The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutNCD980602163_19951009_Warren County PCB Landfill_SERB C_Ground Water Monitoring System forn the PCB Landfill-OCR{ 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 Mr. George Bain 3966 Bachelor Creek Road Asheboro, North Carolina 27203 October 9, 1995 RE: Ground Water Monitoring System for the PCB Landfill Dear Mr. Bain: .RA DEHNR I am in receipt of the September 25, 1995 letter regarding the additional material needed to complete your evaluation. The material attached to this letter should address most of your requests. Some of the items you requested were not available. The material I have included is: 1. boring logs for the original test borings for the site characterization; 2. a copy of the construction plans for the PCB landfill; 3. elevation of the bottom of each well; 4. aerial photograph of the site (please return it when you are finished); 5. elevation of the water in the landfill; 6. well records for each of the wells; and 7. copies of memos, reports, and other applicable correspondence pertaining to the PCB Landfill. In addition to the material specified above, I have included a table with water level data for well MW-4. The data sent to you previously included an incorrect measuring point elevation and incorrect water table elevations. If there are any questions please call me at (919) 733-2178 extension 300. Respectfully, l o} qk~ "L I :Lt,~1_ .. , :t.:. .. l '\./ Robert Glaser, Hydrogeologist Remediation Branch Hazardous Waste Section P.O. Box 27687. Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone 919-733-4996 FAX 919-715-3605 An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper PCB Landfill Measurements The following water level and well depth measurements were taken on October 5, 1995 by Larry Rose, hydrologic technician with the State's Solid Waste Section, and Bob Glaser. Well# MW-I MW-2 MW-3 MW-4 Landfill Well Measuring Point Elevation 343.99 329.98 325.12 322.82 357.67 (ft) Well Depth below Measuring 51.88 46.86 40.80 38.48 Point (ft) Static Water Level below Measuring 45.23 38.25 26.38 23.48 20.43* Point (ft) Water Table 298.76 291.73 298.74 299.34 Elevation (ft) Water Level Elevation in 337.24 Landfill *measurement made on July 21, 1995 The elevation of the bottom of the leachate collection system is approximately 321 feet above mean sea level. H:\BOB-G\G-BAIN2.WPD ' I 0~-------1200FEET . . . .. . -a...~-...... @ I .__ T -~-c-_...,__._ 11•-----. .__.,.... ""''"- -. .. , JAMES 8. HUNT, JR. GOVERNOR THOMAS W. BRADSHAW, JR. SECRETARY STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RALEIGH 27611 September 20, 1978 DIVISION OF HIGH'wJAY~ MEWRANDUM TO: Mr. M.C. A~, Maintenance Unit Head FROM; W .D. Bingham, Head ot Geotechnical Unit SUBJECT; Investigation tor Disposal Site !or PCB (W.O. 4-5401101) · Attached are boring logs and sketch ot a site we have investigated tor PCB diaposal in Warren Colmty. The ~ito wu drilled and :sampled to a depth rangi.o.g !rem 28. teet to 41 f'eet. Twenty (20) samples were delivered to the Department or Transportation Labqratory to be tested tor: Minus 200 material., Plastic Index, Liquid Limit 8Ild pH values. U we can be ot further help in this matter please let us know. WDB:nah Attachments , -' . ' PROJECT . l+. 