NCD986190239_19940323_Cherokee Oil_SERB PA SI_Site Inspection Volume I - Text and Photographs-OCR

STATE OF
NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environment, Health,
and Natural Resources
Division of Solid Waste Management
Supeifund Section
SITE INSPECTION
Cherokee, Oil Site
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County! North Carolina
NCD 986 1190 239
' I Reference No. 05704
March 1994
Doug Moore, Environmental Chemist
Division of Solid wliste MJnagement
Superfundl Sectio~
" I! -I ·--. 'I l "\' I' '' , ' I J ' ' ' ·1 I
' : ' ' . I . I ' ' ' ' " I ' .
· ' l ' ·. I ·
I " • • -• -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Solid Waste Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
William L. Meyer, Director
AVA
DEHNR.
March 23, 1994
Mr, Craig Benedikt
NC CERCLA Project Officer
US EPA Region IV Waste Division
345 Courtland Street, NE
Atlanta; Georgia 30365
RE: Site Inspection
Cherokee Oil Site
925 South Summit Avenue
Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co,, North Carolina
USEPA ID: NCD 986 190 239
Dear Mr. Benedikt:
The Cherokee Oil Site Inspection was conducted to gather data necessary to evaluate
the need for further CERCLA remedial action at this site. Soil and sediment samples were
collected by EPA contractors Four Season Environmental and analyzed for volatiles, semi-
volatiles, total metals, cyanide, oil and grease and pesticides including polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCB) to characterize the types of substances deposited at the site and their
potential migration pathways. In addition, information was collected to confirm target
populations and environments potentially at risk from the site.
The Cherokee Oil site was an unpermitted temporary hazardous waste storage facility
operated by Cherokee Resources from August 1990 to August 1991. Prior to this, the site
was used as a recycling center by Mecklenburg County, a maintenance garage by the United
States Postal Service, a trailer construction business by Brown's Equipment and an
unidentified business named "Saunders Systems". Potential wastes generated by prior
operations at the site are solvents and petroleum wastes from operation of the maintenance
garage. Initial investigations by EPA revealed that the site posed an imminent fire and
explosion hazard to neighboring businesses and residents. After EPA secured control of the
site from Cherokee Resources, it was determined that there were approximately 6096 drums
inside and outside of the warehouse, 13 roll-offs of contaminated soil, several tankers
containing liquid waste and trailers containing drums stored at the site. The wastes stored
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh. North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer pap~r
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
B
I
I
I
I
I
Mr. Craig Benedikt
March 23, 1994
Page 2
at the site included polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB), highly flammable solvents, cyanides,
strong acids and bases, hazardous organic compounds and hazardous inorganic substances.
The wastes were stabilized and analyzed by EPA Region IV ERRB, segregated by waste
type, composited based upon compatibility and BTU production and shipped to appropriate
RCRA -approved disposal facilities. The removal of wastes was completed by March 1993.
The Site Inspection indicated that groundwater underneath the site may be
contaminated with hazardous substances, however, all residents within 2.5 miles rely on
CMUD for municipal drinking water. Elevated levels of inorganic compounds were
detected in Irwin Creek sediments. The substances found in the sediments were also found
at elevated levels in soils on site and in drums shipped offsite by EPA Irwin Creek contains
fish in the area of contamination, however, no evidence of fishing within 1 mile downstream
of the site was established. No evidence of current air releases were established from the
site. Soil on the site remains contaminated with inorganic and semi-volatile organic
compounds. The soil exposure threat is minimized since there are no workers currently
onsite and the site is fenced, however, the soil exposure threat will become a future concern
should the site become active. Based upon the lack of ground water, surface water and soil
targets, it is recommended that the site be assigned an "No Further Remedial Action
Planned" status under CERCLA
Sincerely,
tl~~~
Douglas Moore
Environmental Chemist
NC Superfund Section
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SITE INSPECTION REPORT
Cherokee Oil Site
NCD 986 190 239
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
March 1994
Superfund Section
Division of Solid Waste Management
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health
and Natural Resources
Prepared by: Reviewed by:
D~o~
e~ Pat DeRosa
Environmental Chemist CERCLA Branch Head
' I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
SITE DESCRIPTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
WASTE/SOURCE SAMPLING ........................... 7
GROUND WATER PATHWAY .......................... 12
SURFACE WATER PATHWAY ......................... 16
SOIL EXPOSURE AND AIR PATHWAYS ................... 21
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
LIST OF REFERENCES
PHOTOGRAPHS
REFERENCES
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE I.
TABLE II.
TABLE III.
LIST OF TABLES
CHEROKEE OIL SITE (PAGE 1 OF 1) ............. 9
(PAGE 2 OF 2) ........................... 10
EPA ERRB SOIL SAMPLE RESULTS ............. 11
IRWIN CREEK SEDIMENT SAMPLES . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
FIGURE 1
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 4
FIGURE 5
FIGURE 6
LIST OF FIGURES
TOPOGRAPHIC MAP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
CITY OF CHARLOTTE ENGINEERS MAP . . . . . . . . . . 3
EPA ERRB SITE SAMPLING MAP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
CHARLOTTE MECKLENBURG UTILITY DEPT. MUNICIPAL
TAP MAP E-16 ........................... 14
CHARLOTTE MECKLENBURG UTILITY DEPT. MUNICIPAL
TAP MAP W-5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
SURFACE WATER PATHWAY SKETCH .......... 18
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Cherokee Oil site was an unpermitted temporary hazardous waste storage facility
operated by Cherokee Resources from August 1990 to August 1991. Prior to this, the site
was used as a recycling center by Mecklenburg County, a maintenance garage by the United
States Postal Service, a trailer construction business by Brown's Equipment and an
unidentified business named "Saunders Systems". Potential wastes generated by prior
operations at the site are solvents and petroleum wastes from operation of the maintenance
garage. Initial investigations by EPA revealed that the site posed an imminent fire and
explosion hazard to neighboring businesses and residents. After EPA secured control of the
site from Cherokee Resources, it was determined that there were approximately 6096 drums
inside and outside of the warehouse, 13 roJJ-offs of contaminated soil, several tankers
containing liquid waste and trailers containing drums stored at the site. The wastes stored
at the site included polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB), highly flammable solvents, cyanides,
strong acids and bases, hazardous organic compounds and hazardous inorganic substances.
The wastes were stabilized and analyzed by EPA Region IV ERRB, segregated by waste
type, composited based upon compatibility and BTU production and shipped to appropriate
RCRA-approved disposal facilities. The removal of wastes was completed by March 1993.
The Site Inspection indicated that groundwater underneath the site may be contaminated
with hazardous substances, however, all residents within 2.5 miles rely on CMUD for
municipal drinking water. Elevated levels of inorganic compounds were detected in Irwin
Creek sediments. The substances found in the sediments were also found at elevated levels
in soils on site and in drums shipped offsite by EPA Irwin Creek contains fish in the area
of contamination, however, no evidence of fishing within 1 mile downstream of the site was
established. No evidence of current air releases were established from the site. Soil on the
site remains contaminated with inorganic and semi-volatile organic compounds. The soil
exposure threat is minimized since there are no workers currently onsite and the site is
fenced, however, the soil exposure threat will become a future concern should the site
become active. Based upon the Jack of ground water, surface water and soil targets, it is
recommended that the site be assigned an "No Further Remedial Action Planned" status
under CERCLA.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Under authority of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act
of 1980 (CERCLA) and the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA),
the North Carolina Superfund Section conducted a site inspection (SI) at the Cherokee Oil Site
located at 925 South Summit Avenue, Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. The.
purpose of this investigation was to collect information concerning conditions at the Cherokee
Oil site sufficient to assess the threat posed to human health and the environment and to
determine the need for additional investigation under CERCLA or other authority. The
investigation included reviewing previous information, sampling waste and environmental media
to test preliminary assessment (PA) hypotheses and to evaluate and document Hazard Ranking
System (HRS) factors, collecting additional non-sampling information, and interviewing nearby
residents. ·
2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION
2.1 Location
The Cherokee Oil site (Cherokee) is one of two sites in Charlotte operated by Cherokee
Resources (Ref. 1). The site is located at 925 South Summit Avenue in a mixed industrial and
residential area adjacent to I-277/1-77, Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina (Fig. l;
Photo 1). The geographic coordinates are 35° 13' 36.5" N latitude and 800 51' 51.0" W
longitude (Ref. 2).
Mecklenburg County is characterized by a mild climate. Summers are warm with temperatures
reaching 800 or higher while winter temperatures average between 500 and 60° F (Ref. 3). The
2 year -24 hour rainfall is 3.5 inches (Ref. 4). Normal annual total precipitation averages 44
inches, while mean annual lake evaporation averages 40 inches, leaving a net annual
precipitation of 4 inches (Ref. 5).
2.2 Site Description and Regulatory History
The site covers approximately 2 acres of a 5 acre triangularly shaped lot (Refs. 6; 7). There
is a large brick warehouse which covers an area of 7000 square feet (Ref. 7). The building rests
on the crest of a small hill that slopes to the south and southeast (Ref. 8; Fig. 2; Photo 2).
Irwin Creek flows from north to south, but, makes an abrupt southwesterly change in course
forming the eastern and southern boundary of the site (Ref. 8; Fig. 1). The western and
northern boundaries of the site are formed by South Summit Avenue and Bryant Place,
respectively (Ref. 8; Fig. 1).
The site is surrounded by a chain link fence with a locked entrance (Ref. 8). The fence extends
along the site boundaries with South Summit Avenue and Bryant Place (Ref. 8). The fence
appeared to be in generally good condition except for the South Summit Avenue entrance where
security was compromised by a gap in the southernmost gate (Ref. 8).
1
FIGURE 1
CHARlOT[-M[CKlENBURG
UTlllTY DEPARTMENT
CAPITAl IMPROVEMf]T PROGRAM
FY 92 -96
WA TI:R PROJECTS
:._ FlRST YEAR FUNDED
.--..ruNDS 10mm
r
v I
! I
\ I I
,, ....
I l(. ,., I
1;; . '
':1
·,
';
,.
..:c-_,
"' .,) ... ;•
?; .'
~
\ 44 ',' ,, '
' '' .. ·,
I /
.. / .. •. ;.·ww ]~;:,
.. ·<' :·::-\ ' ·.
i"r\~'. ~~-·-·-< i <,. . f)--...
7" I , ,•\. /.. .._ .~
,, '
) ,, .
: j'' ·:, -'
,, ~
• I
63
I ' •-72_J
\
I',
' \ I • ~67_,_
'
I
,:-: . ·-, 74 ~ _.--,,
' ",
'
'., ';;.a;.rJ,,l~s. '""Ilk l~f•t:..-:t·"11~,;._. 1}•1!l~f\ '' ' . ~ ,....,~'li•~~t~if~t.~ u·n-':.!,:t {t' i,;.,•~·•1•Q: · j ·• ;1s.,i;~:_~f4 q,e:.l\a 1f?;"':fS~~ ,t~ll~• .. ~ ;1,,a'':.•·•1 . , • 'J ,·~~, •"."J•• 1,. ~\ ••;,,, +l' ,, .,,.. I 1 ...... •·· .. 7.,\fo;~;•i;•4'J;O' .., I •
; •, :.• •,-:, •. :r,,l, •:.~'., I. • •°;} •:1,.: •
: ;:.•'.'s'. . ... -,,. , .
