NCD980602163_19810902_Warren County PCB Landfill_SERB C_Emergency Action Plan-OCR

,,EDS r41 _,'1-(',I' ; ft ~ is~ UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY <i "'
~1,, ,/
!.qlPRO'~C,-. REGION IV
SEP O Z 1981
4AH-HERB
345 COURTLAND STREET
ATLANTA. GEORGIA 30365
Mr. O.W. Strickland, Head
Dept. of Human Resources and
Division of Health Services
306 North Wilmington Street
Bath Building, Room 213
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602
Dear Mr. Strickland:
I am enclosing a copy of the Emergency Action Plan which we are in
the process of inplementing. This plan outlines a sampling program
for the PCB Spill.
Also, there will be forthcoming a copy of the work plan which will
execute the aforementioned sampling program.
If you have any questions or corrments regarding these plans, please
contact me.
Sincerely,
11 -~' ~~ih ~---{ir~:;_e; -,v d
North Carolina Project Officer
Air & Hazardous Materials Division
Enclosure
. '
' '
n
FIELD INVESTIGATIONS OF
UNCONTROLLED HAZARDOUS WASTE SiTES
FIT PROJECT
TASK REPORT TO THE
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACT NO. 68-01-6056
EMERGE~CY ACTION PLAN
ON
PCB SPILLS, NORTH CAROLI~A
16 February 1981
TDD No. F4-8O12-O6
Prepared by: Charles H. Lee
W. Frank Mills, Jr.
Submitted to: Wayne Mathis
Assistant DPO
ecology and en"ironment. inc.
International Soec,aiis•s in the En11ironmen:a1 Sc,ences
CONTE NTS
Page
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2 INTRODUCTION
2.1 EMERGENCY ACTION PLAN
2.2 SITE BACKGROUND
3 SITE DESCRIPTION
3.1 LOCATION AND SITE DESCRIPTION
3.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
3.3 WASTE MATERIALS .
4 HAZARD ASSESSMENT .
4 .1 WASTE HAZARD CHARACTERISTICS
4.2 POTENTIAL HEALTH & ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
5 CONCLUSIONS . .
6 RECOMMENDATIONS
REFERE NCES CITED .
APPENDIX A. LOCATIONS OF POLYCHLORINATED BIPHE NYL SPILLS
ALONG NORTH CAROLINA HIGHWAYS ....
APPENDIX B. GENERAL SPILL SITE LOCATION-MA.PS ..
APPENDIX C. ENDANGERED AND THREATE NED SPECIES OF SPILL PREA S
IN NORTH CAROL INA ....
l l
3
3
3
7
7
7
10
13
13
n
15
16
18
A-1
B-1
. . C-1
ILLUS TRA TI ONS
FIGURE 1. LOCATION MAP OF PCB SPILLS .............. 4
FIGURE 2. MAP OF PHYSIOGRAPHIC PROVINCES ............ 8
TABLE 1. CHEMICAL ANALYSES FOR POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENYL
CONTENTS OF SOIL SA~LES FROM NORTH CAROLINA SITES .. 11
l EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Ecology and Environment, Incorporated (E&E) 1s under prime contract
to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). E&E has been tasked to
prepare planning documents called Emergency Action Plans, which
delineate response actions for hazardous waste sites affected by the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of
1980, commonly called Superfund.
I
~
polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) were dumped along 210
Between June and August 1978, over 30,000 gallons of
miles of roadway
i
I I I
I
in North Carolina. Approximately 40,000 cubic yards of contaminated
soil resulted. Sampling studies were conducted by EPA Surveillance and
Analysis Division (SAD) and North Carolina State investigators during
1978 and 1979. Temporary measures, which consisted"of treatment with
activated carbon and asphalt, were taken by the State to prevent
migration of PCB from the spill sites and neutralize hazard to people
coming 1n contact with the material (Mitchell, 1980).
