NCD981475932_19890301_FCX Inc. (Washington Plant)_SERB C_Washington Regional Office correspondence 1986 - 1989-OCR

'·-_i
;. ',J , .,,.. °) \
I
I
I
I
I
I
SITE INVESTIGA'.rICN REPORT
FCX-Washington
NC D981475932
Washington, NC 27889
• "'1,qslf/t .
F[:iJ
I
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
FCX -Washington is located at the intersection of Grimes Road I (SR 1402) and Whispering Pine Road (SR 1404) in Washington, Beaufort county, North Carolina 27889. The latitude is 35° 32' 36" and the longitude is 077° 04' 27". · The site,\ approximately eight acres in size, lies just to the west-northwest of Washington city limits. The Tar River is less than one mile to the south. About 113~0 people live within three miles of the site, 2850 of whom obtain their water supply from private or community wells. In the early 1970s, a trench approximAtely 12 feet by 250 feet by 10 to 12 feet deep was dug and filled with waste pesticides, herbicides, and other agricultural chemicals. Samples of the surface soil from the trench area showed concentrations of variou~ hazardous constituents, including Chlordane, Aldrin, DDT, DDE, Dieldrin, carbondisulfide, hexachlorobenzene, naphthalene, phenanthrene, acenaphthylene, fluorene, dibenzofuran, 2-methylnaphthalene, and mercury. These chemicals may move into the groundwater of the Post-Miocene surficial aquifer which, ~ogether with the Miocene Yorktown aquifer, locally recharges the underlying tastle Hayne aquifer. The Castle Hayne·aquifer, which top surface is about 30 feet below land surface at the site, is the • I major water supply aquifer for wells in the vicinity .
. The site, owned by, FCX, Inc., 609 st. Marys Street, Raleigh, NC 27602 from 1945 until 1986, was1 used for repackaging and sales of herbicides, pesticides, and other farm chemicals. In the summer of 1986,-the facility was ' sold to Fred Webb, Inc., f.O. Box 158, Greenville, NC 27834. The warehouse on-site is to be used for:grain storage. There have been no known remedial actions to date; however,iFCX, Inc. has employed Rose and Purcell, Inc. and GSX to study on-site contamination and to recommend clean-up procedures for the burial area and the warehouse.
BACKGROUND
ocation
The FCX -Washington site is located in the west quadrant of the
ntersection of Grimes Road and Whispering Pine Road (SR 1404) in Washington,
' ,eaufort County, North Carolina 27889. The latitude is 35° 32' 36" and the
' .ongitude is 077° 04' 27', (Reference 12).
;i te Layout
The FCX Distribution Center property is approximately eight acres in
size and is bordered on the northeast by a railroad, on the southwest by a
;etland leading to the Tar River, on the northwest and southeast by
,gricultural land. Land ~nd buildings belonging to National Spinning Company,
, large textile manufacturer, lie to the south and southeast. On the FCX site
is a large warehouse with,an adjoining tank farm (Reference 20 & 21). The
site of the chemical buri~l lies about 200 feet southwest of the warehouse. A
private well belonging to'Cleon Latham is about. 585 feet east of the trench
site and three wells owned by National Spinning are north, east, and west of
the site approximately 450 to 1100 feet away from the burial area. surface
drainage from the site islsouthwest toward the wetland and southeast toward a
drainage ditch (Referencei17). Primary population areas in the vicinity of
the site are northwest and southwest along Grimes Road (Reference·12).
ownership and Site Use History
I
The site was owned by FCX, Inc., 609 St. Marys Street, Raleigh, NC
27602 from 1945 until 1986. The facility was used for the repackaging and
sale of herbicides, pesticides, and tobacco treating chemicals. Wastes from
the operations were handl~d from late 1945 until 1985. About 1970, some
wastes were buried in a trench on-site. In the summer of 1986, the facility
was sold to Fred Webb, Inc., P.O. Box 158, Greenville, NC 27834. Apparently,
the warehouse is to be used as a grain storage building.
Permit and Regulatory History
' There are no environmental permits known to have been issued nor has
' there been any environmental regulation of the site.
I
Remedial Actions to Date '
FCX Inc. has employed the engineering firm of Rose and Purcell, Inc. to
help study on-site contamination. Also, FCX Inc. has employed,GSX to clear
the chemical warehouse and to recommend remedial action concerning the buried
wastes.
-2-
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Summary Trip Report
The FCX prbperty in Washington, which includes the area of the reported pesticide burial in a trench, was -in the process of being sold to Fred Webb, Inc., just prior to the site investigation. Letters confirming approval to I conduct the site investigation were received from William H. McCullough, legal counsel for FCX, on behalf of both FCX and Fred Webb. Additional consent letters for inspecting, sampling, and photographing the site were signed by Fred Webb, Presid,nt .of Fred Webb, Inc., and by J. Stewart Hodges, Vice President of FCX. This was to insure full approval for the site investigation I during the ownership transition.
On 26
following at
August 1986
the site:
Harry Holladay and Grover:Nicholson met with the
'
c.A. Purcell, Jr.
J. Stewart Hodges
Cleon Latham
Steve Hail
Steve Jackson
-Rose and Purcell, Inc.
Consultant for FCX
-Vice President FCX
-Owner of associated residential property
-us EPA. surveillance and Analysis Division -Fred Webb, Inc. representative
. The purpose of the investigation and the pre_liminary sampling plan were . I explained to all present. Holladay and Nicholson conducted a brief walk-over of the site to re-appraise the sampling plan. It was found ·that GSX had used a back-hoe to explore segments of the burial trench and an additional previously unidentified burial area. The sampling lplan was modified utilizing the new findings to include sampling of the contamfnated soils raised by the back-l1oe from the burial spots, as well as sampling from the warehouse transfer areas, Mr., Latham's well, the adjacent drainage ditch, and the background soil ani groundwater areas. I
Background s'oil samples and drainage ditch ~amples were taken in the area of Mr. Latham's home adjacent to the FCX property. Holladay and Nicholson donried prptective equipment and entered ihe trench area where some substances suspecte~ to be pesticides and other agricultural waste were exposed. A HNu met~r was used to scan the site foi volatile organics. None were detected at .cohcentrations above background l~vels. The odor on site was like that at a garden supply store. A light wind swept the area to minimize I the exposure.
deemed safe as
16:40 hours on
Thus, tyvek suits and boots with no fespiratory protection was specified by the safety guide. Sam~ling was done from 11:59 to 26 August 1986. Seven soils samples', four groundwater samples, and one sediment sample were taken. Background soil and ground water sample were included in this number. three groundwater sa~ples were taken from the deep wells adjacent '.to the FCX site which are operated by National Spinning. All sampling was dorle following ·a standard sampling protocol and a chain of custody for each sam'ple was established on-site. Sketches and photograpl1s were made before and1 during the sampling activities·.
-3-
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
:opography
Reference 12, the USGS 7.5' Topographic maps, form the basis for this
section, The Site Sketci (Reference 21) shows a larger scale view of the
layout of the site. The Map Showing surface Water Flow Path (Reference 17)
shows the slope of the site as less than 3% and the slope of the intervening
terrain between the trench area and a small area of Kennedy Creek to be less
than H,
surface waters
i
The closest downsiope water body is Kennedy creek which flows
southeastward into the Tar River. At the US 17/264 bridge across the river,
' the Tar River becomes the Pamlico River. The river flows southeastward into
the Pamlico Sound. Kennedy creek and the Tar River are classified as Class c
' waters which best usage are "fish and wildlife propagation, secondary
recreation, agriculture and other uses requiring waters of lower quality".
The Pamlico. River is denoted as Tidal Salt water and classified as Class SC
waters which best_ usage ~re "fish and wildlife propagation, secondary
recreation, and other uses requiring waters of lower quality" (Reference 22).
' Geolocy, Soils, and Groundwater
The site lies in the NC Coastal Plain and is underlain by sedimentary
formations consisting of sand, silt, clay, shells, limestone, and combinations
of these lithologies. These sediments may be divided into three main
hydrogeologic units, or aquifers, based primarily on hydraulic conductivity
and other hydrogeologic characteristics, The aquifers, from the surface
down~ard, are: the Post-Miocene surficial aquifer or water-table aquifer
comprised of sand, silt,, shells, and some clay; the Miocene age Yorktown
aquifer composed of inte~bedded sands and clays with some shells, and the
Eocene age castle Hayne aquifer composed mainly of shell li~estone
(Reference 1). I
In the area with;n three miles of the site, there are no extensive
confining units separating the three aquifers. Instead, the relative
hydraulic conductivitiei of the three units are the controlling'factors in
groundwater movement. The hydraulic conductivity of the castle Hayne aquifer,
roughly 10-1 cm/sec, is 16 to 10 times greater than those of the Post-Miocene
surficial and Miocene Yorktown aquifers, which are about 1.7 x 10-2 cm/sec.
Therefore, the castle Hayne aquifer operates under semi-confined conditions
and is locally recharged from the two overlying aquifers (References 1,4,8).
-4-
The aquifer ot concern (the principal aquifer used for water supply) in
' the area of the site 1is the castle Hayne aquifer which top lies about 30 feet
below land surface (Reference 4). The potentiometric surface for the castle
Hayne is typically 5 ito 10 feet below land surface, which is only slightly
lower than the surfi9ial aquifer's water table of 5 feet below land surface
(References 3 and 4). water and contaminants move from the land surface
downward, slowly thrdugh the Post-Miocene surficial aquifer and the Miocene
' Yorktown aquifer into the castle Hayne aquifer.