1•:·. ;_-~_/(•·:·
.;:.•.. 'i_,~v , i
• t..• )~•,,•:,:,: ~ ~'fl.
'· ..
'
_,,
'.'·/. ,; .
1&)!1' i') -, .• ~
.f?(> . ·j, f.'... ~ ;, .
.,
'I.;.. r
! •. ·: ·r!: ,:~ . .-·:,·.•· .. ·:, .· 91
; · RE'v1SED 06/?5/'_ .. :
1··::·':. j ,i;.-
'_.l,) ··.:, ~ ~ . .
.. ' .. ; ' ' i ·<. i·• I j
\
i '.
'
' '
; .. .,
. I
. I •
. J
/'I . ;· i . V ':'.~·\: \
:yr· r 1 "/ \_._.r/.'·: ''c,,_.,.·-,:',;/~!\. :•:·:•· . :, ,
~J,•r . •1 ; .i
\ A~d,·N-· ..,.,.,_,, ··,.·:~:(:·:~~\~.:~>:; .~ .. ~
... i
..,,_ ...... ' l !<" •
• __ ::' '.),'. .;.c __ .,, ,i ·
t,. ",~-1 ,., .. .' . ;--.... ....
i .. -.
'' \
i ~./.~~ ... : ' ·. ,;--,ln;
. ·~t:'.::.'1° _'. 7-.---:.
' ···., ~ ..
'; :;.J
•'42·\ ;:-: '-~ · ...
' .. ·,.:: ·'·t.
,.;!: ,; ,,
.'.,-1 ,:l.: . ·r
'!• .
I :1
I
I
I .I.
I
I
I
m
n
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The site is owned by E.C. Griffith Company (Griffith) of Charlotte, North Carolina (Ref. 6).
According to Mr. Griffith, there have been a number of businesses which have leased the
property since 1952. Browns Equipment company, a manufacturer of trailers, operated on the
site. The United States Postal Service operated a garage for repairing postal vehicles for 20
years (Ref. 9). A company called "Saunders Systems" operated on the site (Ref. 10).
Mecklenburg County operated a recycling center on the site for approximately 1 year prior to
Cherokee Resources (Ref. 9).
In August 1990, Cherokee leased the South Summit Avenue site from Griffith (Ref. 9).
Cherokee identified itself as an environmental services firm that specialized in the recycling of
waste oil and petroleum waste streams (Refs. 1, p. 1, 13). The Cherokee Oil Site on South
Summit Avenue has never had a generator or transporter/storer/disposer (fSD) status under
RCRA and was assigned EPA ID# NCD 986 190 239 on August 29, 1991 after commencement
of the EPA removal action (Ref. 11). The South Summit Avenue site was used as an
unpermitted storage facility containing hazardous wastes (Refs. 7; 12).
As a result of investigations by the Charlotte Mecklenburg Utilities Department (CMUD) in
December 1990, the South Summit Avenue site was reported to local, state and federal officials
as a potential hazardous waste storage site (Refs. 13; 14). An NC DOT aerial photo shows the
site layout on February 3, 1991 (Photo 1).
On July 17, 1991, EPA secured the site from Cherokee and sent the Region IV Environmental
Services Division (ESD) to the site to collect samples of soil and drums for laboratory analysis
(Ref. 15; 16). Results of the ESD investigation have not been made available due to the ongoing
federal action against Cherokee (Ref. 41), however, the results prompted EPA to commence
further investigation (Ref. 15). On July 19, 1991, EPA tasked a Roy Weston Technical
Assistance Team (f AT) team to investigate the site. The results of the investigation indicated
that hazardous materials were stored on site in drums, roll-offs, tankers and trailers (Ref. 16).
On July 19, 1991, EPA notified Cherokee Resources that it must clean up its site located at 925
South Summit Avenue (Ref. 17). On July 29-30, 1991, NC Division of Solid Waste
Management RCRA inspectors visited the South Summit Avenue site. The results of their
inspection indicated that no remediation had been commenced (Ref. 1). The State of North
Carolina Division of Solid Waste Management initiated a civil action against Cherokee
Resources (Ref. 42). On August 6, 1991, consultants for Associated Grocers Mutual, generators
of hazardous waste contaminated soil deposited in roll-off boxes at the site, travelled to the site
to perform sampling. However, EPA On Scene Coordinator Michael Taylor determined that
the contractors did not have an adequate sampling plan, technical expertise or proper safety
equipment and ordered them to halt work at the site (Ref. 16, p. 3). The notification was
followed by an Administrative Order (AO) issued by EPA to E.C. Griffith as the site owner,
Cherokee Resources, Inc. as site operators and Associated Grocers Mutual as site related
hazardous waste generators of waste and signed on August 6, 1991 (Ref. 18).
4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
m
u
D
n
n
D
I
I
I
On September 3, 1991, The EPA Region IV Emergency Response and Removal Branch (ERRB)
initiated an emergency removal action (Ref. 16, p. 4). On October 11, 1991, Cherokee
responded by filing a lawsuit against the EPA On Scene Coordinators (Ref. 19). The lawsuit
filed against the OSC was later dismissed. However, due to technicalities in the lease
agreement, the removal action was postponed from July 1992 until October 1992 (Ref. 19). A
new administrative order was issued by EPA in October 1992 and the removal action was
restarted (Ref. 19). All drums were hazardous categorization (Hazcat) tested and segregated
based upon compatibility group (Photo 3). Drums failing hazcat tests were sampled and sent
to the EPA Lab in Edison, New Jersey for qualitative and quantitative analysis (Refs. 8; 14).
Compatible drums were composited based upon BTU content, manifested and shipped to
appropriate RCRA approved disposal facilities (Ref. 8). In addition, four (4) underground
storage tanks (3 -1000 gallon tanks and 1 -10,000 gallon tank) containing diesel fuel, heating
oil, gasoline and residual sludges were removed from the north and south sides of the warehouse
(Ref. 20; Fig. 3). Soils underlying the tanks are likely to be contaminated since the integrity
of the tanks appeared to be compromised by rusted areas on the walls of the tanks. No post
removal samples or removals of potentially contaminated soils underlying the tanks have been
conducted. Sludges found in the tanks retained volatile substances as evidenced by CGI readings
(Ref. 20).
On November 16, 1992, EPA ESD visited the site again and collected soil samples. Sample
results have not been made available due to ongoing federal action against Cherokee (Ref. 15;
41). On May 18 -19, 1993, EPA ERRB contracted Four Seasons Environmental to sample soil
and sediment in support of completion of emergency removal activities at the site. Sediment
samples were taken in coordination with the NC Superfund Section to address possible site
related surface water contamination (Ref. 8).
2.3 Operational History and Waste Characteristics
Mr. Griffith purchased the property from Charlotte Investment Co. on August 21, 1952
(Ref. 6). According to tax records, the warehouse was constructed in 1948 (Ref. 6). The
United States Postal Service operated a maintenance garage for postal vehicles for a 20 year
period at the site (Ref. 9). A concrete island identified in Figure 3 was used to dispense
petroleum products from three underground storage tanks located south of the warehouse (Fig.
3). An oil/water separator located at the southeast comer of the warehouse was likely used by
the maintenance garage to remove water from waste oil or gasoline. Chemicals commonly
stored at the maintenance garage could include petroleum products (gasoline, oil, grease, diesel
fuel, etc .. ) and cleaning solvents. Wastes associated with the maintenance garage include waste
oils, greases, spent fuels and spent cleaning solvents.
Mecklenburg County reportedly used the site as a collection center for recycling plastic and
aluminum (Ref. 9). No hazardous materials are associated with recycling center operations at
the site.
5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
m
0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
One underground storage tank was registered to a company called "Saunders Systems" (Ref. 10).
No other information could be identified regarding the contents of the underground storage tank,
type of operation or wastes generated by • Saunders Systems".
Cherokee Resources, a waste oil recycling company, leased the site from August 1990 to August
1991 (Refs. 9; 14). Cherokee Resources used the warehouse and site as an unpermitted
temporary storage facility for tankers, roll-offs, trailers and drums containing polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCB), highly flammable solvents, cyanides, strong acids and bases, hazardous organic
compounds and hazardous inorganic substances (Ref. 7; Photo 2). Many of the 6096 drums
found on site were stacked 3 to 4 high inside the warehouse with incompatible waste types stored
adjacent to each other (Refs. 8; 16, Photos 2, 3). A number of the containers had corroded
causing the contents to leak onto the floor of the building (Ref. 8). When the EPA Technical
Assistance Team (TAT) investigated the warehouse in 1991, they found cyanide vapors at levels
considered dangerous to human health (Ref. 12). They also detected explosive levels of
combustible gases within the confines of the warehouse and trailers which forced the TAT team
to evacuate the site (Ref. 12, p. 3). According to EPA On Scene Coordinator (OSC) Michael
Taylor, Cherokee apparently relabelled hazardous waste drums as non-hazardous, falsified
manifests and deliberately adulterated the contents of roll-offs to make it appear as though the
contents were non-hazardous waste (Refs. 8; 12).
Several areas of stained soils were noted on the site during the May 19, 1993 Site Inspection
(SI). The areas of stained soil were confined to exposed soils at the basin area (Photo 4; Fig.
3), the east entrance to the warehouse (Fig. 3) and along the site boundary with Irwin Creek
(Photo 1; Fig. 3). Most of the exposed soil on the site is located to the south and east of the
warehouse. The exposed soil is thick red clay covered by gravel with little vegetation noted in
these areas (Ref. 8). According to EPA OSC Michael Taylor, roll-offs containing contaminated
soils were routinely dumped onto the ground to volatilize contaminants before repackaging (Ref.
8). He reported that there was no evidence of a surface cap over these soil piles or a liner
underneath the piles or a runoff collection system used at the site. Bordering the site, thick
vegetation was noted along the bank of Irwin Creek with no areas of stressed vegetation noted
(Ref. 8). No soil has been removed from the site.