5401lOl ll. C •. DEPAR'ItfENT Ci' TRANSPORTATION · Division o! Hi~h~-1ays PCB .PIT BORING Im COUNTY Warren ___________ DATE 9-18-78 ROUTE _. _________ RES •. ENGINEER __________ PIT NO. ~UIP. USED _2_37_~ __ 1 ____ 6_" _A_uge_r ___ INVE.STIGATED BY 'PCB I 4 J.s, Britt w/rock teeth • 2 f!i JJEP'IlfS. ~f!i REMARKS: i.e. p-oundwater data H~ pp• ~~ ·DES9RIPTION OF MATERIAL 2; FRCli TO ~~ 111oisture content; etc. 1 0.0 11.0 1-A Red-Brown Mica. -F..:Sandy clay D.cy 1 11.0 ,o.o 1-B Brown Mica. Clayey silt Moist@ 20.0• 1 ~o.o l.0.5 1-C Brown Mica:. Silty sand : ·1 L.ri. ,; L.1.2 Soft weathered rock_ Practical aurer refusal @ 41 .2' .. Groundwat~r: .. 0 Hr.-Dry caved in @ 28. 5' ·. ... 24 hours-caved in O 28 .5 1: .. - 2 o.o 8.0 ·2-A Red-brown mica. tine sandy clay 2 8.0 38.0 2-B Brown highly mica • . s~dy clay silt . Wet @ 30' Groundwater: 0-Hr.-Drv caved in@ 35.0 . 24 Hr.-34.2 3 o.o 3.0 3-A Red-brown mica. -F-sandy clay Dry 3 3.0 28.0 3-B Brown •mica. zsandy clayey silt Moist @ 19.0 Groundwater: 0 Hr. -Drv caved in @ 23 • 5 ' 21'. Hr:3.-22.9' 4 D.O 10.0 4-A Red-brown mica. -F-sandy clay · Drv 4 lo.a 33.0 4-B Brown mica-clayey sandy silt Wet@ 27.0' ,-Groundwater: 0 Hr. -Drv . 24 Hr.-Dry - -- • • ,, H. C •. DEPAR'IMENT QF TRAHSPORTATION · Division or Highways PCB PIT BORnn LOO ·" ..... G-5 1-78 PROJECT 4.5~ll0l COU?JTY ·_W_ar_re_n _______ DATE 9-1$-78 ROUTE _________ RES •. ENGINEER PIT NO.P __ c_B_tl_4 ___ _ ~UIP. USED 2;37.COOl 6" J.uger INVESTIGATED BY __ J_._s_._Bn_·_t_t _______ _ W/rcck teeth . .. i&i tif 5 ~EP'IHS RDURKS: i.e. groundwater data Hill ·~, t: . Cl. IXI · .· · DES9RIPTION OF MATERL\L 2~ FRCM TO ~~ .. ' ~oistu;ro_content; etc. c; 0.0 6. s . 5-A Red-brown mica. -F-· sandy clay Dey . W /auartz lenses c; 6. c; 24:i.O 'i-B Brown mica. sandy silt .. Moist @ 25.0' c; 2c;.o '='1.0 c;...c Tan ad.ca. silty -F-saod Wet@ 29.0' . · Groundwater; . . 0-Hr • -Dr;r caved in O J0.0' 24 Hrs.-Dry caved in@ 30.0 .J 0.0 7.0 6-A Red~bro,-m mica -F-:sandy clay W/ Dey quartz lenses •. .. 6 7~0 1~.o 6-B Brown mica. sandy silt Drv 6 12.0 33.0 6-c Tan mica. silty -F-sand Wet @ 26.n• .. 'Grmmdwater: 0 Hr~ -Drv caved in@ 29.t~ . 2L. Hr. -drv caved in @ 29.tD 7 · o.o 10.0 7-A Red-brown mica~· -F-sandy clay Drv 7 10.0 20.0 7-B Brown..:.tan -F-isandy clay Moist@ 20.0' 7 20.0 33.0 7-C Brown -F-aandy isilt Wet O 25.0' Grnundwater: .. o·Hr.-dr;r caved in@ ·26. 71 21 Hrs. ·n,,.,, --~VP-ti in @ 26.7 I . 8 o.o 9.0 ~A Red-brown mi.ca-!ine isandy clay Dry 8 9.0 38.0 ~B Brown sn:ica. isandy :silt Moist @ 26.o• r · Wet@ ~n.o• Groundwater: 0 Hr. -drv caved in@ 33.2• -· .. , __ ----~ ,:_ t.<'I ':1-:ll • ' • . ..·.·•.,·•.!'·\•:•, •. \-... \~·-•.. ·'·· .. :Jc,'' .. ··.·:. ,:.!;.,: ... ·-:. .... ·.:·.r:•.···•i;,,·, ........ •! l . ; ~ .. ;..:.t··!-'r•.·•.,.,_ ..... -:""''.-,,!;;:· .. •. :,..: : :.\ !:r,,:J!" .... I • •••• ,. ...... : • -· .: • ~ ·-:•..;-:,-,: .:.,,•., ,•.• •• 1·'-•·.' :•. -· . • .. ~--~.:.. ·., '.s . " . •',c.. ..... , ,._ •• I .•. ,j i:~, •.. ,: t ~-••• .,.;~,,. -~· :•~,:! .. ,.;· •.. •-: ,,. • ....... ' ,... •· . .,,. , • .--•••. , .• , • ••·.. . .. -:z•, .;• ··: -,. ,,. :,. _, .,, ··• . \•\,,..__ •.• ~ ,.iii"'•. :.•r .,,-::... • ., .. ;~_·-.~,-·.· • .. '•••i,,,..,_., .,,,,-,s••,J,~ ff:•·<,:.'~••• ~\,'ft•~~.'-,, •I•• ••I••(•~ ••. ', •',I .. :J•:,,.,,:~1'~!.•' ,~.;_;,,1 •• :,-, .• _-11_, • ..,i••••r'~:.1(1,-:&.-.•Jrt,.J._;,.