As a result of feasibility studies reported in an Environmental
Impact Statement by the State, removal and subsequent deposition 1n an
approved chemical waste landfill in Warren Countv North Carolina was
selected as the best remedial approach. State funds were released for
land acquisition in August 1979, but lawsuits filed by Warren County
and Warren County residents resulted 1n a restraining order against use
of that site that is still in effect. -Fish samc les , collected ac two sites durin2 Seote~jer 1979, ~~ :~e
~orth Carolina ?ish and Game C2~~ission indica~ed no ?C3 in excess o ~
?ood and Drug Administration (?DA ) limits. -------1-
However, approximately two years have passed since sediment sarnplin~
studies were condu c ted and analvses fo r PCB performed. ~i eld vi sits t o
spill site locations by E&E and North Carolina State investigators
during January 1981 revealed that the carbon and asphalt that were
applied in August 1978 are no longer visible at these sites, and the
areal extent of the contaminated soil is presently unknown. E&E
recommends that detailed sampling and analytical studies be conducted at
sites in the Coastal Plain, Piedmont, and Triassic Basin Physiographic
Provinces as a response action to determine the areal extent and
possible concentration pattern of contaminated soil. These emergency
response studies will cost approximately S112,500, and can be
accomplished in five months.
An additional investigation proposed by EPA Surveillance and
Analysis Division (SAD), Athens, Georgia includes collection of fish and
sediment samples upstream and downstream from a number of sites . If PCB
contamination is detected at an y of the selected sites, the ne xt order
tributary stream and terminal stream will be considered for sampling.
-2-
' 2 INTRODUCTION
2.1 EMERGENCY ACTION PLAN
Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act of 1980, corrrrnonly called Superfund, the President is
authorized to commit federal resources in response to a known or
threatened release of hazardous substances or contaminants that pose an
imminent and substantial environmental danger. Ecology and Environment,
Incorporated (E&E) has been tasked by the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) to prepare Emergency Action Plans for sites affected by Superfund.
This planning document includes environmental evaluation, hazardous
condition assessment, and recormnended response action to be imolemented
under the Superfund guidelines by EPA.
The State of North Carolina has assumed the o.bligation for final
clean-up, and has taken the affirmative steps (land purchase, permitting,
and planning) to deal with the contaminated areas.
2 .2 SITE BACKGROUND
Between June and August 1978, over 30,000 gallons of industrial
liquid waste material were deliberately discharged along highway shoulders
1n several North Carolina counties ( b ~). Soil samples were collected
by EPA and North Carolina State investigators along highway shoulders , and
analyses were performed by EPA (SAD) and North Carolina State Division of
Environmental Management Laboratories during August 1978. These analyses
identified the waste ~aterial at sites al onz the hiznwavs as Aroclor -126 n ,
-3-
a polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB). Minor amounts of Aroclor-1242 were also
detected.
The fi rst t emporary measure t aken by t h e No rth Carolina Di vi s ion o f
Highways was to cover the spills in Johnston and Harnett Counties with
sand. During the latter part of August, following a proposal by J. B.
Webe~ of North Carolina State University, an activated charcoal solution
followed by a thin coat of liquid asphalt was applied to the roadway
shoulders where the spills occurred by the North Carolina Department of
Transportation. The carbon was utilized to adsorb the PCB; the asphalt
was applied to eliminate dusting and runoff of the charcoal.
Tests performed on fish samples collected during September 1979 at
locations in Nash and Warren counties by the North Carolina Fish and Gawe
Commission, indicated no PCB contamination in excess of FDA limits
(Rececca Slack and Steve Ha11, EPA, written commun.). Soil tests
conducted by North Carolina State personnel during January 1979 also
revealed no migration of PCB (Mitchell, 1980). However, no sediment
studies have been conducted in nearly two years, and the present status of
PCB migration from the spill sites is unknown. A.visit to sev eral spill
site locations in Wake, Franklin, and Nash Counties by North Carolina
State and E&E personnel during January 1981 revealed that the carbon and
asphalt treatment that was applied during August 1978 is no longer visible
at these locations.