3.0 WASTE/SOURCE SAMPLING
3.1 Sampling Locations
Cherokee Resources, Inc. stored drums, tankers, trailers and roll-offs on the site. The
warehouse contained several thousand drums, some of which had leaked onto the concrete floor
inside the building. Drums were also stored on concrete pads at the east entrance to the
warehouse and north of the warehouse (Photo 1). Drums were stored on exposed soil south and
east of the warehouse along the border with Irwin Creek (Photo 1). Drums were also stored
inside trailers located east of the warehouse near Irwin Creek, south of the warehouse and
southwest of the warehouse on South Summit Avenue (Photo 1). According to RCRA inspection
notes, several drums stored inside a trailer east of the warehouse along Irwin Creek leaked
7
I
I
I
I
I
I
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
materials onto the soil in this area (Refs. 1; 16, Photo #4; Photo 1). Samples of stained soil
under a trailer with leaking drums identified phenanthrene, bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate,
naphthalene, 2-methylnaphthalene, fluorene, toluene, ethylbenzene, total xylene, chromium,
copper, calcium, lead, nickel and zinc contamination in the surface soils (Table 1). During the
EPA removal, drums were separated based upon compatibility group and staged on exposed soil
and the asphalt parking lot around the warehouse (Photo 3). Thirteen roll-off boxes containing
contaminated soils were stored on a concrete pad east of the warehouse entrance and north of
the warehouse (Photo 1). Samples of soils in the roll-off boxes exhibited elevated levels of
phenol, bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate and methylene chloride (Ref. 16; Table 1). A release of
"oily liquid" contaminating surface soils was reported from the roll-offs (Ref. 12, p. 4).
According to EPA OSC Michael Taylor, roll-off boxes were routinely dumped onto the exposed
soil near the northeast corner of the site to allow the soils to aerate (Ref. 8). Two areas of
discolored soils are apparent in this area on the February 1991 aerial photo (Photo 1). Three
tankers were stored at the South Summit Avenue site (Fig. 3; Photo l; Photo 3; Ref. 12, p. 1).
One of the tankers were reported to have been badly damaged with runoff from the tanker
threatening to enter Irwin Creek (Ref. 12, p. 1).
All drums, trailers, tankers and roll-off boxes have been removed as of the May 1993; the only
remaining source at the site is soil contamination. Post removal soil sampling was conducted
by ERRB on May 18 -19, 1993. The site was divided into 50 foot by 50 foot grids. Thirteen
(13) of the grids were sampled at intervals of 0-6", 6-12" and 12-18". The sample locations
were chosen based upon previously staged waste areas or visual contamination. The samples
were analyzed for volatiles, semi-volatiles, total metals, cyanide, pesticides including
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) in addition to oil and grease. (Ref. 21). Each grid was
composite sampled over the grid except for the volatiles, where the sample was taken at a single
collection point located in the center of the grid. A copy of the grid map showing the soil
sampling locations is attached as Fig. 3.
3.2 Analytical results
Of the thirteen (13) soil sampling locations, Samples FS-C, FS-F, FS-G and FS-K exhibited lead
concentrations at least 3 times greater than background (FS-A) over the entire 18 inch soil
profile. Sample FS-B exhibited elevated lead concentrations in the 0-6 inch profile only.
Cadmium was detected in samples FS-F and FS-L to 12 inches and in samples FS-G and FS-K
in the 6-12 inch profile. Elevated chromium concentrations were detected in samples FS-F in
the 6-12 inch profile and FS-J in the 12-18 inch profile. Elevated arsenic concentrations were
detected in samples FS-I to 6 inches and FS-K to 18 inches. In addition, elevated concentrations
of bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, di-n-octyl phthalate, fluorene and pyrene were detected in sample
FS-H to 6 inches (Ref. 21; Table 2).
8
-----
Vo!atiles
•Methv,ene Chloride
~AC et one
Benzene I
Toluene
,' Ethyl Benzene I
Total X~lene
1,1 Dich!oroethane
T etrachloroeth_.r.lene
·styrene
All units are reported 1n ppm
Semi volatiles
Phenanthrene I
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Bis{2 ethy1hexy!}p hthalate I
Benzo(a}pvrene I
Naphtha! ene
2 Methylnaphthalene I
Phenol
'F!uoien-e
Di~n octyl phthalate
12 Methy\phenol
2,4 Dichtornphenol I
All units are reported 1n ppm
--

-
-l!!!!!!!I
Table 1.
Cherokee Oil Site
925 South Summit Avenue
Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co., N.C.
US EPA ID: NCD 986 190 239
Roy Weston T.A.T. Analytical Data -July 19. 1991
CR 001 CR 002 CR 003
Background Drum Outside Bldg Roll Off Box
0.043
0.41 0
0.250 -
3.00
3.20
I 15.00 -
I
I
I
CR 001 CR 002 CR 003
Background Drum Outside Bldg Roll Ott Box
0.510 51.0
0.580
0.370
0.440
0.360
59.0
I 130.0
I
26.0
I
I
I
I
I
s;a liiii ------Le end
1 ··· I observed release
3 x Bkg. (CR-001)
non detect
CR 006 I CR 007 .I CR 004 CR 005
Roll Off Box Stained Soil Trailer Orum !nside Bldg. Drum -Loadinq OocH
0.780 -I 1.90
I I
-I I
._.: 3.00 : ')~ •280.0/ :;.·-:;.-,:;··
·••\95:0: :--:::---:-.:-··:/
. :, \.640;0-;::?:--.-. . I 0.360 ()"-,
I 0.280
-0.860 I
I I 0.250 I
CR 004 CR 005 rl CR 006 ( CR 007 I
Roll Off Box Stained Soil Trailer Drum Inside Bldq. Drum -Loading Doc~
• :. ,:,\:}56,o:: 0,:::::1 I --i
I 0.370 I I
_[ -I
5.6 ;: '.';1Ao;o·,y:·: •<I 22.0 I 1.20
I I
' ':77iO ··•··::.:•.j I I 30.0i/ ::1 -I L
12.0 I I 0. 740 I 1.20 I
I :290:: :,,:::1 -I I
I 0.800 J I
I I 1.60 I
I J 0.220 I
Page 1.
-----
Pesticides & PCB's I
4.4-DDT I
Heptachlor I
All units are reported 1n ppm
I
Metals I
; Aluminum It; . ,.
A(serlic i,,JQ
Barium ~1) I
Cadmium 3
Chromium :Z.'/. •o•
; Cobalt 0-'I
·copper ,i, ..
Calcium
Iron 'j "•" Lead 'I,, 0
Maonesium
Manganese (. ,. I
'Nickel I;.,
Potassium
Sodium
Vanadium '" Zinc I "l. "6>
I Mercury /• I I
Selenium Z.<l I
Cyanide ' 1. q;. I
All units are reported 1n ppm
--11!!!!!!1 I!!!!!!
Table 1.
Cherokee Oil Site
925 South Summit Avenue
Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co., N.C.
US EPA !D: NCO 986 190 239
Roy Weston T.A.T. Analytical Data -July 19, 1991
CR-001 CR-002 CR-003
Background Drum Outside Bldg Roll-Off Box
0.021 ----
0,003 ----
CR-001 CR-002 I CR-003
Background Drum Outside Bldg Roll-Off Box
19000 I 940 I 32000
rrQ.n/ I 3.0 I 8.0
87.0 71.0 37.0
--1.5 --
19.0 42.0 28.0
9.0 2.4 15.0
32.0 110.0 61.0
2600 720 2500
37000 I 20000 23000
58.0 I 100.0 230.0
1300 I 650.0 5700
410.0 120.0 250.0
7.0 34.0 16.0
830.0 240.0 140.0
240.0 3200 320
83.0 16,0 I 68.0
73.0 770.0 I 5.0
--3.0 --
--I 0.3 --
--I ----
liiiii liii ----Legend !
> •·•·•·• observed release
3 x 8kg. (CR-001)
--I non detect
CR-004 CR-005 CR-006 CR-007 I
Roll-Off Box Stained Soil -Trailer Orum Inside Bldg. Drum -loadinq Dad,
--------I
-------

-
I
I CR-004 l CR-005 ! CR-006 CR-007 ,I
Roll-Off Box Stained Soil -Trailer Orum Inside Bldg. Drum -Loading Dad,
I 7200 I 1900 I 19000 20 I
I 6.0 I --I 7.0 --I
130.0 I 82.0 I 18.0 I 0.7 I
--I --

-
-
--I
36.0 ··x:.:/83'0.:••' ·· 12.0 I 0.1
9.0 2.0 I --I -

-
I
42.0 '' '::i:\550·0':'' 16.0 0.7 I
6400 :-:-,:.·.c:::•:•.-::::\ 9600'0\C-/': .. 10000 200.0
I 18000 2300 850.0 I 27.0
I 54.0 ···:::230:0·:-"C • ·.1 20.0 I 10.0
4100 I .1500 I 22000 I 2700
I 220.0 I 40.0 I 46.0 I 27.0
26.0 ·=.:_,.,._ :=> :·:r 2 60. o ·. I 4.0 I 0.5 I
1700 160.0 I 2100 I 300.0 I
22000 · • ,: <J8oo:· I 180.0 I 1100 I
22.0 27.0 --I --I
I 360.0 ·. 610.0' .. '-,·-;, 36.0 I 0.7 ' '
----I --I --I
I ----I --I --I
I 2.0 --I --I --' '
Page 2.
-----

-
----Table 2.
May 18 -t 9, t 993 EPA ERRB Soil Sample Results
Cherokee Oil Site
NCD 986 ; 90 239
1," ;t.'1 g-6 Inches
· Arsenic Barium Cadmium Chromium · Lead Bis(2-eth-hex)phth
r.;~;~=~:~(~B~kg~,e~~i2
i•
3===t~~:t~~:~~==C~~~~~~=t~~~::~:8~1==~;,;i~~:~:~~.;(~-
FS-C 83.7 2e.2 •?••rno:o::
FS-0 61.1 30.1 26.3
FS-E 79.2 40.1
FS-F 97.8 • 3•39// 27.5 ·•/255:oc
FS-G 70.3 18.0 <t::.?o:st:·
FS-H 83.6 23.5 49.3
FS-1 -./.988/: 62.0 29.8 25.8
~~ = ~ h7~!?":t----;;:~;:;c·-;'~--j-------·7i----;'-~;c;'.-o;:-i,-----:.i2
3
6i
9os-· 7-,;o-.-.7 ---
FS -L 1 3.65 89.3 •/_2:58 <::1 22.5 34_2
FS M I 3.38 56.5 42.5
Note. All units are reported 1n mg/kg
6-12 Inches
Arsenic Barium Cadmium Chromium lead Bis(2-eth-hex)phth
,cF~S~--A:--c(""B"'""kg-:)f': c.>";-'1.;c89;;-----,=-'=1"'3;;'1,-'_ ,-, -p=""-"---F1~2oi".~o ~,I -'90_17e5-
FS-B I I 59.9 I I 17.6
FS-C I I 69.1 I 41.2 1· ••432::·
FS-0 I 109 I I
FS-E 60.5 27.9 11.6
FS-F _ 5.13 /:150•0_ :/9/17/:/ ::/.132:0::.: :/.BH:ot
FS-G 2.01 69.8 ··•::/1'88::/ ://857/?
