------------·-
(J: 20 • 2_ r,prn _____ .... _____ _
2 gpm
;•T;t•r-1' 'FT) .. \, ....... ~---.... ' \ ,. •,, ---···--
I
I
I
I
I
'
'
! / ' . .~ ·.
I
/-",, i·
I
i.'l'.:LL HE D COMPI.ETlON: Dr11v •l okotch of the \Mrll hou.1 r1t1u,t!.rlf:' ,·11,d~, 1•,.-.1 1 li,11.,._·,
l!ll!IH.lo. vente, aC\'Oc:o pvrt, groqt, <&n·1 •1>r.lu1nH"•,
Dra1J a locnt1,n aketch ab,>..,ing thu dir,.,ctlv1, tt.1 .. 1 1111.'1t.,r,1wf!I r,f t.1. ..
well to at le let tvo (2) nearby rr,fflr.,r,c .. 'r,,,!1;lt1 01,,•I; -.r :--.... ,In,
intaraecti,ms and atrea.me. Idontlfy roa,1u l.f!tt, ::l411t•, l!ll{tr.11ty rc,..,i
identifica ~lo 1 m.unbere,
I
I
I
I
I
.. ' •,' .. ; ..,...
rmrn11 Cll!Wl.!IU, D[rtdn1,1crn (JF U/1TU/U1L Ml!J ccorwt.~lC HUOUHCES
lwELL RECORD!
OFFICE OF WATER ANO AIR RESOURCES
GROUND WATER DIVISION
W~l l I J P, 0, BOX 27687 -RALEIGH, r1, C. 27611
·;~~;,,,°"'"'"'~,.,~~er \.Jell C..:l,., In~ .
.,tu. ~::,~.;_,s~}h'f1<B,.P[ f'YE!O,C"fr." 'e,b<><~ of fo,.,.J Co_,,,
154 ·~~~---------0,..odronQlt I-IQ. ~S._'sf-"'CC,0 ('a!.f ___ _ tw;---;~;,·L~~}sAi!omtparry;r !'ni;;~r.;;;;a,;,r-o• ,..,
,_[FJl:M..... -JdAilO.H. 0.txfilf.J !ON_ --
OAT£: 9-28-72 O 20 ··-----------·-· ----=-clay
t,,,_'(·'> T"I'!> .wtll folll'LACL A"! E•ISTING ..,.(LL?
0
IOUL OfPTH )CXJ' ·----·-Jitc; Trpt 01'1 r,,(Tl-<O() __ a_l_r __
~.0200'---+--'"00=+~r0e0d'-'r0,,,c0kc.._~~---------, --+-------~--------
t '0Rt,t,1,T,O"' S.lllolfl\.f::i COLL[Cl[O c_]r[S No ol BoQt ____ ll----1-
~ r,, .. _____ Cl __ ..., 22 ,,
Wnol 11,;c11
" ""'9tit'
,::,, Gf<:"Jo1I ~ ~!.!"!!..! ~,1~0~
r,a,,, __ .Q__,,_.1.Q__ ,, ~t __ __,,Pe""=P'------r------·
--------,.. _____ , __
~
" "
i!.!.!. ~
"
"
"
11:I ... ur,,:, CUAt:lf
"
····-··--•-.... _.l;o,,.l ""--·-----l
",, ••'' ••· o• l
, .. , ~--\ ~,; ,_,,, __ _
.. .
.. ___ .::J..:. '1 •.
·-----·-------
-----------
t-·-·
I,.•· ., ',
I
I
I
I
I
\.'EU HE,D COMPLETJOtf: 1.>r.1.w, ·ak.ot.ch o~ tt• IHl.ll hM.d •hLN~!i.t 1.:•Ql•-c, pu1111, 1-11•1,-,,
aula, V'et1~_a, o.oooaa p(Ji·t., arout., ond Doclo,ur•.
VEIJ. LOCATION: Draw a lo-:11.tloo sketch dhovlng the diroct1on •r.J dlo\A.1,ce u( u~
1,1ell to at lt aat two (2) 11ttarb;y re_rer":ica r,oir.ti, 11ucl1 ao rc,.a<1•,
interaection1, and atreau. Identlt) roadt1 vlth St.ate H11tn1a7·road
identirlc11.tic,n DW4bera.
I
I
I
I
I
1 ·,., •.. :i'' ;:/:ht
i '~-
,.~ .. •
. -·--..... '-. :.r.:.··:: .--LJ. ,. •.~: ,,.,. ;_~ I ,>'111<:. •,,,,. f'!•• ~r.r ,:1
~--;,J
NORTII CAROLINA DEP/\R 11,lENT OF NATURAL. AND ECONOMIC RESO JRCES
OFFICE OF WATER AND AIR RESOURCES
GROUND WATER DIVISION
P. 0. BOX 27687 -RALEIGH. N. C. 27611 ll<,altir \,hil I Company. lnc. I O#<<tt, .. G CO,..flll,t,t;~~,-... ~---------='c"a·.,;;"o'.,.----:""(ll CON$T_,n.:T10N PERl,l!T NO w-r•.L .;.-:;::,'7_ .. • s~~!~~ ~.f!i~~-ow."_:? !~~-~-~:~":_~.
154 ,_._;:~.J;~t:V~ /:,t~~~i~~~~;_r~-~-~~--~~=:-~~ No~ -.
•t "t <.s· ~ -~'! ._ ~'.!~ ~.--~"-~~-~-~~--~-'_I_:_~ __ 1!_._~:....._ nsr,o DRILLING LO""-G ______ c...
f.Bli'M.. , __ s's· • _ __, __ ...,.!IBMA:.I.QN DE.~AIP.JlON _____ _
9-LS-72 . -------------{; ---20_ _ ~
---~--,---20 .. _ _!:+2_C!_+a'cecd~c0o0C0kc __________ _
-p,r; TIP( OR 1,1rn,oo --------
~
----~ -~~~-:~---~~~ t··
~I~ :( .,,l!l•· .t,•,ti
-.,.,.i . I
r-·
.. 55 '. .. ·-· --·-_ ... ----1--
1!1 ll
1;·_,,,_,;
I ,:,·, ii
1
t,lu'-'
l:.. Lul, l l' ts '
g,Hl1
·.;-._ N. t.