Incineration of the PCB contaminated soil was considered as a
permanent remedy , but no approved system could be found that could process
the soil. Transportation of the estimated 40,000 cubic yards of soi l to
an existing, approved landfill in Alabama was rejected because of limited
transportation resources, manpower restrictions , logistics of the
intrastate move, and excessive cost (M itche l l, 19 80). A oeti t ion for a
ch an ge in E?A r egu lation s t h at wo uld have permitt ed per manent ~ situ
t r ea tmen t of th e soill s bv t he State of ~orth Carolina was . .
Envi r onmental ?rotection Az encv in June 1979.
-5-
approved a state-proposed PCB disposal site 1n Warren County, North
Carolina. In August 1979, state funds were released with which to
purchase the disposal site, but lawsuits filed by Warren Countv and ~arren
County residents resulted in a restraining order against the use of the
site that is still in effect.
-6-
3 SITE DESCRIPTION
3.1 LOCATION AND SITE DESCRIPTION
The contaminated areas are located on the immediate shoulder of over
210 miles of roadway in 14 North Carolina counties (App. A). Warning
signs have been erected along the highway where contamination occurred;
however, there is no security, and there is unrestricted access to the
contaminated soil.
The 210 miles of roadway on which the spills occurred were grouped
into 15 spill site locations for the Environmental Impact Statement
prepared by the North Carolina Department of Crime Control and Public
Safety (Mitchell, 1980). These 15 locations are shown on maps in Appendix
B.
3.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SF.TTING
PCB dumping occurred 1n three physiographic provinces 10 North
Carolina --Coastal Plain, Piedmont, and Triassic Rasin (Fig. 2).
Lithologically and structurally, rocks and sediments from these areas span
the geologic spectrum. Coastal Plain deposits include unconsolidated
sand, silt, clay, and sand with interbedded gravel. Piedmont rocks
include low-to high-grade metam0rphosed sedimentary and volcanic material
intruded by igneous rocks of varying composition and origin (Wilson and
Carpenter, 1975). Triassic rocks consist of claystone, siltstone, shale,
sandstone, and conglomerate (Lee, 1978). Structurally, the Coasta l Plain
is locally faulted; the sediments strike northeastward and dip gently
toward the s ou t heastern coast. The Pied~ont has undergone :onsider ab~e
f aulti n g, folding, and join t in? (Stu:key anc Con ra d , i958 ).
-7-
I
I
I
I
--1--1. --,
I
_,,
7
\ __ __
\
--,,..,,-...
I
I
I
I
I
I
-8-
I ---
......
\ ....::---
' I
\
\
I
I
I
I
'1
~
V)
I
I
I
~--' 0 'v
MAF O F"
F HY SIOGR A;:HtC
PRO V!t\C ES
F i GJ~~ 2
J•
faults occurred in the Triassic Basin during late Triassic or Jurassic
time (Lee, 1978). At the spill sites, soil co mpos i tion that resu l ted f r om
in situ erosion and transport by surface water, reflects the rock types
from which the soil was derived. Soil types range from dominantly sand to
dominantly clay, and exhibit a full range of permeability, drainage,
erosion, and engineering characteristics.
Elevations in the spill areas range from less than 200 feet above
mean sea level to greater than 600 feet. Relief is greater than 400 feet.
The higher elevations and greater relief are found in the Piedmont
Province in the western part of the study area. Lower elevations and
lesser relief are prevalent in the east.
Surface and ground water characteristics differ sharply from site to
site because of the wide range of geologic and topographic features.
Surface water movement is basically a function of topography and soil
permeability.