FS-H 49.2 17.7
FS-1 3.59 37.7 14.8
FS-J 2.04 36.1 21.4
FS-K •:::/21":4/: 65.7 .: •:{1:94/•:/ 21.9 /\:124'.0/:
FS-L 2.21 67.6 · •:c1t::/ 21.5 15.6
FS M 2.01 49.3 19.6
Note. All units are reported 1n mg/kg
12-18 lnches
Arsenic Barium Cadmium Chromium lead Bis(2-eth-hex)phth
"F~S~-7A7.(B~k-g"):'cc'"',;-'_~3c-1 -r°"'-a3~5'cc_ 6c--i"===-r l-"---;1':;4-';_ 2~1 -8R.44A81
FS-B 51.8 I I 15.1
FS-C 2.36 85.3 I 27.0 p:·•.:-25•3:
FS-0 62.2 I 19.6 10.2
FS-E 68.o I 23.8
FS-F 1.76 43.4 I 15.4
FS-G 61.4 I 25.8
FS-H 55.6 I
FS-1 2.2 47.9 I 26.9
FS-J 68.2 I: :•A5.-7? ..
FS-K -·.13:Af?i 64.3 I 19.1
FS-L I 27.8
Fs M 63. 1 I 20. 7
Note. All units are reported 1n mg/kg
//42.6}.
'.)/:Aota:::·;.:.:
11.8
8.79
10.4
/79•5;:-:•-
11.s
10.6
--
Di-N-Octyl Phth
Di-N-Octyl Phth
Di-N-Octyl Phth
--Le!=!end
I non detect
observed release
3 times Bkg (FS-A)
Flourene Pyrene
Flourene Pyrene
Flourene Pyrene
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3.3 Conclusions
Lead was detected in samples FS-B and FS-C. These samples correspond to a former drum
storage area south of the warehouse near Irwin Creek (Photo 1). Cadmium and lead were
detected in samples FS-F and FS-G. Barium and chromium were detected in sample FS-F.
These samples corresponded to the former trailer locations east of the warehouse and could
represent soil contamination due to runoff from north and east of the warehouse (Photo 1). Bis
(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, di-n-octyl phthalate, fluorene and pyrene were detected in sample FS-H
which correspond to the location of a former trailer and a former waste soil pile east of the
warehouse (Photo 1). Arsenic was detected in sample FS-I at a concentration that meets the
criteria for an observed release (3 x bkgd FS-A) and exceeds the published EPA cancer risk
screen concentration (0.33 mg/kg) for arsenic. Sample FS-I corresponds to a former waste soil
pile location northeast of the warehouse (Photo 1). Chromium was detected in sample FS-J
which was taken from a grassy area north of the warehouse. Runoff from the former drum and
roll-off storage pad north of the warehouse is a likely contributing source (Photo 1). Arsenic,
cadmium and lead were detected in sample FS-K, taken from a grassy area located north of the
warehouse (Photo 1). The concentration of arsenic in sample FS-K meets the criteria for an
observed release (3 x bkgd FS-A) and exceeds the published EPA cancer risk screen
concentration (0.33 mg/kg) for arsenic. No identified source corresponds to sample FS-K,
although runoff from the warehouse or former drum and roll-off storage area north of the
warehouse could be contributing sources. Cadmium was detected in sample FS-L which
corresponds to a low area in the center of the asphalt parking lot. Drums were staged in this
area during the EPA removal (Photo 3).
4.0 GROUND WATER PATHWAY
I 4.1 Hydrogeology
I
I
I
I
Mecklenburg County is located in the Charlotte Belt of the Piedmont Physiographic Province
(Ref. 22). This area is typically underlain by three wnes; (1) a regolith wne (2) a transition
wne and (3) an underlying fractured crystalline bedrock. The regolith wne is composed of
saprolite (clay rich .residual materials derived from inplace weathering of bedrock), alluvium
(deposits of unconsolidated sediments by streams and rivers) and soil (the uppermost layer
referred to as the natural medium for plant growth) (Ref. 23). Hydraulic conductivity for the
regolith wne saprolite averages approximately 5 feet per day (1. 764 x 10-3 cm/sec) (Ref. 24).
The transition wne is where the unconsolidated material grades into bedrock consisting primarily
of saprolite and partially weathered bedrock (Ref. 23). The fractured bedrock has a crystalline
texture with numerous closely spaced fractures near the bedrock surface. Fracture frequency
and size decrease with depth due to increasing lithostatic pressure (Ref. 23). The bedrock of
the Charlotte belt under the site is composed primarily of pinkish gray, massively to weakly
foliated, granitic rock containing hornblende (Ref. 22).
12
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Groundwater is recharged by rainfall which is stored in the regolith zone and gradually
percolates into the transition and fractured bedrock zones (Ref. 23). Both the transition zones
and the fractured bedrock zones can be used as transfer zones for groundwater. However, most
wells are cased beyond the transition zone into bedrock (Ref. 23). The fractures in the bedrock
can act as conduits which serve to transfer water to discharge points such as wells (Ref. 23).
Based upon well logs, the regolith zone thickness averages 5 to 60 feet thick depending upon
topography (Ref. 23, p. 12). The transition zone averages about 15 feet thick and the fractured
bedrock wells do not usually extend beyond 400 feet (Ref. 23). Depth to groundwater averages
20 to 32 feet depending upon topography (Ref. 23, p. 15). However, the proximity of the site
to Irwin Creek indicates that groundwater could be encountered as shallow as 10 to 15 feet (Fig.
1). Groundwater flow would be expected to follow gravity and topography from areas of high
to low elevation indicating that groundwater flow for the site would be expected to flow south
and southeast towards Irwin Creek.
4.2 Targets
A majority of residents within a 4 mile radius of the site rely on drinking water drawn from
surface water intakes located on Lake Norman and Mountain Island Lake and operated by the
Charlotte Mecklenburg Utilities Department (CMUD). Both intakes are located upstream of the
site on a separate branch of the Catawba River (Ref. 25). CMUD operates lines that extend
over a four mile radius of the site and most residents have access to city water (Fig. 1). Based
upon a conversation with Mr. Jeff Mills, an engineer with CMUD, there are residents within
the four (4) mile radius who are not tapped into the municipal system. A copy of the water line
maps for a 0.25 mile radius of the site was obtained from CMUD. No residents were identified
within a 0.25 mile radius of the site who were not tapped into the CMUD municipal water
system (Figs. 4; 5). A housecount was performed for residents along Freedom Road between
Brown Ave. and the 4 mile distance ring identified by Mr. Mills as not having access to the
CMUD municipal system (Ref. 26).
Ground Water Population
Distance Radius Housecount ~unated Population
0 -2.0 miles 0 0
2.0 -3.0 miles 22 55
3.0 -4.0 miles 154 385
There are currently no wellhead protection areas designated within Mecklenburg County
(Ref. 27).
13
I
I
I
4.3 Sample Locations
No groundwater samples were collected during the site inspection since no groundwater users
were identified within 2.0 miles of the site.
I 4.4 Analytical Results
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
No samples were collected since no ground water wells with suspected contamination were
identified.
4.5 Conclusions
A release to groundwater is suspected based upon past disposal practices, the contents and
condition of the underground storage tanks, the mobility of contaminants spilled at the site,
visible and analytical data indicating surface soil and subsoil contamination at the site, the
shallow depth to groundwater and the moderate conductivity of the subsoil and regolith.
However, the threat posed to groundwater users is minimal due to the fact that no groundwater
users could be identified within 2.0 miles of the site during the investigation.
5.0 SURFACE WATER PATHWAY
5.1 Hydrology
The Cherokee Oil site is bordered on the south and east by Irwin Creek (Ref. 8; Fig. 1).
Overland drainage from the east and south side of the warehouse drains south approximately 100
feet across exposed soil to a basin-like area adjacent to a concrete abutment on Irwin Creek (Ref.
8; Fig. 2; Photo 5). Runoff drains through eroded ditches located on each side of the concrete
abutment into Irwin Creek (Ref. 8; Photo 6, 7). The probable points of entry into Irwin Creek
from the basin area corresponds to samples FS-N and FS-O on Photo 1. Overland drainage
from the east and north side of the warehouse travels east across exposed soil approximately 100
feet and drains over an embankment into Irwin Creek (Ref. 8; Fig. 2). The probable point of
entry of contaminants to Irwin Creek from east and north of the warehouse corresponds to
sample FS-Q in Photo 1. Irwin Creek has a mean annual flow of 26.8 cubic feet per second
(cfs) (Ref. 28). Irwin Creek flows into Sugar Creek approximately 4 miles below the furthest
downstream PPE for the site (FS-O) (Fig. 6). Sugar Creek comprises the remainder of the 15
mile downstream distance. Sugar Creek has a mean annual flow of 71.55 cfs (Ref. 28).
Sources on the site lie within the 100-year floodplain and are not contained for any flood (Refs.
8; 29).
5.2 Targets
No surface water intakes are located within 15 miles downstream of the site (Ref. 25). Most
residents of Charlotte are served CMUD which operates surface water intakes on Lake Norman
and Mountain Island Lake reservoirs, upstream of the site on the Catawba River (Ref. 25).
16
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Residents not served by the municipal system obtain drinking water from private wells.
Irwin and Sugar Creeks are used for recreational fishing (Ref. 30). Aquatic species commonly
caught in both creeks are Largemouth Bass, Bream, Sunfish and Catfish (Ref. 30). Although
records from an unrelated fish kill near the site indicate the availability of recreational fish near
the site (Refs. 31a; 31b), interviews with area business owners (Ref. 8), wildlife officers (Ref.
30) and local water quality officials (Ref. 32) suggests that recreational fishing does not occur
near the subject site. The closest documented point where fish are taken for consumption is
approximately 1 mile downstream from the site in Irwin Creek near the West Blvd bridge (Ref.
30; Photo 8; Fig. 6).
During the Preliminary Assessment conducted by the NC Superfund Section in May 1992, a
potential wetland containing hydrophytic vegetation (Cattails) was identified near the upstream
site boundary (Ref. 33). Soil Conservation Service maps and hydric index reports identify the
soil type as monacan, a soil type which has hydric inclusions capable of supporting wetland
vegetation (Refs. 3; 34). During the Site Inspection, John Allison, Regional Soil Specialist
trained in identifying wetlands for the NC Wetlands Mapping Program accompanied us to the
site to confirm the presence of the subject wetland. It was determined that there are currently
no identifiable wetlands in Irwin Creek near the subject site (Ref. 35). The nearest downstream
wetland is a 1.42 acre secondary target wetland having approximately 0.1 miles of frontage
identified using the National Wetlands Inventory map. The subject wetland is located
approximately 1.95 miles downstream of the subject site on Irwin Creek (Ref. 36). A total of
5.5 miles of wetland frontage were calculated along the entire 15 mile surface water pathway
(Ref. 36; Fig. 6)
Based upon review of the NC Natural Heritage Program maps, two observations of the state
endangered mussel Lasmigona Decorata, otherwise known as the Carolina Heelsplitter, were
identified within the 15 miles downstream of the site (Ref. 37). Last known observations for
the Carolina Heelsplitter were in the 1870's (Ref. 38). A survey of the drainages for
endangered mussels was conducted in the mid 1980's by Brunswick College professor Eugene
Keferl. Professor Keferl confirmed by telephone that his study found no observations of the
Carolina Heelsplitter in Irwin or Sugar Creek along the 15 mile downstream distance (Ref. 39).