I I I I I I r: ~A:i c0 .. :1':..!...'dt•1:: ;1;-)1,' 1,_.,,. • .. 1":., ... , .. ,. 1,·, .. •' J'!,-.,.,:,,f .... ,:1.r, iq·,, r:;. WELL W "ATION1 bt>ll~, ','ut:\.ci., t.GCtJ!i,J< i.~J;-t, i,:rL·U~, c.1,j en:;1,oi;;e. ,._ -Draw a luoa:~ion eketch aho-.-ing the d1"oct1no etid d1•Urnc• uf lhe well to ht. ::oaat tvo (2) nearby refer-one• point■ ■ur.h u ro&d■, interaeotioua and atr.aa1. IdontU)' road• v1lh St.ate Hl~N&J rc.,1 1deot1ricat:~on mmbera. i .K .,..,,,.-✓ ~\ ( '\ \ ·\ ., '\ ,. ! "' t,~ '\. '\) 4, \. '-' -\ ' \ \ ~~ _.,\ f 1 _,; ·•··--···----·-· f :-, r0~-?.1'"~r-.•~F:;?·'Z-'-!~' !J'": f"""r:':"O'!;-~.'-~~~-:J-<~-!'~~•"="·':r•;,~~;':~tM7i'¥~~-f0''~~~-~:~M,~l}t:°iJi.:1;,«_,~'.fi.~~ \?.r½·ift'.'. .·
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITE I. IDENTIFICATION SEPA SITE INSPECTION REPORT 01STATE I 02 srr0 ~""~'o' NC DO 0 383 PART 1 • SITE LOCATION AND INSPECTION INFORMATION
II. SITE NAME AND LOCATION
0 1 SITE NAME /L~#. common. o,desct/otr~e name ol s/feJ 02 STREET. ROUTE NO., OR SPECIFIC LOCATK>N IO~NTIFIER Koppers Co. Inc. Hwy. 54 West
03 CffY 0-4 STATE l 05 ZIP CODE I 06COUNTY l°'Wi"I°. ;r J\brrisville NC 27560 Wake
09 COORDINATES 10 TYPE OF OWNERSHIP /CtM,;1, o,,eJ IQ'ZB LATITUDE LONGITUDE (xA. PRIVATE OB. FEDERAL 0 C. STATE O 0. COUNTY OE. MUNICIPAL ..35. SQ..49. 5D 19 0 F. OTHER 0 G.UNKNOWN Ill. INSPECTION INFORMATION
01 DATE OF INSPECTION 02 SITE STATUS 03 YEARS OF OPERATION 12/17/8p_&l/__7/87 X] ACTIVE ,,__, 1959 I current _UNKNQWN MONTH, DAY YEAR □INACTIVE BEGINNING YEAR ENDING YEAR 04 AGENCY PERFORMING INSPECTION (Ch«lr .. ,,._, apply)
0 A. EPA 0 B. EPA CONTRACTOR· 0 C. MUNICIPAL 0 0. MUNICIPAL CONTRACTOR ~ E. STATE (N-olllnnl '"'-°''""'' 0 F.STATECONTRACTOA OG.OTHER . /N-olllrm) ,_, 05 CHIEF INSPECTOR 081TTLE 0 7 ORGANIZATION 08 TELEPHONE NO.
n-.• •· c-,~1;-H~ <a, d 733-2R'" 09 OTHER INSPECTORS 101TTLE 11 OAGANIZA TION 12 TELEPHONE NO. Mark Dw:way Geologist NCDHR (91~ 733-280.
( ) .
( )
( )
.
( )
13 SITE REPRESENTATIVES INTERVIEWED 14 TITlE 15ADDRESS 16 TELEPHONE NO Marty Schlesinger Asst. Proj. M KER, Pittsburgh, PA. (412 227~2690
Jim campbell Proj. Manager KER, Pittsburgh, PA. (412> 227-2689
Mike Dvorsky . Engineer Koppers, Pittsburgh, PA. ,412, 227-2684
.
( )
( )
( )