Site specific investigations have not been conducted. However,
geologic conditions and topographic features exist in each province that .
could allow PCB contaminated material to enter the water supply or
agricultural system. For example, clay-and silt-sized particles, bn which
PCB adsorbed, are subject to erosion and subsequent redeposition in
streams or on agricultural land adjacent to, or down slope from the
spills. Because topographic conditions exert a greater influence over
surficial water movement in the hills and mountains than in the flatlan ds,
stream valleys down slope from the hills should be monitored for
contaminated soil runoff.
Because of the large contaminated area, no attempt has been made to
characterize all affected ecological habitats or biolo?ical snec1es. A
list of endangered and threatened species t h at mav be i~nacted i s shown 1~
Appendi x C.
-9-
3.3 WASTE MATERIALS
Over 30 ,000 gallons o f liquid PCB were discharged along 210 mi l es of
roadway shoulder. Officials fr om the St a te o f No rt h Caroli na (~1itchell,
1980) estimate that approximatel y 40,000 cubic yards of contaminated so i l
resulted from th~ spills.
Soil samples were collected from several places at each location by
teams from the EPA and North Carolina Department of Natural Resources
between 1978 and 1979. Quantitative chemical analyses for PCB were
performed on these soil samples at the EPA-SAD and North Carolina Division
of Environmental Management Laboratories . A s ynopsis of the results of
these analyses is recorded in Table 1.
-10 -
TABLE 1. CHEMICAL ANALYSES FOR POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENYL
CONTENT OF SOIL SAMPLES FROM NORTH CAROLINA SITES
Depth of Soi 1 La yers Tested
Site No. 0 -1 II 1 -3" 3 -6 II County
lA** 20.0* 1. 9 32.0 Alamance
lB 140 .0 4 .1 <l Chatham
lC 2100.0 130.0 35.0 Chatham
2A 2.4 <l <l Chatham
2B 1800.0 210.0 22.0 Chatham
2C 480.0 <I <l Chatham
3A 2400.0 110.0 110 .0 Harnett
3B 900.0 260.0 7.6 Harnett
3C 2000.0 480.0 15. O Harnett
4A 710.0 2. 1 6.7 Granville
4B 25.0 <l <l Granvil le
4C 2.9 <l <l Person
SA 3600.0 12.0 14.0 Johnston
SB 850.0 30.0 6.0 Johnston
SC 4100.0 55.0 5.5 Johnston
6A 70.0 2.0 <l Warren
6B 190.0 8.0 <l Warren
7A <l Edgecombe
BA 1400.0 20.0 1.8 Nash
BB 1700.0 100.0 14 .0 Wilson
BC 1000.0 13 .0 16.0 Nash
9A <l Wilson
9B <l Wilson
10A 680.0 46.0 1. 2 Nash
!OB 58.0 <I <l Nash
lOC 560.0 25.0 1. 2 Nash
llA 130.0 4.8 1.2 Wake
llB 79 .0 1. 2 1.0 Nash
llC 110.0 1. 6 <l Franklin
12A <l Franklin
12B <l Wake
13A 2500.0 210.0 3.4 Warren
13B 160.0 1. 9 <l Franklin
13C 2100.0 41. 0 1.5 Franklin
14A 91.0 <l <l Franklin
14B 240. 0 <l <l Franklin
14C 42.0 <l <l Warren
15A 120.0 1. 6 <l Halifax
15Al7 16.0 5.5 3.8 Halifax
15Bl7 7.0 1. 0 1.0 Halifax
15Cl7 1.4 1.0 1.0 Halifax
15D17 76.0 1. 0 1. 0 Halifax
15Al8 13.0 <l <l Halifax
15B18 190. 0 4.4 20.0 Ha l ifax
15Cl8 1. 3 <l <l Ha~ifax
15 D18 5 .3 <l <l u 1 . :: ,,a _1_ax
-11-
TABLE 1. (continued)
Depth of Soi 1 Laz:er s Tested
Site No. 0 -1/2" County
NC-007*-lrlr 5,200* Franklin
NC-013 4,100 Granville
NC-014 3,800 Granville
NC-015 600 Person
NC-016 12,000 Wake
NC-017 9,000 Nash
NC-018 14,000 Franklin
NC-019 8,800 Nash
NC-201 2,400 Johnston
NC-202 10,400 Johnston
NC-203 4,500 Harnett
NC-204 2,200 Harnett
NC-205 4,900 Harnett