17
V,
' ' \
I
(f}j
j
Ou,.o k, c c,; I S,'./,:_
l-lCD %& 1c;c, '.B"i
5u,.f,,c, VVQlcv Pa-I~"'"/
[h_,. by; J;t,".3 le.s f•hm,
~-A{H cl,, ) '1 l/ If,
/,/(. Sue!:f.,("1_i/lO 51.:cn(.),j
Fig. No: 6 Title: Surface Water Pathway· Sketch
North Carolina
Division of Solidf------------,~-----------~-------------'
Waste Management Scale: Not to Scale Date: March 1994 Drawn By: D. Moore
Superfund Section Site Name: Cherokee Oil Site NCD 986 190 239
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
5.3 Sample Locations
Four (4) discrete sediment samples were collected along the eastern and southern boundary of
the site in Irwin Creek (Ref. 21). No known fishery or wetland areas were sampled due to their
distance from the site. The sample locations are identified in Photo 1. The four samples are:
* One sediment sample (FS-P) upstream of the site in Irwin Creek to determine background
levels.
* One sediment sample (FS-Q) near the most upstream site probable point of entry (PPE)
to establish a release from overland drainage originating in the east and north side of the
warehouse area.
* One sediment sample (FS-N) collected at the east side of the concrete abutment to
establish a release from overland drainage originating in the east and south side of the
warehouse area. (Photo 9)
* One sediment sample (FS-O) collected at the west side of the concrete abutment to
establish a release from overland drainage originating in the east and south side of the warehouse
area. (Photo 10)
5.4 Analytical Results
Samples were collected on May 19, 1993 by Four Season Environmental of Charlotte and
analyzed at Specialized Assays Environmental of Nashville Tennessee. Analytical requirements
for each sample included volatiles per EPA method 8240, semi-volatiles per EPA method 8270,
total metals per EPA method 3550/9071, cyanide, oil and grease, pesticides including
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB). Analytical results are summarized in Table 3. Downstream
sediment sample FS-N taken at the east side of the concrete abutment exhibited significantly
elevated arsenic (4.13 ppm) and lead (213.0 ppm) levels compared to background (FS-P).
Downstream sediment sample FS-O taken at the west side of the concrete abutment exhibited ·
significantly elevated arsenic (1.17 ppm} levels compared to background. Sample FS-Q taken
at the east boundary with Irwin Creek exhibited no levels significantly greater than background
(Ref. 21, p. 9; Table 3).
5.5 Conclusions
A release of hazardous substances from the site into Irwin Creek is evidenced by the elevated
concentrations of arsenic and lead in the downstream samples (FS-N and FS-O). Analytical data
suggest that these hazardous substances are migrating overland to the basin area and draining
into Irwin Creek. Irwin Creek has been documented to contain a viable fishery near the subject
site. However, recreational fishing has not been established in Irwin Creek nearer than
approximately 1 mile downstream of the furthest PPE from the site (FS-O), outside of the area
of contamination.
19
----·--------------
Cherokee Oil Site
925 South Summit Avenue
Charlotte, North Carolina
NCD 986 190 239
Table 3.
Irwin Creek Sediment Samples -May 19, 1993
collected by EPA -ERRB
Arsenic Barium Chromium
FS-P (Bkg} 49.9
FS-O d--4_:..:5::_:_·_-::_2_+-----:::1-=8-:. 6_70
17.0
Lead
44.0
36.8
FS-N !--~6~8~.7'.__-f---=2=5~.1_:__-f'
FS-0 1-~56::_:_-_:..:1_..L------'---9_2_.8 __
Note: All units are reported in mg/kg
Legend
non detect
observed release
3 times Bkg. FS-P
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
6.0 SOIL EXPOSURE AND AIR PATHWAYS
6.1 Physical Conditions
The site is surrounded by a chain link fence with a locked entrance (Ref. 8). The fence extends
along the site boundaries with South Summit Avenue and Bryant Place (Ref. 8). The fence
appears to be in generally good condition except for the South Summit Avenue entrance where
security was compromised by a gap in the gate (Ref. 8). North of the warehouse is a large
asphalt parking lot (Ref. 8; Fig. 2) Between the parking lot and the warehouse is a small area
of grass (Ref. 8). East and south of the warehouse is exposed soil (Ref. 8). The exposed soil
is thick red clay covered by gravel with little vegetation noted in these areas (Ref. 8). Bordering
the site, thick vegetation was noted along the bank of Irwin Creek with no areas of stressed
vegetation (Ref. 8).
6.2 Soil and Air Targets
There are currently no workers onsite (Ref. 8). No schools, daycare facilities or residences are
on or within 200 feet of established areas of soil contamination (Ref. 8). The site is bounded
by industrial and business properties (Ref. 8). A total population of 126,311 individuals are
estimated to live within 4 miles of the site, 108 of whom reside within 0.25 miles of the site
(Ref. 40). The closest residence is located near the corner of Grandin and Morehead Streets,
approximately 0.2 miles northwest of the site (Fig. 2; Photo 1). Bryant Park, a local
recreational park, is located approximately 0.25 miles west of the site (Figs. 1; 2). The nearest
wetland is located 1.95 miles downstream of the site in Irwin Creek (Ref. 36). No other
sensitive environments, critical habitats or endangered species could be identified within a 4
miles radius of the site (Ref. 37).
6.3 Soil Sample Locations
Since contaminated soil has been considered the source at the site, soil sample locations are the
same as those identified in section 3.1 of this report titled "Waste/Source -Sample Locations".
6.4 Soil Analytical Results
Soil analytical results are the same as the analytical results presented in section 3.2 of this report
titled "Waste/Source -Analytical Results" (Table 2). Two areas of soil contamination exceeding
published EPA cancer risk screen concentration benchmarks were identified on the site at grids
FS-I and FS-K during the May 18 -19, 1993 post removal sampling (Fig. 3).
6.5 Air Monitoring
Air monitoring was conducted during previous investigations by the EPA and contractor TAT
teams using HNu, OVA air monitors, combustible gas meters and cyanide detectors. Air
21
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
J
monitor results indicated explosive levels of combustible gases within the confines of the
warehouse and a trailer prior to the removal. Cyanide vapors were detected inside the
warehouse at levels considered dangerous to human health (Ref. 12). No air monitoring was
conducted by the NC Superfund Section during the May 19, 1993 Site Inspection post removal
sampling event.
6.6 Conclusions
The site is located in an industrialized urban setting. The closest residences are located
approximately 0.2 miles northwest of the site and an estimated 126,311 persons live within a 4
mile radius of the site. Since the sources of air releases have been removed as of March 1993,
the consequent threat posed by those sources has also been removed. This is confirmed by soil
samples taken over the site which indicated no detectable levels of volatile organic compounds.
The soil pathway remains a threat due to the presence of elevated inorganic and semi-volatile
organic compounds in the soil. Particularly, two sample grids (FS-I and FS-K) identified arsenic
contamination at levels exceeding published EPA cancer risk screen concentrations. However,
the threat of exposure is diminished by the fact that there are no workers on the site, there are
no residents living within 200 feet of contaminated soil and the site is secured by a padlocked
chain link fence.
7.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The Cherokee Oil Site Inspection was conducted to gather data necessary to evaluate the need
for further CERCLA remedial action at this site. Soil and sediment samples were collected by
EPA contractors Four Season Environmental and analyzed for volatiles, semi-volatiles, total
metals, cyanide, oil and grease and pesticides including polychlorinated liiphenyls (PCB) to
characterize the types of substances deposited at the site and their potential migration pathways.
In addition, information was collected to confirm target populations and environments potentially
at risk from the site.
The Site Inspection indicated that groundwater underneath the site may be contaminated with
hazardous substances, however, all residents within 2.0 miles rely on CMUD for municipal
drinking water. Elevated levels of inorganic compounds were detected in Irwin Creek
sediments. The substances found in the sediments were also found at elevated levels in soils on
site and in drums shipped offsite by EPA. Irwin Creek contains fish in the area of
contamination, however, no evidence of fishing within 1 mile downstream of the site was
established. No evidence of current air releases were established from the site. Soil on the site
remains contaminated with inorganic and semi-volatile organic compounds. The soil exposure
threat is minimized since there are no workers currently onsite, however, the soil exposure threat
will become a future concern should the site become active. Based upon the lack of ground
water, surface water and soil targets, it is recommended that the site be assigned an "No Further
Remedial Action Planned" status under CERCLA.
22
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Cherokee Oil Site
NCO 986 190 239
References
1. Linda Mann, Enforcement Supervisor, Hazardous Waste Section, Division of Solid
Waste Management, NC DEHNR, Cherokee Resources Site Inspection Notes, July
29-30, 1991.
2. Latitude and Longitude Calculation worksheet, Cherokee Oil Site, NCO 986 190 239.
Pat DeRosa, April 7, 1992.
3. United States Department of Agriculture -Soil Conservation Service. Soil Survey of
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. Issued June 1980.
4. United States Departm.ent of Commerce, 1961. Technical Paper No. 40. Rainfall
Frequency Atlas of the United States. Two Year -Twenty Four Hour Rainfall.
Issued 1961.
5. United States Department of Commerce, Climatic Atlas of the United States:
National Climatic Center, Asheville, NC. 1979.
6. Mecklenburg County Tax Assessors Office, Tax Line Map, Book 73, Page 25, Lot
301A
7. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region IV, Fact Sheet, Cherokee
Oil Site, Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. February 1993.
8. Douglas Moore, Environmental Chemist, NC Superfund Section, Memo to File: Field
Trip and Sampling Report -May 19, 1993, Cherokee Oil Site, NCO 986 190 239.
June 6, 1993.
9. Douglas Moore, Environmental Chemist, NC Superfund Section, Memo to File: Site
History, Cherokee Oil Site, NCO 986 190 239. September 24, 1993.
10. Douglas Moore, Environmental Chemist, NC Superfund Section, Memo to File:
Underground Storage Tanks -Cherokee Oil Site, NCO 986 190 239. May 21, 1993.
11. Douglas Moore, Environmental Chemist, NC Superfund Section, Memo to File:
RCRA Status -Cherokee Oil Site, NCO 986 190 239. January 12, 1994.
12. Dora Ann Danner, On Scene Coordinator, Emergency Response and Removal
Branch Memo to File. Subject: Removal Authorization for Cherokee Oil Site,
Charlotte, North Carolina. February 4, 1992.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Cherokee Oil Site
NCO 986 190 239
References
Page 2
13. Douglas Moore, Environmental Chemist, NC Superfund Section, Memo to File:
Discharge Permits, Cherokee Oil Site, NCO 986 190 239. May 18, 1993.
14. Douglas Moore, Environmental Chemist, NC Superfund Section, Memo to File: Site
History, Cherokee Oil Site, NCO 986 190 239. May 18, 1993.