17 ACCESS GAINED BY 18 Tl~E OF INSPECTION 19 WEATHER CONDITIONS (Cl!..ct one}
x:»'EAMISSION 1300 Overcast, approximately 60 F. □WARRANT
IV. INFORMATION AVAILABLE FROM
01 CONTACT 02 Of /Ag.,,.,,110rg-'l•llo11/ 03 TELEPHONE NO.
Marty Schlesinger Keystone Environmental Resou=es 14121 227~2690 04 PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR SITE INSPECTION FOAM 05 AGENCY 06 oycv.aazA Tl~ 07 TELEPHONE NO. 08 DATE Pat DeRosa NC DHR So 1 an Haz. 05 ,08,87 Waste Mng. Br. (919) 733-280 MOf,ITH DAV YEA.fl EPA FORM 2070-13 (7-80
I
I
I
POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITE I. IDENTIFICATION SEPA SITE INSPECTION REPORT 01 STATE 102 SITE NUMBER
NC D 003 200 383 PART 2-W,'\STE INFORMATION
11. WASTE ST ATES, QUANTITIES, ANO CHARACTERISTICS
01 PHYSlCALSTAlES {Cl>ecke~rrtatepply} 02 WASTE QUANTITY AT SITE 03 WASTE CHARACTERISTICS tCh..:lc d 11>•1 apply} I
I
/!,la.,,.,,., ol w3s!e q.,.,,,,,,.,
lJCA. TOXIC lJ A. SOLID U E. SLURRY muu i,. ir,deplffl<letol/ 0 E. SOLUBLE 0 I. HIGHLY VOLATILE l.l B. POWDER. FINES (XF. LIQUID TONS (J B. CORROSIVE 0 F. INFECTIOUS □ J. EXPLOSIVE MC.SLUDGE 0 G.GAS 0 C. RADIOACTIVE 0 G. FLAMMABLE 0 K. REACTIVE
CUBIC YARDS 356_48 CJ D. PERSISTENT 0 H. IGNITABLE 0 L. JNCOMPA TIBLE
U 0. OTHER 0 M. NOT APPLICABLE
/Spft(:lfy} NO.OF DRUMS
Ill. WASTE TYPE
CATEGORY SUBSTANCE NAME 01 GROSS AMOUNT 02 UNIT OF MEASURE OJ COMMENTS I SLU SLUDGE
OLW OILY WASTE
(SOL') SOLVENTS sonro~, 1 ·e+her I IPEI *. I (PSD) PESTICIDES ~entachloroohenol
occ OTHER ORGANIC CHEMICALS
IOC INORGANIC CHEMICALS l'IPE l.S not a .lJ.stea
I ACD ACIDS _ 11ctzc1.1.uous ,sUJ.JS1..auce
BAS BASES
MES HEAVY MET AL$
I IV. HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES /SH~ ,o, most ,~11:y c11.c1 CAS Numb•rsJ
01 CATEGORY 02 SUBSTANCE NAME 03 CAS NUMBER O◄ STORAGE/DISPOSAL METHOD 05 CONCENTRATION 06 MEASURE OF CONCENTRATION PSD Pentachlorophenol 87865 Wastewater .fran TThTT<
I SOL Isopropylether 108203 PCP treatment
process was ri. • -anu Ol.SJJOS= ID
I p.,,iu _l ror o -• ~·~· --
-
I 6 vrs_ The once
filled vol-of
lagoons " 356-48 CU-yds-I
I
V. FEED STOCKS fSHAPP•MI• /orCAS Numb•rs) I CATEGORY 01 FEEOSTOCKNAME 02 CA$ NUMBER CATEGORY 01 FEEDSTOCK NAME 02 CAS NUMBER
FDS FDS
FDS FDS I FDS FDS
FDS FDS
VI. SOURCES OF INFORMATION (C~•IPKff!C ,.,,.,.ncu, •·11' s•••• IMu. s.mt1lti •n•lys,s. t<tt>()rlSJ
I References 2, 23-25, 30, 47
I
EPA FORM 2070-13(7•81)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITE I. IDENTIFICATION
oEPA 01 STATE I 02 SITE NUMBER SITE INSPECTION REPORT NC · D 003200383 PART 3 -DESCRIPTION OF HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS AND INCIDENTS
II. HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS AND INCIDENTS .
01 0::A. GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION 02 IXOBSERVED{DATE: ] 978 l 9861 D POTENTIAL 0 ALLEGED
03 POPULATION POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: app. 2169 04 NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION
Groundwater contamination with PCP has been measured in on-site wells: May 6; 1971 ( 4) ; July 23, 1980 ( 7) ; July 24, 1980 (9) ; Aug. 21, 1980 ( 5) ; Sept. 11, 1980 (5,10); Oct. 27, 1980 (5) ; June 2, 1984 (5) ; and Sept. 9-11, 1986 (8' 21).
01 bi:I B. SURFACE WATER CONTAMINATION 02.Dif OBSEAVED(DATE: 1980 I 0 POTENTIAL 0 ALLEGED
03 POPULATION POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: 3 04 NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION
PCP was measured in water from Koppers Pond on Oct. 27, 1980 ( 5) . Pond sediment contamination with PCP was measured April 11, 1980 (11) ; . June 1980 (12); Sept. 11, 1980 (10) ; and Sept. 24, 1980 ( 6) • Koppers pond overflows to Medlin Pond used for
01 0 C. CONTAMINATION OF AIR 02 0 OBSERVEO{DATE: l . ·. ' --03 POPULATION POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: 04 NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION .
.
01 0 0. FIRE/EXPLOSIVE CONDITIONS 02 0 OBSERVED (DATE: I 0 POTENTIAL 0 AU.EGED 03 POPULATION POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: 04 NAARA nve DESCRIPTION
'
01 Ef E. DIRECT CONTACT 638 02 0 OBSERVED (DATE: I ~ POTENTIAL 0 ALLEGED ~ULATIO~POTENTIALLYAFFECTED:° app. 04 NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION soi · renoval has =cured; however, contaminated soil remains on site near the . steel shop, old lagoon area, and in .the pond . There are approxirrately 638 residents within 1 mile of the site.
01 ~ F. CONTAMINATION OF SOIL 02XlOBSERVED(DATE: 1 -':/8h&-<1 0J/ 0 POTENTIAL 0 ALLEGED
03 AREA POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: app • 10 acre 04 NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION
fA.c,.s/
On-site soil contarirination with PCP was measured: March 19, 1980 .(11); April 3, 1980 (11) ; June 1980 . (12) ; Sept. 11, 1980 (10) ; June 1981 (13) ; July 15, 1986 (14) ; and Sept. 26, 1986 ( 8) .
01 QCG. DRINKING WATEA°CONTAMINATION 2169 02 QI OBSERVED (DATE: I @. POTENTIAL OAUEGED 03 POPULATION POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: apo. 04 NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION Isopropy lether:, which was used on site, has been mea!,Ured: in off-site:drinking water wells at approximately 1-28 ppb. IPE, is not a CERCLA listed hazardous sub-stance, however, it inay indicate direction.of contaminant migration.
-
01 0 H. WORKER EXPOSURE/INJURY · 02 0 OBSERVED{DATE: I 0 POTENTIAL 0 ALLEGED 03 WORKERS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: 04 NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION
.'