NC-206 7,800 Lee
NC-207 11,400 Chatham
NC-208 11, 900 Chatham
NC-209 11,700 Chatham
NC-210 610 Chath am
NC-211 <40 Chat ham
NC-212 2,400 Alamance
NC -215 4 ,300 Warren
NC-21 6 1,900 Ha li fa x
NC-217 530 Hali f ax
NC-218 2,700 Wilson
NC-219 3,600 Edgecombe
NC-241 6,300 Chatham
NC-249 10,000 Chatham
NC-253 5,400 Harnett
NC-262 6,200 Lee
* Resu lts i n ppm Ar oclor-1260
** Sanples f r om s i t es 1A-15Dl 8 collected and ana ly zed by ~o r th
Carol i na Sta te investigators.
*** Sar.!ples fron s i tes '.'J C-007 -~:c-262 c oll e cted ar.c a:12 ~·:zec ':)v :?.~_-S_.!_:'
i nves:i zat or s .
\o data av a i~a':)le .
-12-
4 HAZARD ASSESSMENT
4.1 WASTE HAZARD CHARACTERISTICS
Aroclor-1260, and lesser amounts of Aroclor-1242,
polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) chemical compounds were deposited along
North Carolina highway rights-of-way during 1978 (Mitchell, 1980).
PCB is a class of chlorinated aromatic compounds with var1ous
physical properties dictated by the degree of chlorination of the
compound. Molecules that contain five or more chlorine atoms are called
"higher chlorophenyls" and are more environmentally persistant that
isomers with less. The significant properties exhibited by PCBs are their
thermal stability, low water solubility, low evaporation loss, high
dielectric potential, and resistance to most typical chemical reactions.
These characteristics have enhanced the use of PCBs by industry as
insulators in capacitors and transformers, as indus.trial fluids, and as
plasticizers.
PCBs are highly stable and remain unchanged in most environments over
very long periods of time. Their affinity to adsorb onto silt and other
materials 1n soils enhances their potential to bio-accumulate in primary
producers of the biological food chain, and thus accumulate throughout the
upper trophic levels of the food chain.
PCBs are moderately toxic, via the dermal and oral routes, and are
known skin irritants. Chlorinated biphenyls are suspected carcinogens,
and are known to cause non-metastasizing abnormal growths (Sax , 1979 ).
4. 2 POTE NT IAL HEALTH & E~/VIRO~~ENTAL I~PACTS
-13-
PCB are not clearly known. Studies utilizing laboratory animals have
shown potential chronic effects such as c ancer induc t i on , and pi gm entat io n
and behavi ora l chan ges.
The greatest potential for environmental contamination exists through
migration of contaminated soil and vegetative matter via run-off and
erosion from along the rights-of-way. Ruman, animal, and vehicular
movement through the spill zone may also relocate contaminated material.
PCBs, which have adsorbed onto such materials, may be distributed onto low
lying agricultural areas, or into surface waters near or beside the
contaminated rights-of-way.
CONCLUSIONS
Chemical analyses of soil samples collected from roadways in North
Carolina revealed the presence of polychlorinated biphenyl 1n quantities
greatly exceeding the 50 parts per million threshold under 40 CFR Section
761.1 (b) promulgated pursuant to the Toxic Substances Control Act, 15 USC
Section 2601 et seq. The regulations, as stated in 40 CFR Section 761.10 (a)
(1)-(5), also require PCB mixtures in soils that exceed 50 parts per million
to be disposed of either through incineration or in a chemical waste
landfill.