15. Douglas Moore, Environmental Chemist, NC Superfund Section, Memo to File:
Criminal Investigations data of Cherokee Oil Site, NCO 986 190 239. May 10, 1993.
16. Roy Weston Technical Assistance Team (TAT) Report. From: Ayon Walters, TAT,
Region IV To: Dora Ann Danner, OSC, USEPA, Region IV Through: William R.
· Doyle, TATL, Region IV. Subject: Cherokee Oil Site, Release Investigation Report,
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. October 16, 1991.
17. "Firm Ordered to Clean Up Waste Drums", Charlotte Observer, Sunday, July 21, 1991.
Page lB.
18. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region IV, Administrative Order
in the matter of: Cherokee Oil Site, Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina.
EPA Docket: 91-34-A. August 6, 1991.
19. Douglas Moore, Environmental Chemist, NC Superfund Section, Memo to File:
Lawsuit Information, Cherokee Oil Site, NCO 986 190 239. January 6, 1994.
20. Douglas Moore, Environmental Chemist, NC Superfund Section, Memo to File.
Topic: Current site conditions at the Cherokee Oil Site, Cherokee Oil Site, NCO
986 190 239. May 17, 1993.
21. Michael Taylor, OSC, Emergency Response and Removal Branch, Memo to: Craig
Benedikt, Site Assessment Section Subject: Cherokee Oil Site, Charlotte,
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina analytical data from soil/sediment sampling.
July 26, 1993.
22. North Carolina Geological Survey, Division of Land Resources, Department of
Natural Resources and Community Development, Geologic Map of North Carolina,
1985.
23. The Hydrogeologic Framework and a Reconnaissance of Ground Water Quality in
the Piedmont Province of North Carolina, with a design for future study. by Douglas
Harned. U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Investigations Report 88-4130.
Raleigh, North Carolina. 1989.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Cherokee Oil Site
NCD 986 190 239
References
Page 3
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
Basic Eleinents of Ground Water Hydrology with reference to conditions in North
Carolina, by Ralph Heath. U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Investigations
Report 80-44. Raleigh, North Carolina. 1990.
Douglas Moore, Environmental Chemist, NC Superfund Section, Memo to File.
Topic: Intakes for the Charlotte Mecklenburg Water System, Dynatech Industries,
Inc., NCD 981 014 517. January 25, 1993.
Douglas Moore, Environmental Chemist, NC Superfund Section, Memo to File.
Topic: CMUD Water Coverage, Cherokee Oil Site, NCD 986 190 239. January 7,
1994.
Jeanette Stanley, Environmental Chemist, NC Superfund Section, Memo to
Superfund Section Staff. Subject: Update on the status of Well Head Protection
Programs in N.C. January 10, 1994.
Douglas Moore, Environmental Chemist, NC Superfund Section, Memo to File
Topic: Flow Calculations, Cherokee Oil Site, NCD 986 190 239. January 07, 1994.
Attachment I: United States Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey,
Drainage Areas of Selected Sites on Streams in North Carolina, Open-File Report
83-211. 1983. Attachment II: United States Department of the Interior, U.S.
Geological Survey, Map of Mean Annual Runoff for the Northeastern, Southeastern,
Mid-Atlantic United States, Water Years 1951-80. 1990.
Federal Emergency Management Agency. Flood Insurance Rate Map. City of
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County. Panel Number 370159 0013B. February 26, 1982.
Douglas Moore, Environmental Chemist, NC Superfund Section. Memo to File. Re:
Fishery and Recreational use along Irwin Creek, Cherokee Oil Site, NCD 986 190
239. March 15, 1994.
31. Letters to Douglas Moore regarding October 1990 Fish Kill in Irwin Creek:
a.
b.
From: Anthony Roux, Mecklenburg County Department of Environmental
Protection. Fish Kill investigation report and enforcement action. May 25,
1993.
From: Franklin McBride, Program Manager, Division of Boating and Inland
Fisheries. Biological investigation of fish kill in Irwin Creek. May 25, 1993.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Cherokee Oil Site
NCD 986 190 239
References
Page 4
32. Douglas Moore, Environmental Chemist, NC Superfund Section, Memo to File.
Topic: Fishing in Irwin Creek, Cherokee Oil She, NCD 986 190 239. January 7,
1994.
33. North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources, Division
of Solid Waste Management, NC Superfund Section, Preliminary Assessment,
Cherokee Oil Site, NCD 986 190 239, September 4, 1992. Hal Bryson,
Environmental Chemist, Hand Drawn Site Map of Cherokee Oil Site -Figure 2.
September 4, 1992.
34. United States Department of Agriculture -Soil Conservation Service. Hydric Soils
Index. Mecklenburg County. June 1991.
35. John Allison, Regional Soil Scientist. Letter to Douglas Moore, Environmental
Chemist, Superfund Section. Subject: Cherokee Oil Site, Charlotte, Mecklenburg
County, North Carolina. June 10, 1993.
36. Douglas Moore, Environmental Chemist, NC Superfund Section. Memo to File.
Topic: Target Wetlands Calculations, Cherokee Oil Site, NCD 986 190 239.
January 1, 1994. Attachment I: National Wetlands Inventory Maps of the Charlotte
East and Charlotte West and Fort Mill, NC/SC Quandrangles.
37. Douglas Moore, Environmental Chemist, NC Superfund Section. Memo to File.
Topic: NC Natural Heritage trip report, Cherokee Oil Site, NCD 986 190 239.
June 3, 1993.
38. Eugene P. Keferl and Rowland M. Shelley, The Final Report on a Status Survey of
the Carolina Heelsplitter, Lasmigona decorata and the Carolina Elktoe, Alasmidonta
robusta. Prepared for the United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife
Service and the North Carolina State Museum of Natural Science. July 9, 1988.
Attachment I: North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Observation reports for
L. decorata, Carolina Heelsplitter for Irwin Creek/Sugar Creek, Charlotte,
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. 1987.
39. Douglas Moore, Environmental Chemist, NC Superfund Section. Memo to File.
Topic: Irwin/Sugar Creek endangered species, Cherokee Oil Site. NCD 986 190
239. June 7, 1993.
40. North Carolina Center for Geographic and Information Analysis. Population table
for distance rings within a 4 mile radius of the Cherokee Oil Site, NCD 986 190 239.
May 12, 1993.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Cherokee Oil Site
NCD 986 190 239
References
Page 5
41.
42.
United States of America v. Cherokee Resources, Inc., Keith Norland Eidson, Gene
Wesley (Gabe) Hartsell and Theodore Karl Glauser Criminal No. 3:93CR186.
Letter to Keith Eidson, Cherokee Resources, Inc. From: Bill Meyer, Director, Solid
Waste Management Division, Re: Compliance Order with Administrative Penalty,
Cherokee Resources d/b/a Cherokee Oil Company, Docket #92-329. July 10, 1992.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Photodocumentation
Cherokee Oil Site
NCD 986 190 239
February 3, 1991 North Carolina Department of Transportation Aerial Photo of
Cherokee Oil Site. Note: Trailers scattered along boundary, roll-offs adjacent
to building and stockpiled drums on concrete pad at east entrance to warehouse.
Photo represents conditions of site during period of operation. Sediment
sampling locations are marked on Irwin Creek.
Panoramic View of Cherokee Oil Site. May 19, 1993. Photo taken from
Northeast gate facing east to southwest.
October 1991 EPA ERRB Aerial Photo. Note: Numerous drums are stockpiled
and segregated onsite in various locations. Photo represents conditions at the site
during the EPA ERRB removal action.
Stained soil near the east drainage from the concrete abutment. Photo taken
from east wall of concrete abutment facing north. May 19, 1993.
Panoramic View of Cherokee Oil Site. May 19, 1993. Photo taken near the
southeast corner of the warehouse facing southeast to southwest. Basin area
located in center of photo as well as the concrete abutment.
Eroded drainage ditche located along east wall of the concrete abutment.
Sediment Sample FS-N taken at point where drainage enters Irwin Creek. Photo
taken from drainage ditch facing north. May 19, 1993.
Eroded drainage ditch located along west wall of the concrete abutment.
Sediment Sample FS-O taken at point where drainage enters Irwin Creek. Photo
taken from drainage ditch facing north. May 19, 1993.
Fishermen at West Boulevard Bridge over Irwin Creek. Photo taken from West
Blvd facing east. February 22, 1993.
Irwin Creek sediment sample FS-N location. Sediment sample taken near the
small red flag located in the center of the photo. Photo taken from east wall of
concretet abutment facing southeast. May 19, 1993.
Irwin Creek sediment sample FS-O location. Sediment sample taken near the
small red flag located in the lower right hand corner of the photo. Photo taken
from west drainage ditch facing south. May 19, 1993.
·•
_J
• , 8
,,-.) ( IT Y Of
N\Jh'Tt1 r:J,RUL INA h't-CTANClULf..,R COORDINATE .SYSTEM
f If-VA I IONS 1-?i f Fr-<Rl OTO MEAN SEA LEVEL DATUM
I SJ/\EH.IStif:-0 UY US COAST & GE.DDETIC SURVEY
COMF'lt [_LJ BY PHOTOGRAMMtTRIC Ml:::-JHODS
DY
/\BRAMS AERIAL SURVEY CORPORAT.ION
36 17
/ 1/ /
35 16 ~-./;,,;;;,
34 15
•
I ' '
' ' \ '
i .
, .~ . ,....;_;.,-
r~. • 1R~1·1N
,, --~-'
, ~,. ;,,1"° -~ ..--. -t _-C' .. ,, • _, • •
. .
36"
TOTAL
6,888"
-5(;,~46'
\
------.
• • • _, .• ,~• -< ---~-
FIGURE 2
, . ,, .... ,. ,·. .
; " , f t,H~tl-i·'.,
'
•
.,
1
1C J tr Y ~ :l-J ;.\ ;J l -0 tr 1' J1
NORTH CAROLINA
ENGINEERING DIVISION
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
'
~
~ ~
)><'.
r
)
/
,.
•
' '
.
!,
\
'
•
'.
' ,,
,
I
·-
\
:
. '.•
1' " ' •. '; .,
·,•". ·'"·
''
•
•
I
! '
-
•
i
i
'
!
•
I
i
!'
'en
' [_-,1-~r·•<'.,.,
I
,t
i
i
I
I
j
I I
' '
I
' .
•
' <'
l
. , ''
"
' '· ' ·1· . i.
'
~:\
. . ,_
If-✓!
•
'-
I
'
, -
'-.
•
'
r
'-
' !
I
I
~
!
!
, ,
! '
' ' I
I
i
I
'
R;_
"
I i
• •• "' -. .,. "'.,, . ".;.,.
!
'
' ' !
'
'
' '
' I
\ I'
I r
J
.r;~--...... ~ ~,(_-
..,. -=-,:•.:."' -<Ii: "'
"' '0 -... ~.t.. .,. --'i_,. ,rv ,., ., ·o-C. II'--...........