01 0 I. POPULATION EXPOSURE/INJURY 02 0 OBSERVED (DATE: . I D POTENTIAi.. 0 ALLEGED 03 POPULATION POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: 04 NAARA TIVE DESCRIPTION
EPA. FORM 2070•13 (7•81)
I
I POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITE I. IDENTIFICATION SEPA SITE INSPECTION REPORT N~TATEI~ "1Thr2'6'o':383 I PART 3 -DESCRIPTION OF HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS AND INCIDENTS
II. HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS AND INCIDENTS rconi"'"""'
01 0 J. DAMAGE TO FLORA 02 0 OBSERVED (DATE: I 0 POTENTIAL 0 ALLEGED 04 NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION I
I 01 0 K. DAMAGE TO FAUNA 02 0 OBSERVED (DATE: I 0 POTENTIAL 0 ALLEGED 04 NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION 11nc.1u<Jename1s101w.c~s,
I 01 0 L. CONTAMINATION OF FOOD CHAIN 02 0 OBSERVED (DATE: I (1 POTENTIAL · 0 ALLEGED 04 NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION
I
I 01 0 M. UNSTABLECONTI\INMENTOFWASTES 02 0 OBSERVED (DATE: I 0 POTENTIAL 0 AlLEGED (So,its/RunotflSt""Olnfl~. A.H-.ing dfuma) 03 POPULATION POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: 04 NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION
t 01 0 N. DAMAGETOOFFSITEPAOPEATY 02 0 OBSERVED (DATE: I 0 POTEl<TIAI. 0 ALLEGED 04 NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION
I I
01 0 0. CONTAMINATION OF SEWERS, STORM DRAINS, WWTPs 02 0 OBSERVED (DATE: I D POTENTIAL 0 ALLEGED I 04 NARRATIVE DESCAIP:,lON
I 01 0 P. ILLEGAi/UNAUTHORiZED DUMPiNG 02 0 OBSERVED (DATE: I Cl POTENTIAL 0 ALLEGED 04 NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION
I
. 05 DESCRIPTION OF ANY OTHER KNOWN, POTENTIAL. OR ALLEGED HAZARDS
I
I'-TOTAL POPULATION POTENTIALLY AFFECTED,
V. COMMENTS .
I
V. SOURCES OF INFORMATION 1c,r .. w<>c,t><:1111erer>cu. • 11, ,1~1• 1,1,,5, '"""''"""•'Ys,s, 111pot1s,
Eferences 2, 4-14, 26-34, 40, 43. Laboratory results: Off-_site groundwater samples I llected 12-17-,86, 3-20-87. NC S1:ate Laboratory of Public Health, Raleigh, NC (A pendix B. Site investigation report: Koppers Co. Inc. May 1987. Pat DeRosa, NC ,.-.,;,o;, ~ .. ij:. I _R;:\_l,e . , NC,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITE I. IDENTIFICATION oEPA SITE INSPECTION 'N'~T ATE I 02 SITE NUMBER . D 003200383 PART 4 • PERMIT AND DESCRIPTIVE INFORMATION '
II. PERMIT INFORMATION
01 TYPE OF PERMIT ISSUED 02 PERMIT NUMBER
(Cfl<><:t all//>~/ 111Qp/y}
03 DA TE ISSUED 04 EXPIRATION DATE OS COMMENTS
DA. NPOES
DB. UIC
IX C. AIR 1320 R4 1984 -NC NRCD
i'1 D. RCRA NC D 00320038. ID# only no =nnit.
OE. RCRA INTERIM STATUS
OF. SPCCPLAN
OG. ST ATE 1Srnc1'y!
OH. LOCAL /S,,.C,trl
01. OTHER 15"ctrrJ
bJ. NONE
Ill. SITE DESCRIPTION
01 STQAAGEIOISPOSALICll«~ .. ,haf~J 02 AMOUNT 03 UNIT OF MEASURE 04 TREATMEN! /ChKt-6,,,_,_,,,,,,, 05OTHEA
~A. SURFACE IMPOUN0MENT app. 356.48 cu. ~ds. 0 A. INC EN ERA TION ~ A. BUIWINGS ON SITE 0 B. PILES 0 B. UNDERGROUND INJECTION
0 C. DRUMS, ABOVE GROUND --.· -. 0 C. CHEMICAUPHYSICAL
DD. TANK, ABOVE GRO':)NO 0 D. BIOLOGICAL
0 E. TANK, BELOW GROUND 0 E. WASTE OIL PROCESSING 06 AREA OF SITE .
0 F. LANDFILL 0 F. SOLVENT RECOVERY
fXG. LANDFAAM 0 G. OTHER RECYCLING/RECOVERY ~') ,,.-, □ H. OPEN DUMP 0 H.OTHER
0 I.OTHER ,,._,,
(~,ly/
07 COMMENTS .
IV. CONTAINMENT
01 CONTAINMENT OF WASTES/Ch~~ on•J .
0 A. ADEQUATE. SECURE 0 B. MODERATE 0 C. INAOEOUATE. POOR i;c 0. INSECURE, ~NSOUNO, DANGEROUS
02 DESCRIPTION OF DRUMS. DIKING, LINERS. BARRIERS. ETC.
Surface impoundrnents·or lagoons were unlined with no diking, diversion system, or leachate collection system. Liquid from lagoons was sprayed on field and sludge was mixed into soil.
V. ACCESSIBILITY
01 WASTE EASILY ACCESSIBLE: IXYES 0 NO
02COMMENTS
Site is unfenced, contaminated soil and p:md are accessible.
VI. SOURCES OF INFORMATION fClf• WKilie1•t•1.rocu. •-11-s1a1•,,,.s. '""""••"air~. ••s>omJ
References 2,23,40,47,52.