Climate and Meteoroldgy
Average Ja~uary temperature
Average July temperature
Prevailing !wind Velocity
' Emissions of pollutants
44 -46°F
78 -80°F
9 mph SW
40 tons/square mile
includ~s particulate, sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide,
hydrocarbons, and nitrogen dioxide.
Land Use
Mean annual precipitation
' Mean annual evaporation
Net annual precipitation
One year 24-hour rainfall
I (Reference,?)
53.5"
41. 5"
12"
3.48"
The site lieslin a commercial-residential corridor about 1800 feet west
of Washington, a city of about 8500 people. Agricultural fields border the
site on the northwes~ and southeast and,a wetland, approximately 180 acres in
size, lies between the site and the Tar River. Washington Park, a town of
about 500 people lies 3 miles southeast of the site. The Tar and Pamlico
Rivers, bordered by extensive wetlands, lie south and southeast. Within three
miles.of the site to' the west, north, and northwest are rural areas with most
land in agricultural use. Tranters creek flows from the northwest and enters
the Tar River about 1/2 mile upstream of the site. Both surface water intakes
for the city of Washington are on Tranters Creek (References 12 and 13).
-5-
Population Distribution and Water Supply
These data are based on a house count from the USGS topographic map, on
' information about public and private water systems, and on an estimation of
the percent of the city of Washington within each radius of the site. Within
one mile of the .site there are 994 residents, 850 using surface water from the
Washington distributicin system and 144 using private wells. Three industrial
wells, belonging to National Spinning Company, and one-surface water intake
for the city of Washington are within one mile also. Between one and two
miles of the site are :about 6016 residents, 5100 of whom use city water, while
the rest use private wells. Between two and three miles of the site are 4340
residents, 2550 of whom use groundwater while the rest use private wells.
Three private groundwater supplies, Flanders Filters, Shad Bend Subdivision,
and Trails End Mobile.Home Park, are between two and three miles from the site
also. The populationlserved by these supplies is included in the 4340
residents. In total, within three miles of the site are 11350 residents, 8500
of whom are supplied by the city of Washington water system and 2850 of whom
' use groundwater.
WATER SUPPLY AND POPULATION DISTRIBUTION
No. houses served by
private wells (from
house count)
No, people served i ·
by private wells ,
(houses x 3.8 persons/home)
No, people served
by Washington
water supply (est.)
Other water supplies
and no. people
served by each
Total NO, of
Residents
I
critical Environments
I
Within 1
mile of site
Between 1 and
2 miles of site
38
144
850
Washington surface
water intake
Nat'l Spinning co.
wells-Industrial
water supply wells
994
241
916
5100
6016
Between 2 and
3 miles of site
402 and 69
south of river
1528
262
2550
Flanders Filters
Shad Bend S/D
Tr ails End MHP
(included in house
·· count above)
4340
There are no federally designated critical environments within five
miles of the site. However, a freshwater wetland approximately 275 acres in
size lies adjacent td the Tar River and Kennedy Creek. It begins about 300
feet from the trench area (Reference 12 and 19).
-6-
Totals
750
2850
8500
11350
WAST£ TYPES AND QUANTITIES
In a telephone conversation (Reference 5) with Harry Holladay of the
NC Solid and Hazardous waste Management Branch CERCLA unit, FCX Vice President
J. Stewart Hodges explained that, in about 1970, a burial of pesticides,
herbicides, and tobacco sucker control agent (MH30) occurred on the site. A
I trench about 12 fee~ by 250 feet was dug 10 to 12 feet deep and intercepted
the water table. Two to three feet of soil were put back into the trench and,
then paper and plascic bags and jugs of wastes were put into the trench.
aased on observations during the site inspection it appears that the trench
was then covered with about two feet of soil. The quantity of wastes is ·not
known but can be estimated as 555 cubic yards based on trench dimensions of 12
feet by 250 feet by'7 feet deep.
I
waste type~ identified by sampling include Chlordane, Aldrin, DDT,
DDE, Dieldrin, carbondisulfide, hexachlorobenzene, naphthalene, phenanthrene,
acenaphthylene, fluorene, dibenzofuran, and 2-methylnaphthalene.
-7-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Sample
Location
l
2
3
5
6
·LABORATORY DATA SUMMARY
Sample
Type
Sample Numbers
Inorg. Field/Lab
Org. Field/Lab
Background boil
0-2" deep
I
Ditch sedim8nt
near Latham
house
composite I . 1 SOl
Southeast trench
area
i I
Composite soil
Southeast trench
I area ' I
' I
composite sbil
west end of trench
I
Composite soil
west end of! trench
2991/17170
3201/602406
2992/17171
3202/602407
2993/17172
3203/602408
2994/17173
3204/602409
2995/17174
3205/602410
2996/17175
3206/602411
-8-
Date
Sampled
26 Aug. 86
26 Aug. 86
26 Aug. 86
26 Aug. 86
26 Aug. 86
26 Aug. 86
Analyses Results
code: Pest. = Pesticides
IT Inorganic Totals,
IE Inorganic Extractable
OP Organic Purgeable,
OE Organic Acid: Base/Neutral
Extractable
Pest: 0.035 ppm Aldrin
No IT, IE, OP, or OE.
Pest: 1.7 ppm Chlordane,
0.15 ppm Aldrin, 0.14 ppm DDT
0.46 ppm DDD. No IT, IE,
OP'' or OE.
Pest: 35.4 ppm Chlordane,
46.3 ppm Aldrin,
OP: 6.5 ug/kg carbondisulfide
( tentative, est. ID) .
. No IT, IE, OE.
Pest: 33.4 ppm Aldrin,
0.70 ppm Chlordane,
0.62 ppm DDT, 0.26 ppm DDD,
0.22 ppm DDE & Dieldrin.
OP: 6270 ug/kg carbondisulfide
( tentative; est. ID).
No IT, IT, OE.
Pest: 159.5 ppm DDT,
37.7 ppm DDE & Dieldrin,
1585 ppm Aldrin.
28 mg/kg Hg which is 280
times background.
OE: 9333 ug/kg
hexachlorobenzene.
No IE, OP.
Pest: 12.0 ppm DDT, 27.2 ppm
Aldrin, 50.9 ppm Chlordane.
OE: 2833 ug/kg naphthalene,
7333 ug/kg phenanthrene,
7500 0g/kg acenaphthylene,
4500 ug/kg fluorene,
1167 ug/kg dibenzofuran (est.)
1333 ug/kg 2-methylnaphthalene
(est.). No IT or IE.
I
LABORATORY DATA SUMMARY (continued)
sample
Location
7
8
Sample
Type
composite soil
Northeast /
loading dock
' composite soil
Northwest
loading dock
Sample Numbers
Inorg. Field/Lab
Org. Field/Lab
2997/17176
3207/602412
299 8/17177
3208/602413
Date
Sameled
26 Aug. 86
26 Aug. 86
9 .Groundwater
Latham well
2999/17244 26 Aug. 86
10
11
12
Groundwater 1
National Spinning
co. Well *7
Groundwater
. ' . National Spinning
co. Well #8 I
Groundwater
Naiional Sp~nning
Co. Well #9
13 Groundwater I
Background well
J.P. Rehm house
I
I
3209/602414/602415
3001/17243 26 Aug. 86
3211/602416
3216/602417
3507/603144 20 Nov. 86
3508/603144
3964/17246 26 Aug. 86
3217/602418
3218/602419
3503/603142 20 Nov. '86
3504/603142
3750/17245 26 Aug. 86
3219/602420
3220/602421
3505/603143 20 Nov. 86
3506/603143
3509/603145 20 Nov. 86
3510/603146
-9-
Analyses Results
Code: Pest. = Pesticides
IT= Inorganic Totals,
IE Inorganic Extractable
OP= Organic Purgeable,
OE= Organic Acid: Base/Neutral
Extractable
Pest: 0.61 ppm DDE & Dieldrin,
1.8 ppm DDT, 0.28 ppm Malathion.
No IT, IE, OP, OE.
Pest: 0.25 ppm Malathion,
0.23 ppm DDT, 0.15 ppm DDD,
0.15 ppm DDE and Dieldrin.
No IT, IE, OP, OE.
No IT, OP, or OE.
No IT, OP, or OE.
Pest: None.
No IT, OP, or OE.
Pest: None.
No IT, OP, or OE.
Pest: None.
. No pest, OP, or OE .
' ·-:~·'.>:~:f: .
·<.-.',\. ;: .. ::~_{zf(\:.· :·-":..
NCD 981 475 932
i I
FCX Warehouse
·,1 ··;:i.;;:._•;,(~~, •.••. ·,,.,,-r-:~~ .. ; . .,.t·•··•,; .. .,, tf ~ft;•:~llt, ;;;-;:_.·. '.;; '-~-r!;f. ?t{(l;_-.;J .-,,,Jf 1i111~f
t: ,-.
··.,:)~
TOXICOLOGICAL/CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS
Pathway Matrix values
Substance Groundwater surface Water
Aldrin
Chlordane
DDD !