~.~-•··•~;~ .. ~•-,~• ·~~::.•::fT·:t}{±T~/itf:~ 8".;/f{~/,. .. ~ .. --/.;~:~~!:( .... ~-~--:.:~:.·:~ ... i.'.t;t~i\\-\~It?~~·:!·~::~:;i\f~~l{i192iif~.tJ;1;{r= . ·: ........ ::-.;..., : .. -;:..••~·:. •. ... ~ ~i: .. ;:,•:,. .. . .. :., . :-.. ·. r ..... ~. G ...... , •.·: ... ·!; ··· ••.. :··· .... 5 , ... _ ... -.-;· ;. ...... •.r:;•.~.:.·:: .. ··,~·· ... :·.-~ ... \i~.•~:·itr/J)~t:f/~:'· .. ::~ .. '.~:l;~i~:-{J_{tfx-?}1))$·'. : .. .'·\ .. ~;~~.:~c~~:··.::.: :·:.:::. . ~:}~j~~/.~~~:}f&~rri\~ : .' f• .. :~•~ ~~;..-~:, -~• • .:.:::~:•:-'.-;,,~~.:1,,.;:-: .. ! :.=~~;f~\~.~J.7: .)-t}:.: .: ,• ;.: .• '••I~.-:~;•,;; !"•/ !,:: . .--''-, ~:•• .:;; ;.;,.;;'" ::.:-: .. ~:l••.,rtt,:st;.•~r.--f•.,••: · . ·.::--:.:.:~I.,:.:.. -~~~----11··-..: ; . .-•.f'~~;.4:,~-;,~~1;r~:"t"'· :.:.•··~~~P.:~ i,:; .~.:;;.···· , ··:·~1.~c~~:; ... :·~ .. ,~,.T,~ ~-';.-:·, ....... ,_-:•; · :t-=~~f!_;;:-.;.:. ... :=-~·r.:~~~-~:::..; .. ='J. ·• ·._ •,~;,~•.1, • ._~•4:··•;••:-.Jw.#i .••~ .... '\:1.,,-..~-!••:t.•t:_,•\.--•.-\.••.:i~,:'$ . .'.·1--.... • :.; .. ;:....,t •• r#•·,•-i•",.. !09"1-0.,-S.;--.. 1 ••4~•1.:,~.:--••;-•..,_,.~,.--:"Y'."'tt ••..:..: .. ·. • .. ,.•;:1 : ". ~ ;· .-. t: ~.:.~~:. !·;':~--~-~ .. i:~ :,~.:--• : ,~ ~':~ ;., .... -r, :::i'; •:-:: ; ,_.:;.• ....... '~-.-..~~; ,·) • ~~:~-~=·! -~·-= ,·.~.::;. , ·_,-.:. . .;:::.~:-1'~ r;· ~~~!':.i?. .;~::~:: . • . . • """·r :• .• __ .. ~ ~·:~., ... .::. ·• .: ;.., •· ·•: •• ;. ~ ~..:.~:;.~ ... ~:.-::,... -r· ....... :.-~~....:,:.~ ,~::-: .. •. :i: • ..;~•· ;..~ ~::.,:_ . .,,._ :.-..-.-;:,_~..,: -t :-:·: -~:= • ·'--;;i•~,;-~.~-•,~ :.:~"":.:~~_,..4-1""'. ?9:. ~ . . .. ·· ·: .................... ··-·· ........ ,. ,, .... :1:····~·-·~ -~·~ .....• :,.. .... •.t•~ •• -·· f.·.·· ~-·-. ~· .,.._._. ~---·:,•·· ~ ... -•. ·'-!'t • -·: · -: .·.-.· ·:·-'i ·i;i.::j!~::: .. '>.~1f:] .;-.:•~:j•:'.;~~~~·j~~-~·~:-=-~::_rr,;~t,:'J•1S.r.· . f:~·::5::~t: ::, ,~.;:.~;➔,~!.~~:'~ .. :-:!: · :;.:;:i~~ ¥-°=fi~~-fg_~:,;:r:;r:~~: ·· : • .. • .. -_ .. .,..__ :7 #' ~:--r-:. : ~ -:;..._~ •.. ':i-:f;..-~:::t1.~• •• ~.,.-:• .;~~..:t;:.."':-!. -._:-,." l . 1~~\:;--: .. r:~!. ~;.~-; .~• :: ':~[.-ti~~ i·,l '-: ::\ "1'...;:'..,.Z--,-~-:~ _.._ :-._.., -"r-;. • .,. ,;•.-;_ ~-~ . . ,· • -•. • -:--:•'!! .-.'l" .,;:,,. ... -:~-:~• .. :.a~\·.·,,, .. --.~~-~ ......... ,.., ... _ ........ ':i\ , ...... •·! ... ,t~--:J.,k ;.:..I,.•.-.... :,-.~--... rf. -~-' ·•1!:i;•l-:'~ ·-·· !":-':'t ,~•~:a:: .. --:--:• ... : -· · • ~ • ~ •-,.a..,~~._..:.,,.-,,~--·.: · , .. ~--1!:"'~~~~c--~~-:.t-~'!,~:'t':'-~~~ .. •.•-;--• •'-J"'-•! ·-i: ~-1 .... ,~r_,~:.•• -•r: :i ~~:, ~.:~-~~"-"'· ;t6 .... t\~•· • ... 1o..;..+ -:;.._.":·◄••-=:"~<0--• ;·•." . .,,r-..i-•~•l.tt) .• f:.:~-.. ~=-i'·"~--·•·• :-~•,~~.:0:~'-•;::.: .. ~ ;·~ •~ :i,:l·.1•~---.•·J ..... -_;~!.,,.,......_.•"ff._-::...• ...... •~"'-i~.---=-...:•,.:,. .. ..._ ,.•.::-:',-•.r!f: .,l'~.;t••.·1• .•~~fi· .. -, ,..._,. ,,.....,_ L.'~•..&·1,.t❖••e·.;.~'V.' .··~•-·+ ~~•.•!~••• != ·tr,~~•:~ ·o•1'",,;:r;;,i "•· -~·•• .T•,,.~~••.-.c .. .:.._.. .•. ~ .... . '•' •... • .. ~:--... -. -. .. -· !.,r_i..--..... ~ - •. ._. -~~-...._,,. --..,,.,..., -.. -,. ....... , •••.. :r. L-::"a.......... : -~-I ··-•• , •--~ ,·1•-t.:.,.:;;· •~';,.,t--._ .. :· ':::\·:~ •.;.1~-.,, ~ ..... ,:-.;r~-·i;~ .. -:..'.;-.~-.:r~.•. ;. -~-•· -~~--r~ · .~· "-~:J: 1:·i~':/l:'i~1:-·i.:.!:.