I EPAF0RM2070-13[7•61)
I
I
I
I
POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITE I.IDENTIFICATION SEPA SITE INSPECTION REPORT 0 1 ST A TEh:{ SITE NUMBER NC 003200383 PART 5 • WATER, DEMOGRAPHIC, AND ENVIRONMENTAL DATA
II. DRINKING WATER SUPPLY
0 1 TYPE OF OR INKING SUPPLY 02 STATUS 03 DISTANCE TO SITE (Ch•Cl •• appll<;•bl•J
I SURFACE WELL ENDANGERED AFFECTED MONITORED Upstream
COMMUNITY A.at B.0 A.□ B.□ C. II A. > 3 (mi} NON-COMMUNITY c.o D. J<I D.lll E.□ F.□ B. ]9 (mi)
I Ill.GROUNDWATER
01 GROUNDWATER USE IN VICINITY (Checll one/
[X., ONLY SOURCE FOR DRINKING 0 8, DRINKING 0 C. COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL, IRRIGATION 0 0. NOT USED, UNUSEABLE (OU... soun:•s •~J (Umlr.., orh•• •ourc•• •...ii.I>¥}
I COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL, IRRIGATION /Noou.., ... -,.,-··•~J
2169 .19 02 POPULATION SERVED BY GROUND WATER 03 DISTANCE TO NEAREST DAJNK/NO WATER WELL (ml) I O• OEPTI-i TO GROUNDWATER 05 DIRECTION OF GROUNDWATER FLOW 06 DEPTH TO AQUIFER 07 POTENTIAL YIElD 08 SOLE SOURCE AQUIFER OF CONCERN OFAOUIFER 3.85 (ft) unknown 3.85 (ft) unknown DYES }CJ NO •(gpd).
I 09 DESCRIPTION OF WELLS f/,,cbti,g UH,tQ•. dep/h, WIO loe.tlon telatlve to por,Ulatlon and yj~} for process water and toilets on·· On-site wells Wl and W2 (189' and 73 are used site. Drinking water wells in the area average approxlll'ately 150' deep and are generally cased down to 20-30 ft. with the rstainder open-hole. I 10 RECHARGE AREA 11 DISCHARGE AREA [ltYES COMMENTS DYES COMMENTS
I 0 NO On-site pond. ONO
IV.SURFACE WATER
01 SURFACE WATER USEfClt•c~on•J
0 A. RESERVOIR, RECREATION (x_B. IRRIGATION, ECONOMICALLY 0 C. COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL 0 0. NOT CURRENTLY USED DRINKING WATER SOURCE IMPORT ANT RESOURCES
02 AFFECTED/POTENTIALLY AFFECTED BODIES OF WATER I NAME: AFFECTED DISTANCE TO SITE
K~i:::, Pond i!f 0 (mi) I ~,.: ..... n ......... ~ D .19 (mi) 8Fa13t,;-ee c;:;_ .
D 1.94 (mi)
V. DEMOGRAPHIC AND PROPERTY INFORMATION
I 0 I TOT AL POPULA T10N WITHIN 02 DISTANCE TO NEAREST POPULATION app. 200 ft. ONE ( 1) Mllf OF SITE TWO (2)ffi~ OF SITE THREE l~/l'Jts' OF SITE .037 A. 63 . B. C. 'mi) NO. OF PERSONS ~O. OF PERSONS NO. OF PERSONS
I OJ NUMBER OF BUILDINGS WITHIN TWO 121 MILES OF SITE 04 DISTANCE TO NEAREST OFF-SITE BUILDING
514 . 114 app. 600 ft • (mi)
I
0Th°i~LA riN iTH~~r OF li~1crentiarrlpc~9'"'otrtg1~$hm·· 1-t)ttf'M~.,,~·:1 There are a few service-oriented businesses and industrial sites which manufacture and distribute building_ItB.terials. Population density is low. Wells have a generaly low yield and soils are unfavorable for the operation of septic systems. I
I PA FORM 2070-13 {7-81)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITE I. IDENTIFICATION oEPA SITE INSPECTION REPORT NCTATE\Il 50D'3"!5'o'383 PART 5 -WATER, DEMOGRAPHIC, AND ENVIRONMENTAL DATA
VI. ENVIRONMENT AL INFORMATION
0 1 PERMEABILITY OF UNSATURA TEO ZONE (CMC• =•I
DA. 10-e -10-e cm/sec Xi B. 10-4 -10-6cm/sec D c. 1 o-• -1 o-3 cmtsec 0 0.GREATEATHAN 10-lcm/sec
02 PERMEABILITY OF BEDROCK /Cl>ed o,,.,J
0 A. IMPERMEABLE 0, a. AELATIVEL Y IMPERMEABLE El C. RELATIVELY PERMEABLE 0 0. VERY PERMEABLE fl•SSUIM 10-6cn,1sec,) (10_, -,o-6crn1ucJ oo-2 -,o-• cml•.c:J fGru,.,1na11· ,o-2 cm1,...:1
OJ DEPTH TO BEDROCK 04 DEPTH OF CONT AMINA TEO SOIL ZONE OS SOil pH
20-30 7 UNK '"' 1ft)
06 NET PRECIPITATION . 07 ONE YEAR 24 HOUR RAINFALL 08SlOPE
SITE SLOPE I O!RECTION OF SITE SLOPE I TERRAIN AVERAGE SLOPE ,
(in) 3 (In) 0.4 ,. SE . ,o ,. 09 FLOOD POTENTIAL ,o
□ ~TE IS ON BARRIER ISLAND. COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA. RIVERINE FLOOOWAY SITE ISIN -YEAR FLOODPLAIN
11 DISTANCE TOWETLANDS/~<K••minMn<ml 12 DISTANCE TO CRmcAL. HABfTAT /ol~,w 11>«ln/
ESTUARINE OTHER > 1
(ml)
A. > 2 (mi) B. ~ 1 (mi) ENDANGERED SPECIES: NA
13 LANO USE IN VICINITY,
OJSTANCE TO:
RESIDENTIAL AREAS; NATIONAUSTATE PARKS, AGAfCULTURAL LANDS COMMERC!AUINDUSTRIAL FORESTS, OR WILDLIFE RESERVES PRIME AG LANO AG LANO app •. 600 ft.