DDE
DDT
Dieldrin
Malathion
'
carbondisulfide
' Mercury
Hexachlorpbenzene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene . I Acenaphthylene
Fluorene
Dibenzofu:ran
2-methylnaphthalene
18
18
18 (?)
18
18
18
?
18 (?)
18
15
9
15
9
18 (?)
6 (?)
18
18
18 (?)
18
18
18
?
18 (?)
18
15
9
15
9
18 (?)
6 ( ? )
Air
9
9
9 (?)
9
9
9
?
9 (?)
9
6
6
9
3
9 (?)
6 (?)
From: sax, N.I .. Dangerous Properties of Industrial Materials, ' 6tp Edition, Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, New York, 1984.
'
-10-
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
January 11, 1989
MEMORANDUM
TO: Perry Nelson, Chief
Groundwater Section
I
I FROM: Willie Hardison, Hydrogeologist~
Washington Regional Office
I SUBJECT: Hazardous Waste Clean-up Site
FCX Facility -Grimes Road
Washington, North Carolina
Beaufort County
I On January 3, 1989, Hazardous Waste Branch began clean-up operations at the old
FCX warehouse facility located on Grimes Road west of Washington. The clean-up
involves a pit excavated behind the FCX warehouse, of which pesticides were
' disposed of over a period of years. This site was placed on the Superfund
National Priority List in June 1988.
!
If I recall correctly, around December 1986, representatives from the EPA and
the Hazardous Waste Branch visited the site to conduct an assessment. I believe
' soil and water;samples were collected at that time.
According to the information, the pit is approximately
wide; and maybe as much as eight feet deep in places.
the water table below land surface at the site is
nevertheless, the potential for groundwater impacts is
concern.
I
250 feet long; 30 feet
Al though, the depth of
not precisely known;
still an environmental
With this letter that I am requesting your assistance in obtaining all the
information from the Hazardous Waste Management Branch concerning the FCX site.
As I understand the Memorandum of Agreement between the two agencies,
information pertaining to a.specific site may be obtained upon written request.
I Your assistance in this matter will be appreciated. In the meantime, should you
have any questions, please feel free to call me. i
WAH:ekw
s .H I T
\
Jaybeacon
U.NYAN
.,
u
lli .al
CAMPBEL
,..--
0
u
35°30'
....
f .s
l
j
J
J
ISEP 15 1989
D. E. M.
SITE INSPECTION REPORT
FCX -Washington
NC D9814759)2
Grimes Road
Washington, Beaufort County, NC 27889
20 May 1987
By
Grover C. Nicholson, Geologist
Solid and Hazardous waste Management Branch
CERCLA Unit
J
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
' fCX -Was~ington is located at the intersectioo al Grimes Road (SF 1402) and Whispering Pine Road (SR.1404) in Washington, Beaufort County, Nocth Carolina 27889. The latitude is 35° 32' 36" and the longitude is 077° 04' 27". T'i1e site, approximately eight acres in size, lies just to the west-northwest of Washington city limits. The Tar River is less than one mile to the south. About 113S0 people live within three miles of the site, 2850 ~f whom obtain thei~ water supply from private or community wells. In the early 1970s, a trench Jpproximately 12 feet by 250 feet by 10 to 12 feet deep was dug and filled with waste pesticides, herbicides, and other agricultural chemicals. samp~es of the surface soil from the trench area showed concentrations of various hazardous constituents, including Chlordane, Aldrin, DDT, ODE, Dieldrin, carbondisulfide, hexachlorobenzene, naphthalene, phenanthrene, acenaphthylene, fluorene, dibenzofuran, 2-methylnaphthalene, and mercury. These chemicals may move into the groundwater of the Post-Miocene surficial aquifer, which, together with the Miocene Yorktown aquifer, locally cecharges the underlying castle Hayne aquifer. The castle Hayne aquifer, which top surface1 is about 30 feet below land surface at the site, is the majoc water supply aquifer for wells in the vicinity.
The site, ~wned by FCX, Inc., 609 St. Marys street, Raleigh, NC 27602 from 1945 until 1986, was used for repackaging and sales of herbicides, ' pesticides, and other farm chemicals. In the summer of 1986, the facility was sold to Fred Webb) Inc., P.O. Box 158, Greenville, NC 27834. The warehouse on-site is to be used for grain storage. There have been no known remedial actions to date; ~owever, FCX, Inc. has employed ~ose and Purcell, Inc. and GSX to study on-si'te conta~ination and to cecommend clean-up procedures for t~e burial area and the warehouse.
1
I
]
J
BACKGROUND
~ucation
The FCX -Washington site is located in the west quadrant of the
intersection of :Grimes Road and Whispering Pine Road (SR 1404) in Washington,
Beaufort County, North Carolina 27889. The latitude is 35~ 32' 36" and the
longitude is 077~ 04' 27" (Reference 12).
Site Layout
The FCX Distribution Center property is approximately eight acres in
size and is bord~red on the northeast by a railroad, on the southwest by a
wetland leading to the Tar River, on the northwest and southeast by
agricultural land. Land and buildings belonging to National Spinning company,
d large textile manufacturer, lie to the south and southeast. On the FCX site
is a large wareh~use with an adjoining tank farm (Reference 20 & 21). The
site of the chemical burial lies about 200 feet southwest of the warehouse. A
private well belonging to Cleon Latham is about ·535 feet east of the trench
site and three wells owned by National Spinning are north, east, and west of
the site approximately 450 to 1100 feet away from the burial area. Surface
drainage from th~ site is southwest toward the wetland and southeast toward a
drainage ditch (Reference 17). Primary population areas in the vicinity of ' the site are northwest and southwest along Grimes Road (Reference 12).
Ownership and Site Use History
The site w~s owned by FCX, Inc., 609 St. Marys Street, Raleigh, NC
27602 from 1945 until 1986. The facility was used for the repackaging and
sale of herbicides, pesticides, and tobacco treating chemicals. Wastes from
the operations were handled from late 1945 until 1985. About 1970, some
wastes were buried in a trench on-site. In the summer of 1986, the facility
was sold to Fred Webb, Inc., P.O. Box 158, Greenville, NC 27834. Apparently,
the warehouse is fo be used as a grain storage building.
Permit and Regulatory History
I
The[e ace ~o environmental per1nits known to have been issued nor has
there been any environmental regulation of the site.
Remedial Actions to Date
FCX Inc. has employed the engineering firm of Rose and Purcell, Inc. to
help study on-site'contaminat1on. Also, FCX Inc. has employed GSX to clear
I the chemical warehouse and to recommend remedial action concerning the buried
~astes.
-2-
]
j
summary Trip Report
The FCX property in Washington, which includes th~ area of the reported
µesticide burial I in a trench, was in the process of being sold to Fred Webb,
rnc., just prior to the site investigation. Letters confirming approval to
,onduct the siteiinvestigation were received from William H. McCullough, legal
counsel for FCX, 'on behalf of both FCX and Fred Webb, Additional consent
letters for inspecting, sampling, and photographing the site were signed by
Fred Webb, President of Fred Webb, Inc., and by J, Stewart Hodges, Vice
President of FCX 1 This was to insure full approval for the site investigation
during tl1e owner~hip transition.
On 26 Aug~st 1986 Harry Holladay and Grover Nicholson met with the
following at the isite:
C,A. PJrcell, Jr.
J. Stew;art Hodges
Cleon Latham
Steve Hall
' Steve Jackson
-Rose and Purcell, Inc.
Consultant for FCX
-Vice President FCX
-Owner of associated residential prop~rty
-us EPA. Surveillance and Analysis Division
-Fred Webb, Inc. representative
The purpos~ of the investigation and the preliminary sampling plan were
ex?lained to all present. Holladay and Nicholson conducted a brief walk-over
of the site to re~appraise the sampling plan. It was found that GSX had used
a oack-hoe to explore segments of the burial trench and an additional
previously unidentified burial area, The sampling plan was modified utilizing
the new findings to include sampling of the contaminated soils raised by the
back-hoe from the burial spots, as well as sampling from the warehouse
transfer areas, Mr. Latham's well, the adjacent drainage ditch, and the
backsround soil arid groundwater areas •
. Background lsoil samples and drainage ditch samples were taken in the
area of Mr. Latham's home.adjacent to the FCX property. Holladay and
Nicholson donned protective equipment and entered the trench area where some
substances suspec~ed to be pesticides and other agricultural waste were
ex?osed. A HNu meter was used to scan the site for volatile organics. None
were detected at c~ncentrations above background levels. The odor on site was
like that at a garden supply store. A light wind swept the area to minimize
the exposure. Thu~, tyvek suits and boots with no respiratory protection was
dee~ed safe as specified by the safety guide. sampling was done from 11:59 to
16:40 hours on 26 ~ugust 1986. Seven soils samples, four groundwater samples,
and one sediment sample were taken. Background soil and ground water sample
were included in this number. three groundwater samples were taken from the
dee? wells adjacent to the FCX site which are operated by National Spinning.
All sampling was done following a standard sampling protocol and a chain of
custody for each sample was established on-site. Sketches and photographs
were made before aAd during the sampling activities.