~~.;:.;; .. ~:~ti"if•;:z-_,-t~~ ~,.4•R1.: :-•:·~~.r.-.:. ~.-:~i--t:~ ~.-~::-.:~ .. :.. ·•· ....... -· •. ~,4112.11, ... '!.•~ ......... ~•-·liiitr'-i ., • .-~. _ . ..,.,. .. ·-,:-~, .... -{":-.::e•--~--~-,. t::r. ~ --...-. .,.:-~ .. , ... "" .. r ·I:.:--•·· ~-·. _-::·.-·-.;:'!~··:,.::=.:"f~":'K~1t~-~;.:, .. :£::;-~t-.~•,-:;~~.'.!.5i~ l~.:.r, .. ::..,;-1,~:;.:o:~~_,,r'.:\,:;;;,!_..;;i::1.,..-~'! .. .-:::-·:'~ ....... ::, "-: .. ••.:'.•~i.f'i~!:.~-... -~~~=--•·.1: . .-· c ·-:-.;~": .__,_, _1:,.3:-~__,~.r;.:~1 .. ·~ :r~~~. ;·.;,J.~11r.~~~:;i1.1.~ • .•. ;f_•-•:i-i.-..•.<'C:·,·;;1~· ~-•~•c-::.-1\?-~-"fr:.:~-.-.:·, .. ·-,~i..:..."r ·, •• !:.~ ... -~:~.:~~~~~~=-~ii• ;. • • • ,, .. ,. • •.. -1,r •... -..,.• •• • • -C-• .;...--a:.•,;v••·1 •. .,,,: • .,,.. • • :.,•• ..... -.,.,. •• -.J>,..,. .-,..._ .1,/"!<N.-t,-~r.,....,. ..... ...., , r. •• -. ~9 -lt_,·.:.a. • ti• • : ·-.-~ •.,. -: ,. •. · .• · . .''-1,-; ·--~~~ -:-.;-.:,:;r. i·:;C"'.~,.~ :t.,:;;·;.-? ?'l_?.!-t' ~-.~ •. ;:~-.:.~~:l1"i· ~~~~· .. :;Ji ;_._,':;_~~-,.i~:"~~~~i~~J;ti·: ,·~-" ~:~~, • .. ?-::~-r.:-~~~•~~•.•.-f.::=:.:;.!.!~~~: !.~ '\ ... ;,··'.J••·•r--.&.r ... ,,.:,,· • ·••-~..r••-~•.,, .. :;A•'·~•~'°2-."\r•,-:..•..,.._.• ••.••• ., .... ,!',,_••••·i••J-. •• .,, ... ~_,.,,..:.•,,.r-1:-~•~··"'!9-:-. ..,,-.--:,. . ,:. • ·: .z..,.. •••• •t.t"r:-•J'.a.,:,_11.·•t:'"'~' ..& •~· ...... ,... ,.:..__ •• ,.,_.,..,.., ... ,._, -..~.• •~•_.:.., ..... ,~~!..:'";1',,.;,v-.~"""-, l. •· 'T ..,,,·• 41-,: ;. •• ·.1--'..-~4 :-..1.-!..."'L),•.( ~-. 't -..... ,•••• . • -r.a ·-T••'I'\ ~ -~ -w..,, .. •••"''" •-,_ ...... ~ ..... r~~•-t;·r-:,•"' ••••• ' ,r:.,: ••-:11f•,•-,.._ .-..-. J-r·-r· •. •:.••••• ..-'·•"•"°--r::'!1:.,•~;. .,,_ . ._ _ _,. ll.l,•3• -,:i • -•~•••-.::,-:.. ••f'A7. 1...-• .• • .;~••!• •-f." •.,•~;_;:. ••2 ._,,~--..•••••~jr, .. ,-_;•:•._;..~ •• -..'J-.• ! ... I ·<~·......, P!: . "'-~-~r.1:,--~:e....,.,,..,. • •·~·-.,. .. :. ~· 1:.: .. ..-J',.--.::11-.-..,--:-.~ .. :,~...,_. ~. ~. ' :'-....... , ... _.,J!~-..:-··· -:: ... ~.·<·--· .. . : . -. ' ;.~· -'"\.!.',~,·----,~~; .... ~-.i:.!...:.;:?...,r...:._,. ... ~4:tti~:.. .• : ; • .,t.:.i1' ;•1 ~ '!:/;:':. ": - -...... ~ .: _-.:.::~~~ ~.:~1,, ;.;.· •,:-:,:.· \. -~l_;~ ... ,-;:--••:, .. •,~--· ........ :-;..• ·: -.. • ·. ·:··'·• .. ,,.c-::_ .,~-,.... .. ·.·=-• •-·""!!""_...~ ....... -. --·-·:. .. ,., • •. ~-m .,., ... "' .. • ~ ... ~'!"."·?"·~ · -::-:• •.: ~·-.• ~.1.•:· •1 ·-:> ~:1-.. 1-~~ ·-,i..1 -.. . . -. ,· !:~ .. -➔~~-!'---· .. ,.--; -:.,-::-: '7 ... ~£~·-_r..-.:1'--:~:::·~ •r:,;i .. :':" :-;.,~--... -1 ... •-Q:7 .r-~ ,. ·, :,~. -:..-~t,i,.y:..: _'=;;,•.;.:,.;. · .. ~"":;4• ... -.:~. \'i.:·":'·~-... · t~•.;.~r .. , .... . • • . • • .• •.':::e,-• .•. -.,· :t._!;f."J',,;,C=f) :,,t~ .. ~ -..:.,.n . •. ';,•;.•"""!"'• .;.:-. -,.-:, .• ~-·._• • ~-"":i~-.;•.-.·S"".,'1.•:-•:~•~.•~,~,f,'1•\ •~-.,: :. \~?.4.,:),,~• ... ·~:.::.::..: .. °Fi:-(,~-:--: .. :· ;_-.._.-~•.:r..;.. ~~-~i~.~~~~;{4· .,c-1:--i-'f: !;'1 •"':-: .. ·,.._··. ,. ~--·!.-'\,,::·..:.~~:,·.~ ... i' 1-·n\!1'.:=• .. ~:.,., .. z·:~'!'\• . 'i: :i;.~~c:-~:•-~~ !. ·rf-_~...,,!OC,'-':: . . ~ · .. : .. ~· . ~.:::-~ -'-~:ri.:J":•.• :·~:.•.i.~':t:"'•=:-;-it !--: . :~ · ~:~ ~ -:;' . .-~:·.:;~· _·! ·-1..•ii.;;·~-: ·:\;:.,•~: .. :. -~.::.;.:_-:_"! ~~~·!..::; .. ~~ .. ~~-r.~·-.-··..:.:;\-::J-...~-:~:-··~ · ·.· · · ·: ::·~ r~, ,::-;~~.:: :-: :i:-::l t'~\;:-;;.;~t t~:::i ·}::~j~~~ .;/~\-~.t~·};.1·: ~ .. ;:. ~tf?..