The presence of this material has caused the North Carolina Department
of Transportation to curtail all activit y that reauires disturbing the
contaminated soil areas. (~itchell, 1980 ). This includes needed maintenance
and upgrading of highways and roads, and installation and maintenance by
utility companies.
A recent field study by North Carolina State and E&E personnel revealed
that both the previously applied charcoal and asphalt are no longer visible
at the locations visited. Contaminated soil immobilit y can no lon?:er be
taken for granted, and migration of this soil, which the charcoal and
asphalt treatment was meant to control, must be considered a possibilit y .
Such possibility of migration emphasizes the need for immediate
determination of the present mobility status .
-15-
6 RECOMMENDATIONS
As a first step under the Emergency Action Plan, E&E recommends that
a comprehensive study be conducted that is designed to test the null
hypothesis that PCB is presently immobilized at the original spill sites.
The presence of PCB concentrations greater than 49 ppm at a statistically
representative number of off-site locations will result in rejection of
this hypothesis. The study will consist of chemical analyses of soil and
stream sediment samples from the Coastal Plain, Piedmont, and Triassic
Basin Physiographic Provinces.
Soil samples will be collected from actual spill sites, from borrow
pits, ditches, and residential yards adjacent to the sites, and from
locations progressively down slope toward stream valleys, if appropriate .
Stream sediment samples will be collected from streams and flood plains
that could contain material that was eroded from spill areas. If
mobilization of the PCB-contaminated soil has occurred, concentration and
areal distribution patterns may be delineated that could serve as models
for spill areas in geologically or topographically similar areas.
Thirty locations will be selected for this sampling study from spill
sites in which previous chemical analyses of soil samples indicate PC B
concentrations greater than or equal to SO ppm (Table l ). Based on t he
distribution of the spills, rouf.hly 14 locations from each of the Coastal
Plain and Piedmont Physiographic Provinces, and three from the Triassic
Basin will be selected and samoled according to standard statisti c al
(Parsons, 1974) and EPA sampl ing technicues. Apo r oximat ely 30 sanoles :or
detai led charac:erizac ion of t~e local condi :ions ~il! be collecred a:
each of t he 30 locations :or a rota! o: acc r ~xi~ar e!~ 900 sa~c l es.
-16-
, Although the locations will be selected at random, the local sampling
sites will be chosen by the field sampling teams based on local conditions
such as soil type, topography, proximity to residences, proximity to
agricultural land, or the presence of streams and flood plains. The total
time that will be expended for the field sampling portion of this
study will be about 60 days. Analytical results will be completed
approximately 30 days after completion of the field sampling. Compilation
and report w-riting will require about 60 days for a total of approximately
150 days (5 months) from beginning to completion of the study.
The total cost breakdown for this study is as follows:
Sample Collection (900 samples)
(15 samples/day at $15/sample)
Sample Analysis (900 samples at S110/sample)
Total Cost
$13,500 .
$99,000.
S112,500.
A sampling proposal by EPA Surveillance and Analysis Division, Water
and Surveillance Branch , Athens, Georgia includes collection of fish
and stream sediment samples upstream and downstream from each of several
spill sites based on results from the detailed soil and stream sediment
study. If PCB contamination 1s detected at any of the selected sites, the
next order tributary stream and terminal stream would be considered for
sampling. The analytical work would be performed by EPA personnel at the
SAD laboratory .
REFERENCES CITED
Endangered and Threatened Species of the Southeastern United States, 1979,
Je?artment of the Inte r ior, U.S. Fish an d Wildlife Service , Re2ion I V
Atlanta, Georgia, 8p.
Lee, C.H., 1978, Preliminary study of the uranium potential of the
Triassic Sanford Basin and Colon Cross Structure, North Carolina:
U.S. Department of Energy Open-File Report GJBX-8(78), 13p.