-3-
.1
]
ENVIRONMENTAL S~TTING
Topography
Reference,12, the USGS 7.5' Topographic maps, form the basis for this
section. The Site Sketch (Reference 21) shows a larger scale view of the
layout of the site. The Map Showing surface Water Flow Path (Reference 17)
shows the slope 6f the site as less than 3% and the slope of the intervening
terrain between the trench area and a small area of Kennedy Creek to be less
than 1%.
surface waters
The closest downslope water body is Kennedy Creek which flows
southeastward intb the Tar River. At the US 17/264 bridge across the river, I
the Tar River becomes the Pamlico River. The river flows southeastward into
the Pamlico Sound~ Kennedy Creek and the Tar River are classified as Class C
waters which bestl usage are "fish and wildlife propagation, secondary
recreation, agric~lture and other uses requiring waters of lower quality•.
The Pamlico River I is denoted as Tidal Salt water and classified as Class SC
waters which best1usage are "fish and wildlife propagation, secondary
recreation, and other uses requiring waters of lower quality• (Reference 22). i
I Geology, Soils, and Groundwater
The site lies in the NC coastal Plain and is underlain by sedimentacy
formations consisting of sand, silt, clay, shells, limestone, and combinations
of these litholog~es. These sediments may be divided into three main
hydrogeologic units, oc aquifers, based primarily on hydraulic conductivity I and other hydrogeologic charactecistics. The aquifers, from the surface
downward, are: the Post-Miocene surficial aquifer or water-table aquifer
comprised of sand,' silt, shells, and some clay; the Miocene age Yorktown
' aquifer composed of interbedded sands and clays with some shells, and the
Eocene age Castle Hayne aquifer composed mainly of shell limestone
(Reference 1).
In the area:within three miles of the site, there are no extensive
' confining units separating the three aquifers. Instead, the relative
hydraulic conducti~ities of the three units are the controlling factors in
groundwater movement. The hydraulic conductivity of the castle Hayne aquifer,
coughly 10-1 cm/se~, is 6 to 10 times greater than those of the Post-Miocene
surficial and Miocene Yorktown aquifers, which are about 1.7 x 10-2 cm/sec.
~herefore, the castle Hayne aquifer operates under semi-confined conditions
~nd is locally recharged from the two overlying aquifers (References 1,4,8).
-4-
·1
]
J
The aqiJ.i~er of concern .< the principal aquifer used for water supply) in the area of the 1site is the castle Hayne aquifer which top lies about 30 feet below land surface (Reference 4). The potentiometric surface for the castle Hayne is typically 5 to 10 feet below land surface, which is only slightly
lower than the surficial aquifer's water table of 5 feet below land surface ' (References 3 and 4). Water and contaminants move from the land surface downward, alowl~ through the Post-Miocene surficial aquifer and the Miocene Yorktown aquifer, into the castle Hayne aquifer.
'
Climate and Meteorology
Land Use
Average January temperature
Averag~ July temperature
44 -46°F
78 -ao°F
Prevailing Wind Velocity 9 mph SW
Emissiqns of pollutants 40 tons/square mile
includes particulate, sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide,
hydrocarbons, and nitrogen dioxide.
Mean annual precipitation
Mean anhual evaporation
Net annual precipitation
One year 24-hour rainfall
(Reference 7)
53.5"
41. 5 •
12·
3. 48 •
The site lies in a commercial-residential corridor dbout 1800 feet west of Washington, a tity of about 8500 people. Agricultural fields border the
site on the northwest and southeast.and a wetland, approximately 180 acres in size, lies between the site and the Tar aiver. Washington Park, a town of ' about 500 people lies 3 miles southeast of the site. The Tar and Pamlico aivers, bordered by extensive wetlands, lie south and southeast. Within three miles of the site to the west, north, and northwest are rural areas with most ' land in agricultural use. Tranters creek flows from the northwest and enters the Tar aiver about 1/2 mile upstream of the site. Both surface water intakes for the city of wa~hington are on Tranters Creek (References 12 and 13).
\ l
1 ;
j
]
J
Po~.'!.!.~~ion Dist~ibution and Water Supply
I These data are based on a house count from the USGS topographic map, on int:~•i.:t1ation abollt public and private water systems, and on an estimation of ' . th~ yercent·of the city of Washington within each radius of the site. Within nn, nile of the lsite there are 994 residents, 850 using surface water from the wasl,ington dist~ibution system and 144 using private wells. Three industrial
wells, belonging to National Spinning company, and one surface water intake for the city of Washington are within one mile also. Between one and two
miles of the siie are about 6016 residents, 5100 of whom use city water, while I the rest use private wells. Between two and three miles of the site are 4340 residents, 2550 of whom use groundwater while the rest use private wells. Three private grpundwater supplies, Flanders Filters, Shad Bend subdivision,
and Trails End Hbbile Home Park, are between two and three miles from the site also. The population served by these supplies is included in the 4340
residents. In total, within three miles of the site are 11350 residents, 8500 ' of whom are supplied by the city of Washington water system and 2850 of whom
use groundwater. 1
WATE.l SUPPLY MD POPULATION IJISTRIBUTION
No. houses served bt
private wells (frbm
house count)
No. people served'
by private wells
(houses x 3.8 persons/home)
No. people served:
by Washington
I water supply (est;)
Other water supplies
I and no. people
served by each
Total No. of
Residents
ritical Environme~ts
I
Within 1 Between 1
mile of site 2 miles of
38 241
144 916
850 5100
Washington surface
water intake
Nat'l Spinning Co.
wells-Industrial
water supply wells
99 4 6016
and Between 2 and
site 3 miles of site
402 and 69
south of river
1528
262
2550
Flanders Filters
Shad Bend S/D
Trails End MHP
(included in house
count above)
4340
There are no federally designated critical environments within five iles of the site. 1 However, a freshwater wetland approximately 275 acres in ize lies adjacent Ito the Tar River and Kennedy Creek. It begins about 300
eet from the trench area (R~ference 12 and 19). '
-6-
Totals
750
2850
8500
11350
~ ;
1
,..
Sample
Location
1
2
3
4
5
6
LABORATORY DATA SUMMARY
Sample
T e
Background s9il
0-2• deep
Ditch sediment
near Latham
house
I
Composite.soil
Southeast'trench
area
Composite lsoil
Southeast 1trench
area
Composite soil
sample Numbers
Inorg. Field/Lab
Or • Field/Lab
2991/17170
3201/602406
2992/17171
3202/602407
2993/17172
3203/602408
2994/17173
3204/602409
2995/17174
West end of trench 3205/602410
Composite soil 2996/ 17175
west end o~ trench 3206/602411
-8-
Date
Sam led
26 Aug. 86
26 Aug. 86
26 Aug. 86
26 Aug. 86
26 Aug. 86
26 Aug. 86
Analyses Results
Code: Pest.= Pesticides
IT Inorganic Totals,
IE Inorganic Extractable
OP Organic Purgeable,
OE= Organic Acid: Base/Neutral
Extractable
Pest: 0.035 ppm Aldrin
No IT, IE, OP, or OE.
Pest: 1.7 ppm Chlordane,
0.15 ppm Aldrin, 0.14 ppm DDT
0.46 ppm DDD. No IT, IE,
OP, or OE.
Pest: 35.4 ;,pm Chlordane,
46.3 ppm Aldrin,
OP: 6.5 ug/kg carbondisulfide
(tentative, est. ID).
No IT, IE, OE.
Pest: 33.4 ppm Aldrin,
0.70 ppm Chlordane,
0.62 i:,;,rn DDT, 0.26 ppm DDD,
0.22 ppm DDE & Dieldrin.
OP: 6270 ug/kg carbondisulfide
(tentative, est. ID) •
No IT, IT, OE.
Pest: 159.5 ppm DDT,
37.7 ppm DOE & Dieldrin,
1585 ppm Aldrin.
28 mg/kg Hg which is 280
times background.
OE: 9333 ug/kg
hexachlorobenzene.
No IE, OP.
Pest: 12.0 i:,pm DDT, 27 .2 ppm
Aldrin, 50.9 ppm Chlordane.
OE: 2833 ug/kg naphthalene,
7333 ug/kg phenanthrene,
7500 ug/kg acenaphthylene,
4500 ug/kg fluorene,
1167 ug/kg dibenzofuran (est.)
1333 ug/kg 2-methylnaphthalene
(est.). No IT or IE•
I
f
J
·1
Sample
ocation
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
I I Sample
T e
Composite, soil
1,ortheast
loading dock
I
composite, soil
Northwest
loading d'ock
Groundwater
I Latham wep
I
Groundwat~r
National Spinning
Co. Well t7
' I
Groundwater
I National Spinning
co. Well ts
I Groundwater
National
Co. Well
Spinning
' 19
I
Groundwater
Background' well
J. F. Rehm .house
;. . . ' . . ·, ..... ' '•
LABORATORY. DATA SUMMARY (continued)
Sample Numbers
Inorg. Field/Lab
Or • Field/Lab
2997/17176
3207/602412
2998/17177
3208/602413
Date
Sam led
26 Aug. 86
26 Aug. 86
2999/17244 26 Aug. 86
3209/602414/602415
3001/17243
3211/602416
3216/602417
3507/603144
3508/603144
3964/17246
3217 /602418
3218/602419
3503/603142
3504/603142
3750/17245
3219/602420
3220/602421
3505/603143
3506/603143
3509/603145
3510/603146
-9-
26 Aug. 86
20 Nov. 86
26 Aug. 86
20 Nov. 86
26 Aug. 86
20 Nov. 86
20 Nov. 86
Analyses Results -
Code: Pest.= Pesticides
IT= Inorganic Totals,.