}fl\ .. ~ !.1,..tl;: ;t~~ti~S~~}:t~i' i;?;]!{;.: . -: · . -· • • · -~,-t:,;.•· , ..... ••i .•:9\·,. ... ~ .• :!"a~·•:. ":,; ·. ; ~•-=-.. , .. :.,• ·.:.:;1,.: ::,;,..: .,\ •_:• •M:.·.,,.._..~ ..• , •:. · • ~-~ --:-~~:-~ '~'"'-~•J•·•~ t. :-::-:-... •• r.-.-.. • ~ '· . · · · ~ ... · ·-'~~.r"_.::~: -""':,-=-'Ft~i11~~ :,~~ · :.~:f :; .. ;,J"••=· .. ,•; .:.!:,.~· .. r:. -~ .. , :-•· •. ·lk,.l·~:-i.-:-..i.! a;~::.:-r..:,: •.. -.. , .,.::-J1:1· .. ;,_:~_;;;..-~-~ :;:-.:..-=.•;: :-i-f:.: . ;';_ -~~7-:1:1 l~!~~~~~~~:.~~---!~~ .; · t;;t::f-.t.~_'!;:~--~~f:-..;. --:~-: ... :r;:: !..·;t· .-·:•.,~.:~~;-~..._~_~;.~~· ~::· t-~ .... •·!;tf:;i··-~:~~:3.!~~:~-::--d:~~.;~. :~ · .• -<>·••· ••• ...;., .4.::_, • •.-l a ·.t ~ ~--·• _ .:, ..:.:.:. 1 : ""'• '':"":.,,.. • .. •• ·• •~ •• :,-•...,;,.-~.,_• •• ..,.-••••• ,. ·,• --~-,, • •. .. .. ,r-._.:~,_.· •• .:-.. • •. . .,1~• ,. •• ·-..... .,.J•t• .. •-••·'•t:•••...,,.J-.T-•.~-rr~r•.•t ••...,.l""•"l;,,•~,C· ••.•••••• ·•;:s •=-••"'•1 •••---• ."•~• •·1' •••~.,:.,,,.r••-· •,..·••t•~--..ff,)••~•-•9: .•,: .. ;· . ~ .. , .. 7. V ~ ._ ... ~-,: .. :·.·: Q. ----➔ ~---------------------=-=.,....------=.----..--------------.• ·, ~--. C.O· r':•,.:.:·... . ... . .. :~~.,·.:-:~ ·-· .·; ·. ·;,.. :.: .. :... -'·:"-~c ... ~SOIL-'-;,;;:·-·~ .. : "' ..... ~•:! ,,,,. _..,.,.-..-jJ::;::, ... ----..\o ... · . .:--~i fri:.-:·L, ·.: ~··<·}, -····· ... , .· _, ....... ·:··.··-·:•.~·-·-... -..·.-= ··-~·.·,:.:·/:_~~~:::·::.~;15ff{-~?\!j?.~:1~~?;/ .'.:••,· a: . , , ;.... . ◄ . .: SR .1604 . 0 5 M ~ LE ~-:·.•~ .......... :.·•-·· .1-•.-.. ---·-•.. , • .,.. ... .,... -·-- ·• ··• r •·., t/l :.c.;; :··::: ..• ::>:··~:<\:;~~;~;·(.:~ ·:>)tf );.~·r._·:t?dii1)it.:;t~¥tli::~;~~~fli/:1'.?~j~p~Jil~t{~ • -~.:·~-.; ·.': :£ ... , •• , -, ............ -::-.-•,• .... ,--.... • ,:.~•·1 ......... ,, ..... ,.x.:\: ,_ ... ~ .. -...... ~=-"i!•r~.......,.~:-.,. ..... r.~, .. -~!.,,~-r·-·- -.~-:-... ~. :/:-;· -" __,. ••• -.,, .. -· -• • .... • • • • -f' ~ -~ .... er. -. • a..;;;.. ..... ,. -• "T."" ..... ~~-L-r. ·-z ,.. "--~ • :.;.~,'..· · ···:-•i ;::'.i~iii:;~V3Jll~~]:·~~:~'.~~~f f ~~ti\!llllllilif 11 ... _:/•"'.' ••••.• •.;· ·"':•<t .. -:•· _,._.._.\,• ·•:..."=• .. -:•··•·'a::.·,"'··•-=••:'• :--.. ~---J-r.J-'-..,1!~'-"'.,.....~:{f•:::t·r.,.•.: .. •,t••'".,,..r.~ -..••.'--·'·· .• . ·•· · ·::·" . -:;. ·:-=, ,~ 1 : ..... ~-~~·;2•:.--~:.:~:.~-·~., ..... :--i :::: -~:,.:._ ... ::~~ ~-!,..~ ::;.~:-.:.:::~~~:..""'i..,it?~:.:~ .. !i.."'" .~~.,.:-w-~~-1;.;:.~: ;-_ .. .: . ... :~ ·.•. :. .• · .. · . .... .. . . . SCALE ~ 1 = 1.0Q· ,. ,: ... ! .. :<..-::·:·.;::-:_.. ·· ... -. . .~ ~,~~\~!~!:::;/: ::•/-t~-:.<.~·.i .. . . \ . :. · Pen· • • NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTAT ...... .-....r::;:;,~-,,_ ........ _ 0lVlSION Of' HIGHWAYS n MATERIAUi • T~STS UNIT ll :IOIL5 LABORATORY !iEP ~5 1978 J::j. ...........•.................. .... DEPARTMEl4T OF TRAtlSPORT~fleN DIVJSION OF HIGHWAYS • GEllTfCHNl~t U~lf BEPORT ON SA)IPLES Oi' .Soil. fQr .. ~'t1--~-p.Jl ________ :. _____ _ ProJ•~t _____ • __ 4 .. MOllOl .• _________ Count, _____________ \ia.rr=--------------Owner ___________ _ Daw: Sampled __ 9-!_!-7S _________________ Rccelvtd ---~-~~-":!8 -------------Reported -~-2~--7~--- SampleJ from --~~-~_f! ____________________ a, _l"!