Mitchell, B.R., 1980, Removal and disposal of soils contaminated with PCBs
along highway shoulders in North Carolina: Administrative Action
Final Environmental Impact Statement, State of North Carolina, 49p.
Parsons, Robert, 1974, Statistical Analysis: A decision-making approach:
New York, Harper and Row, Inc., 836p.
Sax, Irvin N. 1979, Dangerous properties of industrial materials (5th
ed.): New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 485p.
Stuckey, J.L., and Conrad, S.G., 1958, Explanatory text for geologic map
of North Carolina: North Carolina Department of Conservation and
Development Bull. 71, Slp.
Weber, J.B., 1980, PCB spills along North Carolina highways and
inactivation with activated carbon, In Proceedings of Soil Science
Society of North Carolina, no. 23, 7p.
Wilson, W.F., and Carpenter, A.P., III, 1975, Region J geology: A guide
for North. Carolina mineral resource development and land use planning:
North Carolina Department of Natural and Economic Resources Regional
Geology Series 1, 76p.
APPENDIX A
LOCATIONS OF POLYCHLORINATED
BIPHENYL SPILLS ALONG NORTH CAROLINA
HIGHWAYS
FROM MITCHELL (1980)
A-1
APPENDIX A. LOCATIONS OF POL YCHLCRINATED RIPHE NYL
SPILLS ALONG NCR TH CAROLINA HIGHWAYS.
SR l OOl., Alar.:ance Co unt y -Frorr. ~ethe l Chu r ch north o f Sn ow Ca'.1:c> to the
Ch atham County Line.
Length: 5 .00 shoulder miles
SR 1004, Chatham County -From Alamance County Line to SR 1346.
Length: 2.22 shoulder miles
SR 1346, Chatham County -From intersection with ffi 1004 to NC 87.
Length: 11.16 shoulder miles
NC 87, Chatham County -From intersection with ffi 1346 southerly.
Length: approximately 1.42 shoulder miles
US 421, Chatham County -SR 2120 to Lee County Line.
Length: 9.59 shoulder miles
SR 1006, Chatham County -Between NC 902 and NC 42.
Length: 3.46 shoulder miles
NC 42, Chatham County -From Deep River (Lee County Line) to
intersection with SR 1006.
Length : 4.56 shoulder miles
NC 902, Chatham County -From SR 1006 to Roc ky River.
Length: 9.68 shoulder miles
SR 1146, Edgecombe Count y -From US 301 to ffi 1135.
Length: 2 .40 shoulder mi les
SR 1135, Edgecombe County -From ffi 1146 to ffi 1143 .
Length: 2.43 shoulder miles
SR 1143, Edgecombe County -From ffi 1135 to ffi 1141.
Length: 0.51 shoulder miles
SR 1130, Edgecombe Count y -From ffi 1003 to NC 43.
Length : 1.33 shoulder miles
SR 1141, Edgecombe Count y -From ffi 11 4 3 to NC 43 .
Length : 1 .43 shoulder miles
NC 44, Edgecombe County -From ffi 1409 east 0 .2 miles.
Length : 0.23 shoulder miles
NC 43, Edgecombe Count y -From ffi 1130 to ffi 1131.
Lengt h : 0.87 shoulder mil es
SR 1003, Edgecombe Count y - From NC 43 t o Wil3on Coun r v Line.
Lengt h: 3.38 shoulder mil es
A-2
SR 1432 and SR 1436 , Franklin Count y -From 1/2 mile east of :'-'loulton to
a point beyond Gupton, then traces to Centerville.
Length : 5 .10 shoulder miles
~C 561, Fr ankli n Cou nt y -From 1 ash Cou nt y Line t o Center ville.
Length : 4.80 shoulder miles
NC 58, Franklin County -From Warren County Line to Nash Count y Line.
Length: 5.10 shoulder miles
NC 98, Franklin County -From Nash County Line to Bunn and
approximately 5 miles west of Bunn.