IE Inorganic Extractable
OP= Organic Purgeable,
OE= Organic Acid: Base/Neutral
Extractaole
Pest: 0.61 ppm DDE • Dieldrin,
1.8 ppm DDT, 0.28 ppm Malathion.
No IT, IE, OP, OE.
Pest: 0.25 ppm Malathion,
0.23 ppm DDT, 0.15 ppm DOD,
0.15 ppm DDE and Dieldrin.
No IT, IE, OP, OE.
No IT, OP, or OE.
NO IT, OP, or OE.
Pest: None.
No IT, OP, or OE.
Pest: None.
No IT, OP, or OE.
Pest: None.
No pest, OP, or OE.
. ·, . . . . ,. ' .. :.: ~.-.
'\
. --·:., ., ' . ..,J :~ ::/ :-~ -
.. . ~~ ·~-..:....:.t:::~ ...... .. ,. -~~~;-~--..:
;:---...~
' '1 ·. [~
:·c. 'l~'.i
:-, : ·'{ . .
.
.
·: 1:,lrr~~---J
-~;;/,it: :,._··::_~ ~---:----.:;-, .,~,---.
-·
. ' ·~
'!' :,:u ti~ ·/{I ~: ~'
TOXICOLO<;ICAL/CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS
I Pathway Matrix Values
::iubstance Groundwater surface Water Air
. i
' Aldrin 18 18 9
Chlordane 18 18 9
DOD 18 ( ? ) 18 ( ? ) 9 (?)
DOE 18 18 9
DDT 18 18 9
Dieldrin 18 18 9 i Malat~ion ? ? ?
1 Carbondisulfide 18 (?) 18 ( ? ) 9 (?)
Mercury 18 18 9
Hexachlorobenzene 15 15 6
Naphthalene 9 9 6
Phenanthrene 15 15 9
Acenaphthylene 9 9 3 I Fluorene
Dibenzpfuran 18 (?) 18 (?) 9 ( ? )
2-methylnaphthalene 6 (?) 6 (?) 6 ( ? )
J I
f' rom: . Sax, N. I. Dan9erous ProEerties of Industrial Materials,
I 6th Edition, van Nostrand Reinhold company, New York, 1984.
l
J
J
-10-
. I
J
1
!
.l
Appendix A
Maps and Photographs
j
1
j
J
J
L I
'
I
FCX Washing'ton
NCD 9814751932
!
J(
:51r1: SKETCH
'
. \
.. ,
-r:~ I j I i I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.. :I
---EJ ---

-
--

-
l!lll!Z3 -·
··-....,
I I .
'
I j a I I I
I
I
I
I
. I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
., 1.·
JII
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
·I
i . . . . ,,:· ~.-. ;,., ·,. 1· . .·
. , _ i-r. ,. '.~; t;t, • , .. -~~.;.,{. ~~~-.: ... ~-.--·. I. --~. ··-~·. ~ .. ~ '~;-~,s . l .·· ·.·.•·.~ .~:: . .
•' : , ,'I,·:":----.·-,c· .;.,, ,..;;t:. ·.. '· ,,. .. ,,. .
'
'._. I?,.. -1t -~ f.
I
t!.11-t,.J.._ '.c,.1".o,.. G£du~r AJ•t.. lf.,/)o;.__ ,.-,,,
,i,
~Ii
I,, ,,
it
..s)Jl.w , [
I
. , .. w'06/f1iv31>"' ✓ t34f1c.5<,,rT
i
Sow'f/,.e.ri,v s1a Te...s 1 --' -
5tt6~.f!f:J (..e'f'.,,_ts
-t
' '
p ... .-..,~,.,,d
l,C iJ ~ ;tt f r c-)1!-
fr"pe.,,.Ty_ So/J. Tc,, WJJJ,c.}_ '""! G,.e,.,.,w//c.
' j.
I
'
t
!
t
I i-~-l.tA?ln4~•:.
I
hlfL ttt7J.11•l we-l/ __ u.3e_7c,, &4.//'"r 11rG f': c...y. 1Re.,iif't
'I._ o,~_ 1.vc-J..'-j ?.o 't:.. i2• 7 if (§c.-J1');
w.J-i 7 ff e .. 1"-e...
\ \ \
North Carolina Department of Human Resources
Division of Health Services
P.O. Box 2091 • Raleigh, North Carolina 27602-2091
I
James G. Martin, Governor
Phillip J. Kirk, Jr., Secretary
18 August 1986
Ronald H. Levine, M.D., M.P.H.
State Health Director
i N.C. Department of Natural Resources
and Community Development
P.o: Box 1507 1
' Washington, N:c. 27889
Attention: Mr. Willy Hardison
I
I
Dear Mr. Hardison: i
I
It was good talking with you again last week. We appreciate your
interest in the FCX -Washington site. To answer your question, the residence
and well adjacent to the FCX site is owned by Cleon Latham. The well was said
to be shared by FCX and Latham. The well is now reported to be out of
operation. FCX is 1without water and Latham is on city water.
I
We regret that things did not work out to allow establishing new
wellpoints and water testing at FCX at this time. Perhaps we can get together
h . I anot er time. .
Thank you for.your help. If we can be of any assistance to you, please
contact us at [phone].
HH/tb/0193b
Sincerely,
!~!~~1:~tal Chemist
Solid and Hazardous Waste Management Branch
Environmental Health Section
j
-i .
!
i
i GRdUND WATER DIVISION
Grid Nwnber (/J-.7o,+
Latitude ~s~S'~,3"""-3'-------
Longi t ude ?7 o 'i -
Serial Nwnber
.
I OFFICE OF WATER AND AIR RESOURCES
I DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL AND ECONOMIC RESOURCES
i RECORD OF GROUND WATER POLLUTION SOURCE
' R ·coRD BY: /JI J--J..1 f /-/i!!t1cl1.sod-' DATE8-/1/-8l. W.D. PERMIT NO. __ _
T W N : 1,)/4-.5 1-/-/,-1 tl O W : COUNTY: /.3er;1.;.,f'o rt-"
L CA Tl ON (SKETCH O,N BACK) : -"'O~t~C>~~F_-_c.-'-. _,,·Y:'--_t.U-"-'/4~,1-~~1-1_c="-~f-=""-e-.~9~fV~~G~Y-''-"""-e-'5~f!~o=,q~d~~w-e_.:;.~t-
·, S· lJt:1sU/,.;c,1Dt1l .
0 NER(S) OFvFACI LI 1TY OR INSTALLATION:_,__,C,c..c_::..e.,,,,c.·.✓, CC----------------
T PE. SOURCE : (LA N
1
D F I LL, LAGOON, ETC ) ... r.ce=ip._,n.,_f':...f:...cd~_,.a.,_I d,,___,_f.-=e.S="-t-', ,:_~'-=d-=c__,Q~'"'-""""'=f'f!'-------
C ARACTER AND QUANT! TY OF POLLUTANTS: rJe5f,c.ui,e..~ -~--"~~=~--------------
DI SCRIPTION OF FACi!LJTY (SKETCH ON BACK): _________________ _
i
_Dc!e facility activated: ______ Life expectancy of facility:
I -----------
A\ g. discharge rate: 1 -------------------------------
H DROGEOLOGIC COND'ITIONS AT SITE: Swvd ,e-/)!Jy v sft,' 6i'itvd .:SH-;./.( ?;,,/ft
-+---------'-' ___________________ Jn, __ epth of water table: s:: 7-fr
ME thod for preventing1 groundwater contamination'-'-'-: ~e:JJ..=":..r•V,e..:::e..::_ ______________ _
.
P LLUTION CONFIRMEb BY ANALYSIS? DATE ANALYST: -----------------
M ( NI TOR I NG F AC I LI Tjl Es INSTALLED : ~e::'lt-"vC.Crv~-€...=---------------------
S t MPLI NG SCHEDULE::...: .,,11'-'.o"---":.;:....:e....=-----------------------------
•
NI AR EST STREAM: 11/R. /P!'lml•c.o R..,ve1L DI STANCE ·){;._ ,,uh.:
' ' NI AREST WATER SUPPLY WELL:-"O'--'1-'-v-"",5-'-1-'--fl'.-.,· ________ DISTANCE 't:/Oq ft::
MALYSES AND OTHER!DATA AVAILABLE: -----------------------
'
Moriitoring_ fa~ilities ineerled.:..: ___________________________ _
;
REt,IARKS: __ ~------------------------------
J
·, ,;;f 7;:?i:2\
]I :t. ~ 1{.lj• t WAsH,%£tJE1:po
\a, ::J :.cJ;:f/f/ GTQ,' Of'F/CEi
',, :.-:::-~::;::/ /fl/?
• North Carolina Department of Human Resources G 1989
Division of Health Services D. e;, q.
P.O. Box 2091 • Raleigh, North Carolina 27602-2091
.Jun-ies G. Ma.rtin, Gove1rnor
Phillip J. Kirk, Jr., Secretary Ronald l-1. Levine, M.D.', M.PH
State f-:ealth Director
31 July 1986
Steve Hali
Surveillance an~ Analysis Division
U.S. Environmentitl Prot;ection Agency
College Station Road
Athens, Georgia I 30613
I
Re: FCX ~ Washington
EPA Overview of CERCLA Field Investigations
.NC D98147419() Ci_"/,1415q3-;;>--
Dear Steve:
I
As discussed in our telephone conversation, the NC CERCLA Unit has
scheduled a site'investigation at FCX -Washington facility at 10:00 a.m. on
Tuesday, 26 August 1986 for EPA evaluation. We plan to meet with FCX
representative A:\:t Purcell.