-~~ Brit~-------------· Submitted 1)1 ---W !. D :_J!~i.J!___ ---~---------------------------19.F-_ Standard Specillc:atlona 396732-396751 TEST RESULTS l).. ~ · ?3' .,J• Proj. Sample No. lA 1B Lab. Sample No. 396732 396733 kct&lnotd :, Sieve ,~ -- Passini: :10 Sieve ,. 100 100 Puainir :co SieH ,. 99 99 Pusinsr ~00 Slevo ,. 74 54 ~ c.,.,_ S-d-2.1 &e I 1.:1 ..... ll~ :so ,. 4 9' J T n .. 1 .. d--0.u Lo ,. 24 42 ~ I.OI ••• Jlft. SZ10 t • .. t 111----.06 22 33 ~ .. ,.. X :i• 11, 1.00, .... ~ .... -~i~ c1.,-i-. ,. so 16 I thsa I .MIi "'•• .! r...i ... • --ll ~ 11-.,. , .. ,in,r 'l• --::OQII .. • LL 64 48 P. L 34 NP • AASHO A-7-5(20 A-S(S) ·Clusitlcation Texture Statioa Hole No. 1 1 Dcoth (ft.) 0 1.1 . ta ll 30 Ph 6.26 6.36 cc: • •Y• M. c. Adams .lllr. W. D. Bi~ham Soil3 File ~ . le 2A 2D JA 3B 4A \ 396734 396735 396736 396737 396i38 396739 -1 1 --- 100 98 98 100 100 100 99 96 95 99 9S 9a . 48 74 63 78 70 77 7 7 11 3 • 7 4 SJ 21 30 22 29 24 24 24 33 29 42 24 16 49 26 46 22 48 . ----- -- ----I- 36 64 47 58 I SJ 58 9 36. 19 24 14 29 A-4(3) ~-7-6(20) 1 A-7-o(lC ) A-7-S(l~)A-7-S(lJ :)A-7-6(19 • 1 2 2 3 3 4 30 0 8' 0 3 0 3 . 281 10 40.5 8 381 6.75 6.53 6.35 6.43 6.29 S.98 . ) .. : Jlat. • . . . . NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OIVISION Of' HIGHWAYS MATERIALS 6 T~STS UNIT IOILS LABORATORY ProJ. ------------------------- Project ____ ,!.~0ll.Ol. __________ Co1anl7 ---------------------------Owuer -·------ Data: Sampled ----------------Jtccelved ---------------------ltcported --- Sampled from _ _fCI)_?it._6:l, ___________________ Br ----------------·--- Submitted b~ --·----- , _________________ . ______________ 19 ____ Standard Spcc:ificatfon.s 396732-396751 TEST RESULTS ,.. ;) -?i . -::,, cl- Proi. &au,le No. 48 SA 58 SC 6A 6B 6C ?A • • Lab. Sample No. 396740 396741 396742 396743 396744 396745 396746 396747 Ketain•d :~ Sieve ,~ -12 -1 7 2 -- . Paasinc :10 Sieve .,. 99 84 99 96 90 97 100 100 Pualnir :,o-Sine .,. 97 80 96 93 86 92 97 99 . I a1 Puainsr ~00 Sien .,_ 64 62 64 48 65 S9 50 ~t C-ne s....i-s.o .. I t.U ........ :N .,. ? 9 9 7 8 10· 11 2 J i n.. s-..-.:s .. "' 36 20 33 51. 23 JS 41 14 ............ ••'-:Tl ,: • Mo • i Sill-4.0S . t ;a != la I.GOS •111. .,. 31 .1.'i 1A 28 21 35 24 30 ~ 'i ;iU ci.,-t...., , .i d.A .. ,,. 2~ ~" ?n 20 18 54 . • lh•• 0.041 ..... J r .... , •• • a :" ··-.,. -------- r ... , ... ,,. ,_ cw si... ------- LL 41 62 45 28 64 43 34 67 P. f. 9 27 . 14 4 29 5 6 31 AASHO A-5(6) A-7-5(14 .-l-7-lil8) A--4 ( 3) A-7-S(l'l 1)A-S( 5) A-4(3) !A-7-5(20) Classiiic11.tion . , Tcature Station I Hole No. 4 Ii Ii § 6 6 6 7 Depth (ft.) ln n ,; Ii , c; 0 7 12 7..\ . 'i'i ,; •a ? c; I lll 7 121 33 ... ,.. ph 5.89 6.05 S.91 6.31 S.73 S.78 5.89 S.72 cc: . , Jle!. .. -. . . NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 01'VISION o, HICiHWA YS MATi:RIAI..S 6 TE:5T5 UNIT SOILS LABORATORY Proi ········------·-------------·-· itti:W S:Ziiffrrff f Project _______ 4 • .5401101 _______________ Counl7 ---------------------------------Owner _________ _ Data: Samplecl ------------------------llec:c:IYed -----:-------··-------------Jleporteci ________ _ Sampled from __ _f~!Lri,~_f_i __________________ By ------------------------ Sl&.bmiu.d bJ' ------------------------------------------------ 11 ___ St.1uuurd Specificalion, 396732-396751 TEST RESULTS ,.?, ;J -f; Prof. Sa1nple No. 7B ?C SA SB ' Lab. S.mple No. 396748 396749 396750 396751 . Ket&lned :, Sieve ,; ---- Pasaln,r :10 Sien ,. 