A. .114 (ml) B. .19 (ml) C. NA (ml) o. .25 (ml)
14 DESCRIPTION OF SITE IN RElA!ff)N TO SURROUNDING TOPOGRAPHY
Relief at the site ranges from 385-365 ft. above rrean sea level (20) . A railroad spur :r:uns southwest across· the site. The area southeast of the spur, including the old Cellon treatment and lagoon area, drain to Koppers Pond. North and west of this spur, the site drains to a ditch which flows east under the railroad tracks toward Hwy. 54. Facility slope between the lagoon area.(lvl5) and the north shore of Koppers Pond (B15) = (368-350) 7 500 ft.= 0.4%. The te=ain average slope between .the north shore of Koppers Pond and Medlin Pond = (368-350)/1000 ft. = 1.8%.
VII. SOURCES OF INFORMATION (Cll• 1r,.cllic ,.,.,.,,,us. •-11 . Sl•t• 1 .. ,. SMnP'-aMl),SJI. ,<tp0,11/
References l,3,5,8,13,17,20-22,26-38,40,42,43,46,47.
I EPAFOAM2070•13{7•81)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
oEPA '
II. SAMPLES TAKEN
01 NUMBER Of SAMPLE TYPE SAMPLES TAKEN
GROUNDWATER off_-sitE 50
SURFACE WATER
WASTE
AIR
RUNOFF
SPILL
SOIL
VEGETATION
.OTHER
Ill. FIELD MEASUREMENTS TAKEN
POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITE I. IDENTIFICATION
SITE INSPECTION REPORT 01 STATE,02 SITE NUMBER
PART 6 -SAMPLE AND FIELD INFORMATION »~ n nn,-,nrno,
02 SAMPLES SENT TO 03 ESTIMATED DATE
RESULTS AVAll.ABLE
State Lab. of Public Health, NC OHR available
.
I
I
I
01 TYPE 02 COMMENTS
I IV. PHOTOGRAPHS AND MAPS
01 TYPE ~GROUND O AERIAL I 02 IN CUSTODY OF I\H. • 1 "T.,.. unit .r 1..1e
(Nam• ol o,garnz-,1on or~ 03 ,_.AP$ 04 LOCATION OF MAPS
XI YES NC CERCIA Unit Files, Raleigh, NC I
· 0 NO
I V. OTHER FIELD DAT A COLLECTED ff'ro,,l,;a,..rra1,,,_.,..c,_,,10t1J
12-17-87 ·6 wells sampled 6 P&T + IPE (2 wells)
6 Total inorganic -
I 6 Extractables -
6 PCP (to 1 ppb) -
03-20-87 13 wells sampled 13 P&T + IPE (4 wells)
13 PCP (to 1 ppb) + PCP (7 wells) I
VI. SOURCES OF INFORMATION (Clle spec,l,crer11,•nces, •-Q .. state hies. umpl••n&/ysis. irworts)
laboratory Results: Off-site groundwater samples collected 12-17-M,, UJ-'.tU-87. I NC State Laboratory of Public Health, Raleigh, NC. Appendix B, Site Investigation
Report: Koppers Co. Inc. May 1987. Pat DeRosa, NC CERCLA Unit, Raleigh, NC.
I EPA FORM 2070• 13 (7•81 J
I
I
I
I POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITE I. IDENTIFICATION
oEPA SITE INSPECTION REPORT 01 STATE 102 SITE NUMBER NC D 003200383 PART 7 • OWNER INFORMATION
.
II. CURRENT OWNER($) PARENT COMPANY 11titi,i,1,cet,1e1
I kj:1NAME 02 D+ B NUMBER 06 NAME 090+BNUMBER
Koppers Co. Inc. Koppers Co. Inc.
I
03 STREET ADOAESS(P.0. 8o•, RFD,. lie./ 104SICCOOE 10 STREET AODAESS/P.O. Sox, RFDI. •tc.J r1 ~CODE P.O. Box A 436 Seventh Ave.
losc1TY r6STATE 07 ZIP CODE 12CITY rJSTATE 1◄ ZIPCOOE
•Mo=isville NC 27560 Pittsburgh PA 15219
I
I
01NAME 02 O+BNUMBER 08 NAME 09 o+e NUMBER
Unit Structures, Inc. Unit Structures, Inc.
03 smeer AOOAESS(P.O. Bo•. RFD,, ,tc.J r•s1ccooe 10 STREET ADORESStP.O. 8o•. RFD•. •te.J 111SICCODE Hwy. 54 West P.O. Box 23215
05 CITY 1°6 STATE 07 ZIP CODE 12CtTY 11:;;ATE 14ZIPCOOE . 1'b=isville NC 27560 Louisville 40223
01NAME 02 D+B NUMBER 06NAME 0~ o+e NUMBER
I 03 smeer ADDRESS{P.O. Bo•. RFD•. •IC./ 104SICCOOE 10 STREET ADDRESS /P.O. Box: RFD I, •re./ 111SICCODE
I oscnv 106 STATE 07 ZIP CODE 12 CITY 113STA~E 14ZIPCOOE
OtNAME 02 O+B NUMBER 08 NAME 09D+BNUMBER
I 03 STREET ADDRESS /f'.O. Bo•. RfD 11. •tc./ 104SICCO~E 10 STREET ADDRESS /f'.0. &,. RFD 11. •rc.J r1SICCOOE
I
05CtTY . 1°6 STAT 07 ZIP CODE 12 CITY r3STATE 14ZIPCOOE
Ill. PREVIOUS OWNER($) rt1srmos1,.c--,11nri. IV. REALTY OWNER($) /lf~;#s1mos1r.c•nf/hlJ
01NAME 02 O+ B NUMBER 01NAME 02 O+BNUMBER
I Unit Structures -Inc.