' Enclosed is a copy of our preliminary assessment including directions
to the site, a USGS map and the 103(c) CERCLA notification. A copy of the
Unit health and safety plan will be sent during the· next two weeks.
If you need any additional information please call me at [phone].
LC/tb/0184b
! cc: Denise Bland
Enclosure
Sincerely,
Manager
Solid and Hazardous Waste Management
Environmental Health Section
Branch
I UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION IV
4WD-ER
OCT 1 4. 19861
MS. Lee· Crosby
N.C. Waste Management Branch
3,15 COUFtTLAND ST?EET
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30365
I N.C. Dc!partment of Human Resources
P.O. B::ix 2091
Raleigh, N.cl 27602
'
Dc!ar Ms. Crosby:
I
I
Enclosed is a copy of the oversight Inspection. report for FCX in washington,
NOrth carolina. If you have any questions, please contact me at (404)
347-2234. I
Sincerely,
Felicia Barnett
Environmental Engineer
Emergency and Remedial Response Branch
i
NORTH CAROLINA
I
INTRODUCTION
OVERSIGHT INSPECTION REPORT
SOLID AND HAZARDOUS \./ASTE HANAGE!-ENT
CERCLA FIELD INVESTIGATION
FD'. -WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA
AUGUST 1986
BRANCH
On August' 26, 1986, Grover Nichelson and Harry Holl2day, North Carolina
Department of 1Hurnan Resources (DHR), Division of Health Services, Environmental
Health Section', Solid and Hazardous Waste Management Branch, conducted a CERCLA
sampling inves1tigation at the FCX -Washington facility in 1./ashington, North
Carolina. Wat1er samples were collected from four wells, and soil samples were
collected from eight locations on and in the vicinity of the FCX sj_te. Steve
Hall, US-EPA, !Environmental ·services Division, conducted the oversight inspec-
tion. 1
The FCX c'ontact at the facility was Mr. Stewart Hodges; Mr. Arch Purcell,
Rose and Purcell, Inc, (consultant for FCX) was also present.
I
SUMMARY -
Grover Nicholson and Harry Holladay conducted the investigation in a
I professional lllf'nner. All sampling, sample handling, including identification,
record keeping and chain-of-custody procedures observed during the oversight
were generally I acceptable.
FACILITY PROCESS
' FCX -Washington is no longer in operation.· ·It was an agricultural supply
distribution center which included the handling of pesticides and fertilizers.
No formulation•of pesticides occurred at the facility.
' SAMPLING TECHNIQUES AND SAMPLE HANDLING
The follo";ing observations were noted during the oversight inspection:
Prior to ground water sampling at the private well located adjacent to
the site (Lach:ee, property), the water level and total depth was determined
properly. New 1disposable surgical gloves were worn during this det:ermi.nation.
. I The static volume of this well was also -peterrnined correctly. \./hen the
investigation "'\a·s planned, DHR personnel\intended to purge three volumes prior 4::-
to sampling the well; however, they were misinformed as co the depth of the
well and ·the diameter of the well casing. (The well was deeper and the dia-
meter ;.,as 4 in'ches ·--not 2 inches). Therefore, because the well had been
sampled previously, it ,,,_.,as determined to purge less than the three volumes ' prior to sampling. A closed top, tefl,:n,. ~--.,.i.lt:•r \.llrh nP.v, unused nylon ropr:::
' was used to purge and s.arnple the 1well. Precautions were taken to be sure
tha_t neither th'e rope nor the bailer c_ouched the ground.
-,.
-2-
s•oil samJ)les were collected directly into thf'. glass sample containers
\,,1th wooden tongue depressors which were new and unused but not precleaned.
Also, samples1 "Were not mi}:ed prior to being placed into the sample container.
DHR personnel.I indicated that the samples were mixed in the· laboratory prior ~
to analyses.
A minimum amount of information was placed on the sample containers, at
the time of Sample collection. Subsequent information was added back at the
office prior ~o transferring the samples to the laboratory.
The intept of the sampling program was to sample from the least contaminated
area to the mOst contaminated area. However, site soil samples \Jere collected
before the off site industrial water supply wells.
Samples fere not chemically preserved in the field since they are received £:--
in the state'1s laboratory ·within 24 hours of sampling. However, they were
refrigerated imoediately with ice.
Other than the use of an H.Nu meter for the
conductivity meter
safety survey, there were no ' .
field instruments ( pH meter, or thermometer) used during ~
the investigation.
I
All field documentation was maintained in a bound log book, and a receipt
for samples Jas presented to the FCX personnel and to Mr. Lathem at the con-
clusion of the sampling activity. Samples were securely maintained during the
' inspection.
The bailer had been precleaned according to DHR's standard operationg pro-
cedure, also ESD's_ procedure, and was wrapped in ,aluminum foil. Precautions
were taken tq prevent contamination bf the bailer, bailer rope and sample
containers. However, plastic cubitainers used for m<<«ls and . some inorganic
analyses werei stored compressed and needed to be inflated prior to filling.
The method used by DHR was to "blow" into the container in order to inflate it. lc;-
1
During discussions with DHR personnel, it appeared that there was a need &-
for basic firkt aid and CPR for all field personnel. . Suggestions were given
in that both the Red Cross and local hospitals can usually supply both courses.·
I
A checklist covering this oversight inspection is attached to this report.
I
I
RECOMMENDATIONS
I
Plastic cubitainers should be inflated man-ually instead of blowing
into i:her::i.
I Each person should be trained in basic'first aid and CPR.
All samples requiring chemical preservation according
protocols should be preserved immediately _upon sampling,
of th~ timi lapse between sampling and analysis.
- I
to accepted
regardless
Fieldlinstru~en~~ (pl{ rneL~r, conductivity meter and thermometer) sl1ould
be available during· any site investigation.
-3-
/ -If possible, knmro or assumed lesser contaminated areas should be
sampled before more contaminated ones in order to reduce the potential
of cross contamination between samples.
' '
✓--When -less than three volumes are purged or other deviations from the
prot~col are made, they should be documented in the field notes and
inve~tigation reports.
To
· to
I
minimize chance of error
be· placed on the sample
in misidentifying samples, all information
containers should be done in the field.
To preserve a sample's integrity, stainless steel spoons or spatulas
' should be used··. instead of wooden tongue depressors. (Even if new and
unused, the tongue depressors could interfere with a sample's inte-
gritf, either through absorption or leaching).
Soil ;samples should be mixed prior to analyses in the field if not done
in tne laboratory.· A cleaned, pyrex type glass cake pan is recommended
if done in the field.
'
UNIVERSAL ;
FIELD OVERVIEW
CHECKLIST
Locatio;i , \._0 Pc-St\ /NG-To0,
Study Date( s) ' @/2 6/4 G
'1/ .1 I 00
Facility Co;itact __ ___c,S..,_T.,__,E"-----''---'-''-=-Lt"~g::.=r-----'-H-d;,...,_=~c;=e-s=·-------------
1
Phone Number -~----------------------------
Contractor/St ab e Personnel G g·ov82. 1,J I ctj--c<;. s:or-.J ~ t+:fr)?i>::,'. Ho Lc AVAY
Address PO t>O,X 2-09 / ---------'-=-----'-----------------------
Phone Numbe r ____ q,_,_;~'o/,__-------'7'--'3=---=;5_-__,2.=..,8"'-"0-'--/ ____________ _
Project Leader, GRo'\JET<: f\._J L c_ ~ L s UIU
Other Contractor/State Personnel --------------------
i
ESD Overview Personnel,__ __ _l__!c.r::,~L-~L=-------------------
-Other Personnel and Affiliation
I ---------------------
Pr12.c.i-½
PLANNING AND BREPARATION
' I
1) a stuqy plan, work plan,
-2-
,1 5rr/v7/L,AJ~ /c..,,'r,,,_,~
site operations plan, etc. issued Was
for this investigation? I R ?,,,.,,_/,;-,.,,;-,.;,,,, 7, .;, ",:-c-;;_,,,,e/7-I
Y or N
Da t e Issue dc_ __________ ofo=-.::::..=c-c,.,,..;, -en-/,;, c /4/,,,; l oJ /H',;, /> i"n o!
s c, A 77 /' /.,.,., .7 S ,.._, e //.? S i? . 5 An/!?/,,., ,f
,Piao <-<--'" ""-/'"'"'/.,,,,...,_✓ //''"' -1-v , If YES:
Was the study plan reviewed
-,L--,4-e s,;Le, ,r;vcSr-1;c>/,,,.,, • v
by ESD? --1--
Was the I study plan acceptable?
SAMPLING
General Procedures
1) Were sampling locations properly selected?
2)
i
If No, explain'-----------------------------
Were sampies collected starting with the least like:,?: contaminat'71
and proceeding to the most likely contaminated? In /7.,L 0 ✓ s,4..7.