Length: 4.70 shoulder miles
NC 97, Franklin County -From Wake County Line to Nash County Line .
Length: 0.90 shoulder miles
NC 96, Granville County -From just north of Oxford to NC 49.
Length: 15. 2 shoulder miles
NC 49, Granville County -From NC 96 to Person County Line.
Length: 1.80 shoulder miles
SR 1315, Halifax County -0.2 miles from NC 4 to 0.1 mile east of
bridge.
Length: 1.03 shoulder miles
SR 1308, Halifax Count y -From 0.1 miles north of SR 1309 to 1.2 miles
north.
Length : 1.18 shoulder miles
NC 4, Halifax County -from SR 1314 to ffi. 1308.
Length: 3.13 shoulder miles
NC 43, Halifax County -From Warren Count y Line to NC 561.
Length: 0.65 shoulder miles
NC 561, Halifax County -From SR 1317 to Nash Count y Line.
Length: 3.58 shoulder miles
NC 87, Harnett Count y -From Lee Count y Line t o NC 27 .
Length : 5.30 shoulder miles
NC 27, Harnett Count y -From NC 8 7 to SR 1252.
Length : 12.00 shoulder miles
NC 210, Harnett County -From Johnston County Line to cit y limits of
Angier.
Len~th : 1.82 shoulder miles
NC 21 0 , J oh nst on Count y -Fr om in tersection with VS 70 souther lv to
Harnet t County Li n e. ~or t h side on ly.
Len gth: 17 .00 shoulder mi les
A-3
NC 42, Lee County -From intersection with SR 1322 to Deep River
·(Chatham County Line).
Length : 4.52 shoulder miles
NC 87 , Lee Cou nt y -Fr om Harne tt Countv Li ne :o ~S ~2 1 .
Length: 2.14 shoulder miles
NC 98, Nash County -From Franklin County Line to NC 231.
Length: 1.41 shoulder miles
NC 231, Nash County -From NC 98 to SR 1137.
Length: 0.94 shoulder miles
SR 1137, Nash County -From NC 231 to NC 97.
Length: 3.48 shoulder miles
NC 97, Nash County -From SR 1137 to Franklin County Line.
Length: 4.39 shoulder miles
NC 58, Nash County -From Nashville to Wilson County Line.
Length: 4.12 shoulder miles
NC 561, Nash County -From Franklin County Line to Halifax County Line.
Length: 0.7 shoulder miles
NC 97, Nash County -From NC 58 west l mile.
Length: 0.35 shoulder miles
NC 58, Nash County -From Franklin County Line to 3 miles north of
Nashvi 11 e.
Length: 4.11 shoulder miles
NC 49, Person County -From Granville County Line to SR 1515.
Length: 4.24 shoulder miles
NC 96, Wake County -From 98 to Franklin County Line, to traces only.
Length: 0.30 shoulder miles
NC 97, Wake County -From Zebulon to Franklin County Line and from
US 64 Bus. to Zebulon.
Length: 4.50 shoulder miles
NC 43, Warren County -From Liberia to Halifax Count y Line.
Length: 6 .40 shoulder miles
NC 58, Warren County -From intersection with NC 43 southerlv to
Franklin County -both sides.
Length: 19.25 shoulder miles
US 158, Warren County -Between ~aeon and Vau?han.
Length : 0.60 shoulder miles
S lL.07 , \,;i lson Cou:1t y -:=':-or:1 y,_ 1003 t o ~-~OC 2.
Len gt h : 1.06 shoulder miles
ffi 1419, Wilson Count'y -From US 30 l to SR 1003.
·Length: 0.87 shoulder miles
SR 1003, Wilson Countv -From Edgecombe Countv Line to US 301 3vpass.
Len~th: ~.76 shoulder miles
Total Length: 210.97 shoulder miles (from Mitchell, 1980).
A-5