03 STREET AODRESS/P.O. &•. RfD 11. •tc.J I 04 s'.c co_oe 03 STREET AOORESS/P.O. Bo•. llfOt1. •le./ · 1 !?4 SIC CODE
P.O. Box 23215
I
05 CITY
r6;;TE 07 ZIPCOOE 05 CITY .106STATE 07 ZIP CODE
T-n-:-:..!17,-.. an??,
OINAME 02 O+B NUMBER OINAME 02 D+ B NUMBER
,....,,,.,..... ·1 r~
I
I
03 STREET ADORESSrP.0. Bo•. RfO "· •re./ 10◄ SICCOOE 03 STREET AOOAESS/P.0. Bo•. RFOt1. elc.J 10◄ SICCOOE
05CITY 106STA~ 07 ZJPCOOE 05CITV 106STATE 07 ZIPCOOE
01NAME 020+BNUMBER 01 NAME 02 o+e NUMBER
I
03 STREET AOORESS(P.O. Bo,. RF41. etc./ IO~SICCOOE 03 STREET AOORESS/P.O. Bo,. IIFDt1. ere./ I O◄SICCOOE
05CITY . 106STATE 07 ZIP CODE 05 CITY 1°6STATE 07ZIPCODE
I V • SOURCES ·oF INFORMATION /Ch spec/llC,.letences. e,fJ, Ualel/191, Sarni>le.,,a,ysl:5. '•PO•U/
References 40,2
I
EPAF0RM2070 13(7,81)
I
I
I
I
POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITE I. IDENTIFICATION .&EPA SITE INSPECTION REPORT 01 STATE,02 SITE NUMBER NC D00.3200383 PART 8-OPERATOR INFORMATION
II. CURRENT OPERA TOR {PrutnCH lldifr•renl /,o,ng..,,,e,J OPERATOR'S PARENT COMPANY /II •ppllc•ble}
I
I
01NAME l02D+BNUMBER 10NAME 111 O+BNUMBER
TTni t Structures
OJ STREET AOORESS (P.O. Boll, RFDII, •re.) I 04 SICCODE 12 STREET ADDRESS (P.O. Bo•. RFDI. etc.J 13SICCOOE
Hwv. 54 West
OSCITY i:;;TATEI07 ZIP CODE 14CITY 115 STATEl16 ZIP CODE ~rrisv:i,lle 27560
08YEAASOF0PERATION l09NAMEOFOWNEA .
I 1986-Unit Structures/Koppers
Ill. PREVIOUS OPERATOR($) (U.tmoa:l r-.,;.,.,l n,-,; provlt:le only lldlfletffll lrom owner} PREVIOUS OPERATORS' PARENT COMPANIES 111app1c._,., 01 NAME I 02 O~B NUMBER 10NAME r 1 D+B NUMBER I Kon=rs Co. Inc.
03 STREET ADDRESS (P.O. Bo11, RFD,. •IC.} 1°4SICCOOE 12 STREET ADORESS (P.O. Bo.1', RFOII. etr;.J tJ·SICCOOE 436 Seventh Ave.
05CfTY I"" STATEl°7 ZIPCOOE 14 CITY r5STATE
1
16ZIPCOOE Pittsburgh PA 15219
I
06 '(EARS OF OPE~TION I 09 ~AME OF OWNER DURING THIS PERIOD
1962-1986 Konne>rs Co. Inc.
01 NAME 1°2 O+B NUMBER TO NAME It 1 ~+BNUMBEA Unit Structures, Inc.
I 03 STREET AOORESStP.O. Bo•. RFDI. •lr:.J 1°4SICCODE 12 STREET ADDRESS (P.O.~. RFDI. •tr::.) 13 SIC CODE Hwy. 54 West
05 CITY (i°6STATEI07 ZIP CODE 14CfTY r5 STATE( 16 ZJPCODE
I
~rrisville NC 27560
06 YEARS OF OPERATION I 09 NAMEOFOWNERDURINGTHISPERIOO
1959-1962 . Unit Structures
OtNAME Io~ o+ e NUMBER 10 NAME -·111 O+BNUMBER I Caxy Lumber Co.
03 STREET AOORESS/P.O. Bo.-. RFDI • .,,,_, 104 SIC CODE 12 STREET ADDRESS fP.O. 8o•. RFDI. •It:.} t3 SIC CODE I .,. CITY r6STATE
1
07 ZIP CODE 1.-CITY .l15~TATEI 16ltPCODE
08 YEAASOFOPE~Tl~ I 09 NAME OF OWNER DURING THIS PERIOD . 1· ?-1959 .
1 IV. SOURCES OF INFORMATION 1c1t• SPKitlc rete,.ncu ·•-11 .. 11•t• t#••· ~ a,wy,4_ ,eeio,uJ
11 References 40,2
t
'
I
lAFORM 2070·'3{7•811
I
I
I POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITE I. IDENTIFICATION ~EPA SITE INSPECTION REPORT 01 STATE~~/SITENUMBEA · NC 003200383 PART 9 • GENERATOR/TRANSPORTER INFORMATION
II. ON-SITE GENERA TOR
I 01 NAME 02 (?+B NUMBER
I
03 STREET ADDRESS fP.O. Bo•. RFD I, etc./ I 04SICCODE
OSCITY r STATE 07 ZIP CODE
I Ill. OFF-SITE GENERA TOR(S)
01 NAME 02 O+B NUMBER 01NAME . 02 D+B NUMBER
I 03 STREET AOORESS (P.O. Sa•, RFD I, •tc./ . I 04 SIC CODE 03 STREET ADDRESS {P.O. Ba•. RFDI, .,c.J I 04 SICCODE
.
I
05CITV )06STATE 07 ZJPCOOE 05CITY l06STATE 07 ZlPCODE
01NAME 02 O+B NUMBER 01 NAME 02 D+B NUMBER
I
I
03 STREET ADDRESS (P.O. Ba•. RFOI, •re.J I 04 SIC CODE 03 STREET ADDRESS (P.O. Ba•. f:IFD11, •re./ 104SICCOOE
OSCITY r STATE 07 ZIP CODE 05CITY rSTATE 07ZIPCODE
IV. TRANSPORTER(S)
OlNAME 02 O+ B NUMBER 01NAME 02 O+ B NUMBER
I 03 STREET ADDRESS /P.O. Bo•. RFDI, •tc.J Io_" sic CODE 0~ STREET AOORESS (P.O. Ba•. RFOI, 11c.J I 04 .""' CODE
I
05 CITY ,06.STATE 07 ZIP CODE 05CITY (°6 STATE 07 ZIP CODE
QI NAME 02 D+B NUMBER 01 NAME 02 D+B NUMBER
I 03 STREET ADDRESS /P.O. Bo•. RFD,, elc.J 104 S!CCOOE 03 STREET ADDRESS /P.O. Bo•. RFD•. et,;.J r· s1ccoo:
.