Remarks e,uilS ,b ah ·
"" ,6--'
'
----;t---
/VO
3) Were new disposable rubber gloves worn during coller~",on of all
samples? ,/
ReIIl<)rks (yu-ek. s...,,yfs s/./od&-f Cdc'CX,..,, .,/20 ce1cv·o ~
c1 v,.,,, r = :s:1z:t-:.:a°'$P/2ay
4) Was sampling equipment wrapped in aluminum foil and protected from
wssible contamination prior to sample collection? ._;1-
If No, explain'-----------------------------
I
5) I . If equipm~nt was cleaned in the field, were proper procedures used?
(This inc~udes storage method for rinse water ar:d ·solvents)
If No, ex~lain ------------'----~------------
6) What instruments were used during
/'
C
-3-'1/J./00
7 ) ' Were field instruments properly calibrated?
If No,
,rzo./-
expl~in #. ,,Uu ,rn6/4-i,
('] & e-/42.-
8) Were calibration procedures documented in the field notes'
Remarks 1 ---------------------------------
9) I Were the samples chemically field preserv74?
If No , ex pl ~i n ___ -"'Sc:.. _..t:?,~q'-¥',.?"-/4'-'----'[ _ _,u""'"S'-vi?"-"--'-/_L~~'\,____,_c--'"l'-'--'-/2~-;;_,,b"-_,_c,,"'--'4-/2,.L.<.-'t'-. _
2 .r. /
10) Were the samples iced?
I
11) Were samples for selected parameters field filtered?
I
If Yes, list parameters and describe procedures.· -----------
Well Sameling
I
1) Was depth of well determined?
I
2) Was depth to water determined?
3) Were the above depths to water converted to water level e;~tions
comrron to all wells? one. c.,...)e// S<Yn-t/le/· v#;r.r a/7'
//Jc/c.,.ffl/.i / :,17,vc/e,,c.-/,,oq ~//2 .
Describe how the depths were determined e /ecfr,c., ?<-,,;;~r-
4)
5)
6)
7)
k v~ / >a cl, c 0:6ir
How was the 1volume of water originally-present in each well deter--
mined? __ _..C~G'~f<~C-<-~/.i=e~k-~c/~---------------------
Was the
How was
I volume determined correctly?
I
comRlcteness of purging determined?
'· Volume
Measure /
Time/Flow rate ----Con<l./ pH/T ----
Was a suffi~ient volume purged?
Was the wel~ o~er-I)urted? ·
Y or h'
;Uc
y
I
y
•
/
-f-
r,
---. ; .._ I VV
8) -\.las a ded.icated (in-place) pump utilized? / ,;;f f-);;,-/2:;,,~/ 5;P,m1r;
! /J ~-I / £> h(C;7°? ,-.,,.s,d'~
If no, describe the method of purging (bailer -include type and·
cons truct1ion material, pump -include type) ____________ _
~i,/2/<>71 C kr.LL c/ r:';R ,6a I /4,t.
9) How were :the samples collected?
Ba 11 er ___ .,,.---------r.7.,£ /4 /-li~rn ,,._, S' kk n C-<.._.-
Pump ___ _
Combination
Const rue tio n material of b_a_i_l_e_r-,: __ ---'/,'-'==t:'/4"----''--°'7::::..L------------
Design of, bailer
Open Top _____ _
Closed Top ----Other _____ _:_ ________ _
10) I If a pump was used, describe how it was elearied before and/ or between
wells. --:-'----------,,-,.--+..=---------------
11) Was the sample properly ~ransferred from bailer to sample bottle (i.e.,
was the purgeable sample agitated, etc.)?
12) Was the I line rope or allowed to touch the ground?
I
13) Was any wetted rope or line discarded after use at each well?
'
14) How were sampled?
Surfpce Water Sampling
1) What procedures and equipment were used to·collect surface water
samples? ,
Who collected samples? __________________________ _
2) Did the samplers wade in the stream during .sample collection?
If Yes: i .
Did the sampler face upstream while collecting sample?
' Did the sampler insure that roiled sediu.ents wece not collected
' along wi ~h water sample?
Y DC N
ok..
-5-q / .!.. / 00
. I
3) Note any deficiencies observed during the collection of the surface
I water samples
'
Waste, Sludge, Soil/Sediment Sampling
l)
2)
3)
Were the soil/sediment samples well mixed prior to placing the s~m,Ple
in the sample container? /,4/:,C,.n/ ·"-> S'-7/of'.Pc/ ,/4 OCC<'rNl 7'?<~
/4 j ti ,,. ,., /4 ~ j Note any d~f;irciencies bserv1d during the collection of the soil/ sedi-
ment samples t.,fJc) ~ t-<,,:_, ~
Y or N
-'&~/4'.!:c:a:::_.£::~~~S?.:d.!:::J,,t!Li:::.;;-.z~o~s~~/~/,~-'--2~'-l.!'.l:L~~'--~:£t:~~.f
Total aumbe:r of samples collected
Other Sampling I
i
l) What other 'types of samples were collected during th~~-investigation?
2) Wpat procedures were used for the collection of these samples? ____ _
Who collected samples?
' I
QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL
(While all of these QA/QC procedures are not' necessarily used,
please identify the specific techniques which were employed by
sampling p~rsonnel.)
·,
l) Did the sampling. personnel utilize any field tr Ip blanks?
Y or N
q/ 1/ 0(.)
Y or N
2) Did the sampling personnel utilize preservative blanks?
If Yes; co; either of the above questions, list the types and handling
of the blanks ;
22 (J f' /'-e J '°" l! c? h' ,;,,___s, C J,.L,,c!
f
3) Were a:1y equipment blanks collected?
I.
yo
If Yes, list: ----------------------------
I
4) Were any duplicate samples collected? ;<Jo
I
' If Yes, list the types (parameter coverage, etc.) and describe their
handling. I ~----------------------~------
I
5) Were any ·s?iked samples utilized? /{)o
I
If Yes, list the types (par=eter coverage, etc.) and describe their
handling.! -'-------------------------~----
FIELD DOCUMENTATION AND CHAIN-OF-CUSTODY
1) Were split samples offered to the site owner or facility represen-
tative? . (_s17!,.:j, t.,Vil.S ckd-_,<(j
2)
3)
4)
5)
Was a receipt for samples given to the site owner or facility repre---
. sentative· prior to leaving the site?
. -f--
W ere chain-of-custody records completed for all samples?
Were sample tag numbers and laboratory traffic report form numbers
cross referenced to chain-of-,custody forms? ;t)o .../.a,c; ,oos. Or
-/-,-cJ ,44 0 ~al'/.,;, f +o,,-~ J' . f7
Were chai'.n-of-custody form numbers recorded .in the field log book?
(
-/-
I v -\-4,,\ Y or N
8) Were all sample tags and chain-of-c,1stody forms signed by sample
lector( s)?
col-L
9) +
10) Was sampling documented with photographs?
If Yes, wks a photolog maintained?
~
11) I Were the samples shipped to a contract laboratory? ' . . ;Uc>
If Yes:
Were the report forms filled out properly? ,£,1 /A-
Were the
traffic
I
I ,samples properly •packed for shipment? O,e ~ A~/_0 ,,,_;L,,,.f /4?
s -/4. -/4 vch { 2,/e_, '
STATE REGULATORY AGENCY PERSONNEL
Qualification's of investigative/ sampling personnel ( training and .
_experience) b1y names GtoL>a-<. µ;r;.l,0 /sw "'7e.01/3)i,+-Bs ·kj;s:h~ +-,.,,.:,14; 20,uCYT
I"' (f';g_u.,t,., Z'f5 ~c1V\'7@~~ci.._.,_;aJ.a.,.•, 2.'f's v• . .Q '--'~·-•s~<.<'/--.
. h\f'.~1~1 Hvc.'c.w&~ -2..o rrl: C~a,,,r'r+ ::/Wlot'S./'1 1° lhl/ µc:., s,~"-<-\?..../8.S
Have investigative/sampling personnel received sampling technique and
equipment trdining?
I Have personnel received safety training?
•• • • I
If yes to eiiher of the above questions, list where and when the
trai·ning was 'received and who provided the_ instruction.
I
f Do the investigative/sampling personnel undergo periodic refresher
training regrirding safety? '
' Did the investigative/ sampling personnel have appropriate safety equip-
m~nt in their po~session during this inspection?
If YES, describe the equipment which was available
this inspectton. d,;Jv 1 ../-.1 K-/: s:,,,V{ &2£?~
. '
If NO, list the equipment which was needed.
and/ or used during
;,u¼Af
7
y
V /
{
-8--,1 J./ '-'V
I I
Have the inve'stigative/ sampling personnel been categorized as to the
I type of inspections they can conduct?
Have the inve,stigative/ sampling personnel had comprehensive physicals?
Do the
(i.e. '
sampling
periodic: I
personnel participate in a medical monitoring program
follow-up physicals)?
If yes' how often? d/?Oud / I ___ _..c::...:..:...c..'-"--"---'--------------------
Y or N
V
I
y
7
Do the investigative/sampling personnel per form the en tire RCR.' Ju ter i m Ce?c:c.;. 4.
Etatuo lnspeetion or m~rely collect samples? C-or7k-/ =:r/d-~ ctt e,,,<.s-/4j .. fun
' ' ' If the personnel
coordinated 0-th
only collect samples, how are their sampling efforts
the rest of the inspection?