,""--"',;-"<t ,, "';,, -.. "'<a , .,. -:. Ii" .,,
' , .
",; -"' . ,
'•
•
I
I • i
·-. ! 1' ' " ~ ··-....._ -. ' ' '
-r, <
I, ' .,, .
' '
. .
Ii
'• ,.
•
,,~(:/ '/c,'I:,
'1 //
,CJ:!
I
I
----------..:__-----
,.
•
•
! -·
·•
WEsr
-~ ' • I 1 I,
'
o' ~ ;
' ,0 !, ;·
I
l
,
I
)
I
• , 'i
·'
'
-
,
•
~
'
------
'---.
• '
'~ ........
' '
'--o.. '' ,,
• !
----
'
'
~-----~'::_~ ' .. '-,.,.
----~ ,~,;,~
• . .
\ ,,
I \
'
I/ I
•
'
! ,.,
1 ' I .
sf
c' l~• ' ',
: ' ' ;1 ( ·: .: ~ ..
,, ,, .' \" ·.: ,, ''. -
,, ;___.1,
··t -ri .... '
' . .r: ./ ·-..... ~; -f{_L
\::)
J j
'
I ' '
I
!
•
' ' ,1 •f,.
1:j/
} •~-.
. ,,.
ii' -' ,,,
!;'~'ii
".' ",-1'. ., . ,, .
_.,,~J. 1,;,.
-,H•lfl: •'·
'},]:
. \ '.,, ~ . • t-1
'
: '' . , ~~ ·' •s: .. i ·,• ~ . '
' m . ' . . ,,
I\
I
•
,,; :
• •
,,,
i'
/
l
1
i \: < • I ,., '1·., . "l ·, .' 1( i. ;•;
_, : : ,. ~!•
,.
,! •
•
,,
' .
I I,
' :' .
' ' ' •.' -~.;:
'
,t, ,.,.:~-.-, •. .,
1'
I ,.,
i'I~; ' ,• .• I'"·
1'. I
'I' ; ' I I
''
·•L,: •~' •o ,., ' '~ .. f', , ., .,
j_··, ,8>
_.,:i• 0.:0 ·..,' "\ . . I
r-,..,.. $ ', :<Ii , __ ,
r ,,:, •,~ i ,;_,.~~• ;?:, :
... <") 'I '/ ~ r'·,1 .,-,.
11$! • ·~ ~•.'' ... ,,
tflli ... • t< _ " / < •1'. ·.t
-~ i 11'-'1'<•; ... ~ ... -.,· . . , ' . ' . ·; ,., ,,
.,, ' " J ' ' ',.,,~ '•j ~ ,
i
' ,.
' '
''..// 'h:.
' . i
; ,/ -I, ',, :. t .
. .-''"'
•
. , • ,\ I ' . 'I . ,,, t ·. .i \ ,\•
-./
' ' ' ' . "
1 I ' : d ' • I, ' ' <t' •
/
• i
•; I •
•J''I,, ~~ I
'",.j;; I i
1 --r .
, ..
". " I •I , i· ., •.•
: ,.,
"'. !/.,_
' , ·~,,,·,·tiii
, "
'. ,.1 ''
·11 ·\Ye,
''•· ,,
AJl ... :--. ., ..
•• .1, ••
::, ' i : ,,
' •
y·
,,
'• .,~''.:
1·,-.._,."✓·•,. f
.::..-
'
' • . " ' .
\ ~.,.~ .. , . .i,I
r ,, ,
•,# '! ,(:','
•\ .. -;!I
~:·,
' l' ' t
r .U"·
t ,,., ,i
-....,,
. ,_ ..
.. ~'
:•\ • ~ l '._; ,.., . ~
,', '
i ·~-
• c1 , I
e. '!·.!'• n •
'! '
·~, ~-, "'' ;('I ,,
I,
• ' 'I ,: .
.. :'!,,;~,.I,·
1 , •• I
t .. \
' •
.
" .. ~
''
. ' '
•
' ' '
' '
. " "">-' A~ " I . ,...
(
,
' ' 0) •
~;r,. '/'· ''.'i'
' ' I ,;,.,,,
,, .:"'
,, t~ ,·' I
,,..~,:1,
-~. t
,_ 'j" ' ;~,r., ~ .
I r
""'·1 ..s, 11:_,. ~o
,, -,i., ,s,. ,{$" _,,•. , ~ ..
l
'
i
j
i -----JJ '
,
' .,
,,
I
I
! i
I,
IZ Io
s.soo78
IZ/2.
s.soo79
, '
' '
ii
1. .
..,
i
'
I
I
-
' ' i
' l / 0 i
0 :
'
Lll-'/O'A'o'~ 6,.,4.f!.(::;
U'~D,._1'>1,1,..1 •, 4•10-P,•:1
APDeo 54" /;(>•:;>j~lt'.J
•
r-:.15, -"
I
' ' .
i
i .
✓ '-1.
i
r
,
•
' ..
'. '
,.,,,,
•' •
,,
;
',
'
•• j
\ I ' .. ,, I ~ . .,,,
,,:1
' .
'./--,:· :·;;
-' . ,, . -
... I
,:· .: ;' '1· .f:
'1; • ' ••
'
,.: '
••
'
•'
·, .,; ' ' ~ . .:,..;.::. ,, .
,_
ll
C
D
~~----G-
~\
FS-B \
Grid B-2
. i-
FS-C
Grid C-2
FS-D
-
----,--
'
GATE
!
' '
r-7
---------· -------1----1-------------
1 I
I
U.S.T.'s' L..J
11
I I ----t---;---7 ,-----
I I
L_.J
Composite of Grids 0-2 and D-3
FS-A (Background)
[J]
j
LO
!
•--··-----------------------------------------,---------,-------------------, I
r-· l
I I: 1-t;
U·:.;.T.
6 ROLf-OFFS
;
COMMAND POST
POOL
----•-· -·, FS-M
; Composite of Grids A-6, A-7, A-8 and A-9
---------'--
I
\
\
I
I
I
I
\
I
FS-l
Grid D-6
I
\
\
\
···y-----,
\
\
--\ __ ! ------
---------------------------
FS-L
Grid C-7
FIRE .,,
HYDRt,NT
';I
---I
0 ·1
r .::J I
I !i
'
I
i;
p
·7
i
I
' j -
'
+-
'
L,------------+------------•----~-
F
I
I L ___________ -·· -. -------.
;
' i
L
l
I ' ' J
\
\
\
I
C.i).C.
\
\ FS-E
\ Grid E-2
\
\
-· \ ____ _
\
\
\
\..
;
_j ·-·--.
S/1 ,1PLE STORAGE
(~IJEl~Of<EE OIL l~1 :rJVl,L SITE
------
,-CH,/\RLOTT[, ~AECKLENBl.i,~G CCJ!JNTY, N.C.
0 SITE u!/:i.r,,::\M
:\ I) ,h, p T f [) AFP!A:
; ' '
------..
' ·l.,_
" ' \
~
\
01L/vV.A. TER
SEPARATOR
*
FS-F
Grid F-4
--- ------
\
\
' " " ' ' , 1
j ...__ i . --..
! '..._
I
-f
·-·--._
"' • 0
"" :ii
"' ' "' ~ "" ·c: -+-0 ... 0
-~ ~ 8. 0 E ' Vl 0
"' u
I
I
·--·-+-
i
FS-1 \
Grid E-7 \
I ' --------·--.------! --------
I
I
I
I I
\
\
)
I
I
I
+----/---,~<----------
I
/
I
/
----__ _l __ _ -------_J_ ----------
~;,,:: I ·r~-~~-1!Tr!YT2l;,.:)'.~;:.·.
-,_ , .. :! •·i 1~/-?:Y:·i-:'\:-,,:;r.:.:·-::r'.:--,:
~---J
L: 5
SCALE
FEET
50 100
11 j()
3'04
' .
UNIT T
EPA TM NT OF THE
GEOL GICAL SU
.,
\ -
-f ~(,13! 1, __,f
--
I
/
" ' (
-
' '
)
,,
' J
,,
,J
i
,_
Main
Island ,
c",i' \,
i
s
I TERIOR
VEY
,1
;-( I
',
\,
\ l l "
' ' ' . ·-· ' ..
, __
'
81 :00' I ' I
35" l •cic7'7.,.,"F"~~->TIC"C~C'>TC
'
w
II
J 0 0 l
--
).~
r' I
I I'
1, 1, ,,v;,:,-"
I c
,, "
'r, ', ,.,,.,0 -'
apped edited
Control
,,
7 .
. "'~,,!
cd Jbl1shed by the
NOAA, and North Ca
lopography photoBra .· •· •• ;;;
!~ken 5 F,d<i chc
Po on1c pro1ect1on
' 1' "
'
rvey
,n Geodetic Survey
n .aer al µhotogra
10,000-foot gnd based North Carolina coco-d1nJte system
1000 et ,versa! Tr nsverse Mercator grid ticks ne 17
shown m ue I North American Da m
To place ed,r;ted North er
pro1ect1on Ima,, 10 meters sooth and
s wn by dashed corner ticks
[!;,tum 1983
17 meters west as
Finer dashed lines 1nd1cale selected fence and field lines wher
generally Vl$1ble aerial photographs This 1nformat1on 1s unc ecked
Red 1ml md,cales reas lrl which ly I ndmar bu1ldm~ ore shown
-I
' I
Ro,eello
"'
57'30
' --\ / ,f
\
c'\
,J I
--' I
\
.r
:l>.
s.,_ __ /,
I , \,
I
l
(<'O~S Me""'~'-'
r 511"1': ,. ,,
•
'c
'
-~.,••....:c::_• •
-------' ----■■• • . . -.-.. . ' .. ' \ · ... · ... .,,,., " ~v--:~ ,
......... , ... -;
' ,,
.3co,_, .,,,_ -( ....:_-£-
~_/" '~-.,,,,_,,,,,\ (?--
C;'l~ -;; ,_ .. r-,i'>,,i;)
(
'' ' ,_;
'J
•
' . .-~ ..
••'\:•:.s'.""''P.)I'<\ •::-::•a J~ "·,•••• •1\ \\ :,l ,,,,,,
! 'j '~,->,. .. .X\ ;:::!_,~·\:\ ~f~ J~ •• :~
\
. ' '. -"? ---
" ' "'1 l
lj~
,J
-"j
'
' ' (
-' ' '"'·.( i'
_[, ':,730
,.
,,!
... . .. .. . ... . .. "' ~ . : ..