I
05CITY 106STATE 07ZIPCOOE 05 CITY 106STATE 07 ZIPCOOE
V. SOURCES OF INFORMATION fC"• wKJ11c ,.,..-.rn:: ... • 11 ..• ,.1.,,. •. --,,1eena,y~. repo,1sJ
I
I
I
I
EPAFORM2070 13!7 81)
I
•·
I
I
POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITE I. IDENTIFICATION oEPA SITE INSPECTION REPORT 01 STATE' 02 SITE NUMBER
"" n nn,?nn,o-:i PART 10-PAST RESPONSE ACTIVITIES
II. PAST RESPONSE ACTIVITIES
01 0 A. WATER SUPPLY CLOSED 02 DATE 03AGENCY I 04 DESCRIPTION
01 0 8. TEMPORARY WATER SUPPLY PROVIDED 020ATE 03AGENCY
I 04 DESCRIPTION
..,,·
01 0 C. PERMANENT WATER SUPPLY PROVIDED 02 DATE 03AGENCY 04 DESCRIPTION
I 01 0 0. SPILLED MATERlAL REMOVED 020ATE 03AGENCY 04 DESCRIPTION
I 01 IS. E. CONTAMINATED SOIL REMOVED 02 DATE 03AGENCY 04 DESCRIPTION
I Anril and May 1980; November 1980; July 1986 .
01.0 F. WASTE REPACKAGED 020ATE 03AGENCY 04 DESCRIPTION
I 01 D G. WASTE DISPOSED ELSEWHERE 020ATE 03AGENCY 04 DESCRIPTION
01 0 H. ON SITE BURIAL 02 DATE 03AGENCY I 04 DESCRIPTION
01 0 I. IN SITU CHEMICAL TREATMENT 02 DATE 03AGE~Y
I 04 DESCRIPTION
01 0 J. IN SITU BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT 020ATE 03AGENCY 04 DESCRIPTION
I 01 0 K. IN SITU PHYSICAL TREATMENT 02 DATE 03AGENCY 04 DESCRIPTION
I 01 0 L ENCAPSULATION . 02 DATE 03AGENCY 04 DESCRIPTION
..
.
I 01 0 M. EMERGENCY WAtiTE IBEATMENT 020ATE 03AGENCY 04 DESCRIPTION .
. .
I 01 0 N. CUTOFF WALLS 02 DATE 03AGENCY 04 DESCRIPTION
01 0 0. EMERGENCY DIKING/SURFACE WATER DIVERSION 02 DATE OJ AGENCY l . 04 DESCRIPTION
01 0 P. CUTOFF TRENCHES/SUMP 02 DATE OJ AGENCY 04 DESCRIPTION I ' I
01 0 0. SUBSURFACE CUTOFF WALL 02 DATE 03AGENCY 04 DESCRIPTION
lAFORM 2070-'317·8')
I
I
I POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITE I. IDENTIFICATION oEPA SITE INSPECTION REPORT 01 STA.TE,02 SITE NUMBER
PART 10-PAST RESPONSE ACTIVITIES NC D 003200383
I II PAST RESPONSE ACTIVITIES ,conr1n.-11
01 0 A. BARRIER WALi.s CONSTRUCTED 02 DATE 03 AGENCY
04 DESCRIPTION ·
I 01 0 S. CAPPING/COVERING 02 DATE 03AGENCY
04 DESCRIPTION
I 01 0 T. BULK TANKAGE REPAIRED 02 DATE 03AGENCY
04 DESCRIPTION
I
01 0 U.GROUTCURTAINCONSTRUCTED 02 DATE 03AGENCY 04 DESCRIPTION
-I
01 0 V. BOTTOM SEALED 02 OATE OJAqENCY
04 DESCRIPTION
01 0 W. GAS CONTROL 02 DATE 03AGENCY
04 OESCR1PTION
I 01 0 X. FIRE CONTROL 02 DATE 03AGENCY
04 DESCRIPTION
I 01 0 Y. LEACHATE TREATMENT 02 DATE 03AGENCY 04 DESCRIPTION
I 01 0 Z. AREA EVACUATED 02 DATE 03AGENCY 04 OESCA1PTION
I 01 0 1. ACCESS TO SITE RESTRICTED 02 DATE 03 AGENCY
04 DESCRIPTil'.;)N
I
01 0 2. POPULATION AELOCATE,O 02 DATE 03AGENCY
04 DESCRIPTION .
01 0 3. OTHER REMEDIAL ACTIVITIES 02 DATE 03AGENCY 04 DESCRIPTION
I
I
I
I Ill. SOURCES .OF INF OR MA TION /Clre SPK1f!c references.• Q , S/ele f~es. $-,Pie enaiys>s, 1el>O<f•I
References 2,5
I
EPA FORM 2070 13(7 81)
I
I
I
I
I
I
--• -1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITE oEPA SITE INSPECTION REPORT
PART 11 • ENFORCEMENTINFORMATION
II. ENFORCEMENT INFORMATION
01 PAST REGULATORY/ENFORCEMENT ACTION O YES }<l NO
02 DESCRIPTION OF FEDERAL, STATE, LOCAL REGULATORY/ENFORCEMENT ACTION
.
,.
Ill. SOURCES OF INFORMATION /Cir• Sp&<;lf>C r•l•tM>C.H. •.1).. .11~1• fil_•s. s_,,,,. .,,.,,s,,, ••t>OrU}
EPA FORM 2070 13 {7 81)
I
I. IDENTIFICATION
01 STATE I 02 SITE NUMBER NC D 003200383