If state personnel did not collect samples, did they thoroughly evaluate
sampling procedures used by facility? ---------~r-r-,>-,,r-----,
If facility collected samples, did state representatives accept a split
. sample( s)? -------------A-+,'-,+--------------
SOP
Has
(Appliesi only to state
the stat'e developed an
overviews)
C~c.c.A-
SOP for~ field sampling?
o·id the state personnel have a copy of the SOP with them during this
inspection?
What does the SOP Cover?
I
Field inspections in general (sampling techniques, etc:.)
Sample· handling ----Sample I.D. and chain-of-custody ___ _
Uses and limitations of various types of bailers and pumps __ _
Equipment cleaning
Field m~asuiements (c:ond., pH, T, etc:,)
I Calibration of field instruments
Other ! ----
Did they follow their SOP during this inspection?
Y-
\
I GENERAL COMMENTS/OBSERVATIONS
J
LL ·
' ---.-'
--nrtFUL.l -----{)_Hf. 5 +-I-{/,,{) 133-zgo/_ ---
1 _ I -----1-h-!: pcx:-=_:--~~~ ~ ~. -zr;;,;;;_~_!J,,---
' __ 1 • ~--. ---;;;;i ----
-1----!+l-! [J)_,J) . ,,r_ ~ A) ti_-~_,,,_ __
--,-h+-'; g-7-u-,_. zoa ✓ Al, -~~~~-~---~-f----
/)_ -~ ~ ~, __ {__=-=c...=,.,) -----
1 I
: ~0/ 7}
--,~ -B.-_ 2-I--~b--S-+---.--H Tu wJi--k-&:11~-=-=~~·-=--=-------=-------
--1-~~, --~ ~ µ 5 ~~~-~~---
, I
. ,,
'
- . --. 1------
I
I
I
' I
' ' --------t-----~:
------
=-========~==--=----·. -----·----
-·--·---1-------------------------------. ------,, I
_______ -~)?1-£1 w1;t-1 __ .;;, £ {-f/J_ CJ<--s.,t? ___ '3-,;it.-(6l ___ o:.-7 o53e:, ____ , ..
' I -· ··--4 -__ StLll't-_i,/yf(/ __ _13ct.4
I ,
----·· -___ 7;; ___ f. C..,Jf_r'-{'Je)5~-f,hv~:,_ w,1/ ~ 71,.,,v,c.. _____________ ~ _
• I
_ _ _ _ ___ _ ,j _____ (}~_·, __ c..Jlh~t _ k,,-!) ~f'<->v _ ..... ~11 _s «r,Jt•~y P:c..y __ __ _ ,.
'' -----. _:.~
. '
, c.i:.."/4tY~,,;--r,.,~ 6.1-1 en ..,(.,J....,,.._ "'"-~" ,: 11,,., .. f; i,.,i. "1' -r~•"~
_; _______ c.c/1<-<-f-_5c,1/ s11 ... 1_1~.5. _____ . ________ --· __ _
I
..,._ STAJ!Q-
rJ/ .-.. •::~ ~ !:+CGrG!ioo-Q@~~ I
~t.; _---, Resources&Community Development
-~-;;;;.-~· -( S ~ f /J ,-0 C U
('fO d tf f; I ,j fJ / J ,I. /J 1,/ /Jfl-~•' ., 6Ff"{(0 !/ Q-V/Lt_E,
~ C?-~ 7· /'\ C:: J J JO f ( f::::-(J Z
ltc/v. ~~/ .
,... '
/ V -'Z ('J + -78) ' \ +
111✓ VJ .p:.)__ ': ' ' ',-,
,fld;;,,,Jl~! t;,_ ~ ~ .. . ----
... . -....... ---_____ ............... . ................. --. . .. ·-. . .... __________ ... _ -------------------'-"-II
z 33~2!.L
Zif (,--2,5'/.
f'
__ /_r
(.,.,
., ~ a.--,,J_, -~vu' ,cV,%<, A.,.\. aJ~
w/La..f,r
" ' ' -------.. ---__ ., _______________ _
' I _ ._, _54~"'--
'l,cf(~Z(,/ __ ,, _ _ _ __ ,,_ _ _•_l_ ____ j.. ,..,._,/ _--:yf~•-o.h<P:.....-,,.,,
zt,{~Z-;?J '' ______ ,, ________ tr ___ , 11 _ 5'cf-J-JJ o/ ----------------1--.. -------.. ·---
2.-70 ~it!_,. rr ---•r-c4.i1!/;--n-. . ---·-. ----------------
ZY 1~1r /: : __ ,;-,rt;· ,~=-,~0~~fl.,~~:::: k ;~~~-#-~---------~·
___ .,,i ____ !_! __ .,_.Arf_c/t!-~J(:. __ ":C __ n1c,lc.~~'--" _ ,_, .· ----.-----,------------·--
1--
' -·--t-·-!
_ j
I
I I
I
I_-
·-------------------~---
. · ___ j_ ____ _
.. \.
·:r~i-·•c
--:
LOG OF WELL FOR WASHINGTON (CITY OF) BY LAYNE ATLANTIC COMPANY, NORFOLK, VIRHNIA
Ft.
10
20
30
40
42
81
96
135
163
170
180
190
204
217
227
249
294
400
Located at Washington, N. c. Drilled July 31, 1940.
Formations and Depth of Well
!h
10
10
10
10
2
41
14
39
28
7
10
10
14
13
10
22
45
108
Surfacesand and clay
Sand and shell
Soft limestone
Hard limestone
Shell rock
Hard Shell rock
Hard limestone-Very hard
Black sand
Layers of Limestone & White
Shell rock and clay
Shell, rock & clay in layers
Shell, clay in layer
Shell rock and white sand
Shell rock and white sand
Clay and shell rock
Shell rock Sandy clay
Clay shells-Sandy
Blue clay
Reamed 18" hole to 1731
sand
Dimensions of Casing & Screen
Casings Ft. In.
60 0
70
115
120
125
135
150
160
Screen
Ft.
31
60
10
45
5
5
10
15
10
or Casing
0 Pipe
Screen
Pipe
Screen
~lei:i&i
Screen
Pipe
Screcen
Set new pump
City started
Well Data:
Sept. 21, 1940 with old motor Test 550 gpm(Ambrose)
pump to service new motor. October 28-Test 500 gpm
Oct. 11 -Al set new motor on pump.
#19 pressure above ground.
Date Tested: 9/4/40 -Static level 9 1 Production: 350gpm
Pump Data: C
PL:60 Permanent Test 500 Gals. 110' PS
Shop No. 10303 Type Luhr. Soelnoid 220 volt: Type Head TF618 Size
Size column 6 x 1-3/16 x 2. Length Suction 101 with 6" Strainer.
Capacity and Head: 500?. Pressure 19#.
Motor Data:
Suction 6". Depth Setting: 100
Type Bowel 8" KHC. No. Stages 11.
Horsepower 30: Voltage 22: RPM: 1750 Phase 3: Type CFU: Cycles: 60; Make: US; Frame No. 917.
Size
In.
18
10
10 Everdur
10
10
10" to 8" C
8"
8"
8"
Oct. 25.
Drilled second well in 1942 because first one did not produce 500gpm as was guaranteed. Yield dropped to 250.
2nd well abandoned; too much iron.
c:>71,, 'f/57; .J /80-
3
o7f.'ll.1So
-3
.3 13D O,;l. )-'13
03 -o?,-o 7 a,>, ,,, 2,-.'.JMI o o11,,7,:J,f/t; 3 115.,, 3-5 1,'-1 0,7 ;133 IJ{o J.'l.c, --'rJ.J.. ,., · i.::=~=--=--..:....i-----+:...-=.....:::._:+__:_+---l-=--=~-+--...:.:...:~::___:-+---l!---..!.~-+---l----l--+-~..:::....1,.:.::..:....i-__:-4-=--==..+--J.--+--+L:..:.i---l--+:-:~f----l---l----11---+--l-~l---+.:...!:::::....J
o"> -o"3 -07 Bo -':3.:/7( IJ,;1, w·J o,", "'~ -':rJ~,s c•
.-..:, :.
. ' -· I
I
i '..: ~· -·
3
.s
3
1.D 0
0
() I ;-1 I • .,
;c-0
D
;, I J:lt>
i
1,0 aa
/,0
I
O~h ! )~b ,s ' .c .,i .;"~
},...)
J,5 D 11 33 l
l
7 3 TL.:. !
Bo
-03 -o 7 rJ 11 v-1
o :o -o 7 Be
fl)-;11 b-1
b 3 ---U 7
I
c3, -0:, -· c 7 /30 //~";..s lu-r:, v-; !--------;~--
.
. ... :: ·~" _:-: ~.:.:
Y3317D
013
013
,..., J
5
3
5 I
3
I 13
' -
1,,/7.5'
/(, 0
,_. ,
-!
i j
0
C,
9
0
?, 7 / '/()
7,8 .165
7.t>
7.S
'-!5
-]::,; fU-,,-·
I ':I .'l 2-1 2.tlO ~-/
/,2.7 7.11
JI i!So ti-!.
J.;!..
/(, c; 2-2. n_,, •• o I ~"° 1]..:,
,.,., ', 7.8 ;C
?,z.. Io/ ,,2_
I ' ' .~ 'i !_;; ?_:.-1 1u ., '
ss C
7J_. fL..:;
.c I
-I ' 4 ID
1
.
! -· ·-:•.:; . --b7 0 'fo