-~e ,
I I/ I
' ' ' -
-• I
•• - J
.,,: --'
-"' :;"' ~ . .,
~
' I ' 1/ 1 1
" I I
I
H[I MIL
' I~ -
' ·);;:-
,::✓, 1/ ~ ,
,I ,r
"
Jrn GRID AND
DCC<INJ\lll)N
1980 MAGNET 1rn m NORIB am
ii
~o/
-; . '!,/
"11i ., . " -
' ;,
\" '"', ,.: \
-' ~ ,• 1 '111 ( •
' -' ) I ~ ~•
I _c ,--c,}i"·. -'· ._,/ V: • ·,/\ (
) .c;= soi.rr,-, -.. ,.._£
"" I --
,./'_ /! )~ ,; ' 17\'
-. \_'\ : ~. ::-I 1,11-'; / )\,'-,
'"'1 \ L"_ \ l1y~-:,/
o I ;
/ I
-1
~~~,~OR"f\l
\.__r1 /\ I, , ,".4, _,' ::::r\::.., / ,1 L
~ J,,,u,
JI -u ~~::___ -,, ' ' -:s :~if;"~'-~
"
' '
--'
X
"-
'
-"" •:J;(
* •' ' I - •
; \ ~ -'\ ..
0 •,
':::._ '-.J
.Ac,C -.\
' '-, ,,
'
-;-=
T M(LL/ ws
AU:.1~40l0
= """ o, >l F
<; C KIL8 E.ER ~~~~=~~=~
i"ONTCUR ff
NATIONAL GEO TIC YE:RT
10 FFFT
'
TIIIS MAC r: I IFS 1TH Tl NAL AP ACCURACY Tl\ DAROS
ro SAU BY U GEOLO ICAL SU EY ESTON VIRGINIA 209 n~1•ci;1e
1) 6a1UJLl~r, !CcQd
.l1~ckoc 1v1~, ~~ t~J 198
r 'Cr111 t. DF5CR I G Tn IC MAPS A D SYMBOLS IS AVAILABLE. ON REOUE:C.T
.JhJs
'
'
'
I i
(
(
l Ml.
M
8~,Htr,.., F 01
1-Gacden
r,
/
)
/
[
"" cc
_5,
p/
l \;,
]7
7 /1() j:•.~
I 'i,
_J -
: . '"A
-. --~-·.
~ OJP.D'lA~G E OCATIO
MOUNT lN ISL D L E Q ORA OLE
D
LI NTTED ST A TE
7 Ml
'' --
I,
J
I (l_/1
I_(<\\ {_ ,,
I/ , __
NOR CAROLIN p
UTE ERIES (TOPO RAPH[C)
RT
G
NT OF E I TERIO
OL GICAL SURVEY
l "-0000 80"5
-,
'-¼, 't
,/l Tv
t:
I
Golf<
~ .,.fourse -'
/
I
(
(
,\ . ,.~ ·V.r-..-~,..:...,.,,-~ ... ,...., .. ~ I
,~•,"• 1, I.,. It • c-~
• I I,'
I.'
I -{ t, e.,)
11 "l' "'
'tb_J'\::;-...
,;
'BM/
.:!. "1i ---' ,_. ',,,.
,_ f);!p"-.. \ ' '""Y? . ¾\,,, ·c_ -01 . ~, -
~
I •/~ I I
(
I I
I I
' ' -1 I \ 1 I ,
. (' ,, ' -
' ' ( (, I " -~
-~· ~ 1;t-'\,._;,,__
\__--'~·,, ___ --.,_, I ; '-.
I
I' 1' I
" 17' 30"
--.
'o -)
' , <'i(t;"<_
'' '-<> ~
·i : . ; ~.,.. [., , I. .'...~• ~
•' t t' I '... 1/' ' ' I .-/ , ___ l
,.. ~ / ~
R,J '
IWA
---{_ --' / 'I. ' ' ' ' ,,-
··•·N f ·~::t;,-,
?' -~-
,)Ii
1\ 11 •
I I "' -.,.
\( --t ;(~I* '
" ' 00 I
cd cc and d b cclo
Pnma, h1ghw~y
hard Jrflce
weath
FICATION
Light duly
improved
d all weather
rfac
Con Ir NOAA, and Nu ti
i: 1c\0 •r,mm>lri T tLJ
k~n 1c -,0 1:J cheu0 j
rol,n Goodet1c
fro 11
'
,,,
Secord h1ghwa) all
hard sunace
lrt0 rslate Roule
..
ealher Unimproved
weather
road lair or dry
C
== --====S ~ racdca ple11rrctr1 a
,US Rout late R u Po, nic pro1ect1or1
10 000 toot g11d based 1 N t11 Carolina coordmal sys!
10()() mr>ter l 11vecs~I r, ns,e,se Mercator g,
shawn ,r blue 19?7 North American D;,tum
rn
ARLOTTE WE T. N. C. To plac the predicted No /\mer an D.itu :983 'llove the
3';,0/ :>-Wl::!O';, ';,/7 5
1968
ORF\IISEO 1980
1H NW-SERIES V842
"
Ject1011 lines 10 meter, so~ o 17 l s wesl ~,
,howri by dashed corner ticks
-led tint ,n 8tes areas ,n ICh QI I Ian mar
11 ' ,,, '\
I
----'«'"" '-L
1' 'i . rr
' -' I,'
"' ' ' '
"
_, I ~-' --
' --' -',_,,,_, ----)
;-' I ,,-
1 , , I ~
'
aO IV N~
/COR E
,,J;;;::iiJ:t _:0\
-0,
!.y,_.-Sea , :;-
' ' rr--:-
-I.
/ ' 1/:.'
' '
' -
,,
lJ •n I
;/ \\\ I ( \
~ v•\
L ,
"· ' '
• "
-/4". j .~ ..... L. '· ,' ·--
)
' .3= )) _// ( I 1
I
,-~ _, -, ,~1\
V<; • I \'_,:,/,1/1 it,
'I
' I
--~ ....
,, ,. ~-, ,(
, <:"'V:._h_i
' ' ' ,,
--
l ' 'j C
;:-::-_/', ',,
;:re'., I •>'
1 F--_ {4
_:; '-05/ •
' . ; .
''t ,:, ,(,
~t. 1111
·-, /,
"-\ ~
' ~ '. :,
!':-,,;; --
'•
' ~:
}.:if()-
' ' " ,-' "
' (\ --1
,--/C-~,; ,;,;
I ;,,., 1->1;,~tii:\""""''-: ~ -
(',•\ -
'4;~~~ -. -,-;--0-
\
f ;,~, 1U..
" --I -
; ·r"v~H II 1, D
r.,:t, ,_ I
" ~ -I~ ,,
• ' ◊ '
; ,'",Cc I ',,,o mo
' (,Y. f'-'
-C../"' _,
-I ' -",' " ,.1 _,)
I 1 I ,
,,I ':~1 --~,
It:.:: /I -
-1
------,,;;'j '
:
I I:,,_ ~--:·~,7;):c:C:F, I\ \2:
DERIT
ORTH C
.5 MIN
0
E
-\\t -, .re,
: • ✓ J ·, . .. . .. -
:i;r ... ; • t'. ,_· '_ _ff.·-~--'
,
. \ ":;} ·. "I
,;.,. •'"';'~.,.,'<.I . .\ .. ,c, ,,,_ ··: "''·'-
," ' 'I~
-,
~\" ·-·
'~-:;:
~ ~-·-,--
N
" :.,ccc.,, ". ,c;c,,,;11c '-.:.:.-~ "-
".. . . jij;il,\,' . J -,'
,,,.,' '~T'" '., ,~., ....,..,,SC'! ' '', -
u D ANGLE
-MECK NBU co
OPO RAPHIC)
,0
/
3913
-,, ... . , '-' ,,. ,, ... :_,._/'., -',
'
. l
• \ (c-'J
•• I -~3Y ~ \,-//;:;::<"o,.•5:t"' "\
' I , '
CJ# <-:.: '.~ ;) ,f '._=c.•'.
::::: J -'
"
' '
,, '
/~ J3S~ '.! . " ,,
-'
;·
" / ~~
" " ~.Y. ~ -. '
/!, " ~ ') I
'1': "'' ,11:.I 1U ,..-1 ,
S' •
98 MIL.
IIM L,SIIJ ll
r;.IN,'TIJ
"
,-
' f,a-• • ,
I • • I, ;! .
* '. '1' -
" '
\ -,-,,'
r cc. __ '-.,0L: ,, ,_1,,z;c://.?
l"' :• ,./4
•~•~ I
' ; ' .,., "'" ..
"
• • '• ••.. "\_: '<c;•:f (,1 •\O . If~;,-> :(\ ' • ;L
l' ;( . < ,::'\;,, '-'
\ ·,_ J<t.v . .
,, . '
. :·
. -., ' -"" ! I ' • • • • -,, •
'·~,, ✓
\I • •,. : F ure 1.
Chero ee Oil Site
____l____l ---l -=,--•-==~
NHION
TOU~ lr<IHl✓AL
FRT AL [)
' r " .,
TCT
oW OF 192
Tl ISM,\ GCr~~LI~~ \'IIH NAII-JNHI ~AP ,IJR~C T~NO u:,
FOR SALE U S GE OGI L SURVEY
NV R OL RADO B0225 0 ON VIRGINIA 092
SC IBING TO A~H MAPS ANll SYMROI S I AIJ>.B 0
MIi
REQUEST
5 South
Ch lo e,
U EPA 1D.
"' '
C
( ourc
E tent of
(Source:
Cit I I I
NC.
39
al
C
4rCI'}'
' -
/I "W .",/'-II
'"
Im ove
ater Ser ice
Ca i Improvement
at r Coverage
•
'
0 •
RO".D i.; AS lrlCATI
Pr mar~ 11gl1
'1irU crfoc
Secondary h1g
1 rd '\L,.rlace
II weather
1dy all WC !her
USRote
CH
,gt Id
improved
roaG all weat er
SHIH
Un11111 rcved ro3d
weather fa" "'
s
LOTTE EAST,
3 80 87 TF 024
DMA 48 4 Ill
a
'. '"89
' '
a
\
C.
"Bl"''"' N
;;_ ~.i.. '...;..._
:~·.;~:-
1!. ,.· "~. , '
• . ;
. .
~ ~~ . ~ ,,. . 't<~i ~~' ,,~:,,!!<!! --. _·: ', ·.:-:... ,;;,: ,;:.
,-• " ,, . ; ' ~-: ~ . ' ,.,. . t ' . .... • o,!flllll', .. _. -..,..,.~-' ' . . ~-:_ .. , ;"· '. •_., ' ji
. . . . . .
~-. , '( ' ' '. . ~ ', : . ~ ..,,-.
·.;. .. . ;. .... ~ . . ,.... . ' ....
' " -~~ .. ,.f ~.. .
-~
' ''
..,
~'-.3 . . ' '
. ~ ,e ,.., /
; .. ·.:··"/'·;';~ ~
J· , _,. ·_ .,,
.. · :·~ .''!.W
,.
Photo t Cherokee Oil Site
925 South Sum . Charlotte M rnit Avenue USEPA in: :i~n9burg Co., N.C. 86 190 239 ~
Scale: 1 inch = 100 feet
Source: \f'l North Carolina D February 3 1991 epartrnent of Trans .
' portat1on
' ... '' 4· ~' ,•~, '