99 99 100 100 Paaalntr :.ao Sien ,. 97 97 99 97 67 55 80 -58 Pualnrr ::200 Sien ,,. ., C....ne S-4-LO ._ I •. ZI ...... A :ao ~ 4 7 3 8 . J j n ... s-.. , ..... u "" .,. 38 . 4S 20 43 i ; ··" ........ 1211 .. i Sll&-4.01 · .,. 38 . 30 23 31 loo 3 ; .. ... ··°"' ..... : ... = iU ci..-1-• 20 18 54 18 .. .: .,. "'·· ,.001 .... I .! r ... ;,.. • -:a :aa s1.-.. .,. ---, ... , ... ,. ----::111111- LL 38 39 66 45· P. L 8 8 23 4 . AASHO A-4(6) A-4(4) A-7-5(17) A-5(5) ClusltiQtion -I Texture Station Hole No •. ,, 7 8 8 Deotb (ft.) ln ?n 0 9 -1".l"t ?Of 331 91 39 1 I nh Ii 77 Fi nl 5. Fi£; 5.90 ce: - • - Cl".lll.U,;I<' \( ',i I,\ 1.'i" l'~ O. Co.: 211J/ n.ilcJ.ch, 1:c 21.;02 ~r. Jerry C. P~rkins, Head Solid Uascc and V~ctor Coµtrol llranch JH'li.don of llealch S'-!rv.lcc:, t:. C. D.lrnrtmcr.t of ltuman lle:;uuL"cc:.; r. O. Do>. 27637 Ralcith, ~o:th C~rolina 27611 Dear Mr. Perkin~: lht.: ('l'Oj'O!rnd l'<=}l ui~110!,al :;ltc luc.1Ci.:1l in 1:.1r :·,·a <.:,,uni:)' ill." 1;:1 j l.udc JG.20'13", lon&itudc n1•09•53", lu aLovc: Lhc !Jll-:,,1..:ar Uc,od )c:yd. 'rhc s.itc i!i loc.i.tcd un A hil ll•'op t,.:L\l~cn llic!i.11!c ~: Ci:1: .. --:I: ;,nJ cine: ,,r l~s lributaric:, •. l c:ttlm:ltc, u.:i::,•tl cHt flood 1,:.;ucd!i ,·ollcc:Cc<l .;it: "''•rlh C.wolin,L r.trc.?ms, ti&.Jt cha 100-y"ar flouJ t,:::lf,lit ir. uot: 11:orc: 1:hc1n 8 (e.:L aunv\! a,;cr.icc LMtcr levct in t:h,:r.c cre,"'~u. Th\! pruposl'ld : .. ~tc: ir. .ippro;-.i.m.Jtcly 80 Leet i100vc Lhc:;;c: creel;:. .ind not :;uhjcct: tu (.tc,odinr.. 4:..-N. ll. J,1ck::.,m, Jr. / llyJrolo;i:.t PIJ: ci:h .......---- .... t ... ,:_.:: . .! ·: ' .. ·'. ,.·:.-.... _ .. ,,·-.. :\ .. ~-/·· . '..?_.:;)) ----. - • A .-~-o_Nz_sUL_r_na_N_o_~-o-L-..-:-rr_· ,---~-Ell-:_s_.l._~-s-~-!-.~-_-t_e_s_,_I_n __ c_. _____________ _ A CIVIL ENOINEEJUNO. STRUCTIJBAL ENOl!\-n:Ill:NO • GEOTECU:SIC.LL ENGl:SJ::EIU:SG • llAn:RIALS Tl:STL'-G SERVICES 4.01 GLENWOOD AVE.. P. 0. Box 12447 · RALElGU. N. C. 27600 919/828-0801 March 7, 1983 North Carolina Department of Natural Resources & Community Development Raleigh Regional Office 3800 Barrett Drive Post Office Box 27687 Raleigh, North Carolina 27687 Attention: Mr. Edward L. Berry, Hydrologist Re: Monitoring Wells PCB Landfill Warren County, North Carolina Dear Mr. Berry: t.AAR .::. 9 198'3 hf\l.~IUH nf.G\ONAL 0FF1CE As requested by Jim Lineberger Grading & Paving, Inc., of Gastonia, North Carolina, Ezra Meir Associates, Inc. constructed four (4) moni- toring wells around the PCB Landfill in Warren County, North Carolina. The wells were constructed in August 1982 under the direction of Mr. Daniel H. Biechler, of Sverdrup & Parcel, Consu~ting Engineers, Greens- boro, North Carolina. On August 25, 1982, Mr. Biechler accepted the construction of the monitoring wells and the grouting of all open holes. Effective on August 25, 1982, it is our understanding that the State of North Carolina assumed responsib~lity of the wells. Attached, please find monitoring well construction records and one (1) copy of the well specifications. If you need any further information in this regard, please let us know. Very truly yours, EZRA MEIR ASSOCIATES, INC. y_/ .,:I. 1~ ~ Edward G. Aguirre Enclosure EGA:sam DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HANAGEMENI Bz~a Meir Associates, Inc. P.O. Box 12447 Ralei~h, NC 27605 ATTENTION Mr. Edward G. A~uirre Dear Mr. Aguirre: RE: Monitoring Wells In Warren Co./ and DEM Groundw~ter Re~ulatio1 I am writing to inform you that we have received the well construc- tion information on the four W:rren County wells and to thaRk vou for your prompt action. I would also like to inform you and vo11r corporation that any wells that you construct for groundw3ter information 3hould ~e reported to us regardless of who they ape for o~ whit ~roundwater information is being sought. If the information i3 ~fa confidential nature. send 3 letter requesting confidentiaility ~l~ng with stat~d re~sn~3 to have us restrict ~ny release of tn~ !nformatio:1 for som~ so~cifted time oeriod. Again thank vou for yo~r c~ooe~&~i0n ~n-j cont~ct m~ if I can be of helo. EB:bch cc: ?e.:"'r·y IJel.:;on Sinc-er-elv, Edw3.1·d Berry Hydrologist . . .. • coMPUTAT10Ns roR Mo,J1roR..JN G Weu.s --- I z 3 - L --- - - roP EL£V _., _____ .. --- :5'·}2 --- 328 ·-- 32Z --·- '326 ------- . CoN C 5 W-.B . ·. -------------sorro,....,,, sc~-=~AJ ___ el E \(_ ____ .... ~ -~·':l ~Il-L Z.9/ 2, 0 I 281 Za' ,__ 281 2 (), ·-·-z~, 'lo' ·- SHEE1 · )_ I OF I 9,1982.. I CHKO 8" S T€€'L P/PG' SC1-iG'Ov Le 40 ·z,'-.8'' ~D,J~ i .,,. i .r 4@u ., cArt-1 01-R&crnAI · oR. G.1<4,,_><.4/i-wwP i~r13ENT•).','I T€ SE..;L .. ..... 3 0 , ELEV. ~o . 0 . ---··-- ' Q NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT I , WELL RECO~D . OIVISl()i-i Vt ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT · P.O.Box27687 -RAL,El~,N.C.27611 919-733·2020 DRILLING CONTRACTOR £2L!4,,?l'e'/;' ,,,./5~y.,_,;1ilc5: NO. WELL CONS'_'fl.UCTION PERMIT NO. 1. WELL LOCATION: (Show sketch of the location below) ;,JI/ Nearest Town: ~~,,..,.,~,A/' N', ~. D33 YI County1 Wt'}U/.A/ LC~-v:/./ ---------,------,....,.,.---,--,-----,,---:---:------O,uadrangle No. Afi?;A/ · ~S~.s;'. (Road,Co111111unity or Subdivision and Lot No. l 197 I • 2. OWNER:~/ ~d;-aC:~Uh q ... -?d.V~. -~RILLING LOG 3. ADDRESS;..: ____________________ _ DEPTH FRO-M--TO FORMATION DESCRIPTION 4. TOPOGRAPHY: draw,v&lley,alope,hilltop,flat(circle one) · .s. usz or WELL, /7/cw:-/,.e/N'.:; DATz, B-18 -B3 ..J ·v1~ 6. DOES THIS WELL REPLACE AN EXISTING WELL? _2 I . -~,..,._...., __ _ 7. TOTAL DEPTBt .S-/ RI.G TYPE OR METHOD: _____ _ 8. FORMATION SAMPLES COLLECTED: YES NO _ _,c;X_,_ __ _ 9. CASING1 Depth Inside Dia. :;:;, :31/Z to 2Ci 3 t t_'\:...:'1"-'- Wall thick. type or weight/ft. II s,' :SC;/Ec,ut.E .t,10 ,,l,VG 10. GROUT: Depth Material Method From~to~Oq ft ~s' 11. SCREEN, Depth Dia. Type, Opening It adaitional space is neeoed, use back of form Fr0111:,03t~ft Io' £DIV71/.IU()P~ SL() 1 LOCATION SKETCH (Show distance to nuir.bered road■, or other map reference point■) 12. GRAVEL: Depth Size Material Fro111.?O3 to '2. 'i. / ft :t 22. 13. liATER ZONES (depth) 1 ____________ _ above 14. STATIC WATER LEVELa __ tt.belowtop of casing Casing ia __ ft. above land surface ELEV: 15 •. YIELD(gpm) 1. _____ KETHOD OF TESTING: ___ _ 16. PUMPING WATER LEVEL: ______ "-ft. after ____ h.oura at ______ gpc. 17. CHLORINATIO!l: Type _____ -".Amount ____ _ 18. WATER QUALITY: TEMPERATURE (°FL_ 19. PERMANENT PUMP: Date Installed'--------- Type _____ Capacity _____ (gf~)HP __ _ Make __________ lntake Depth ____ _ Airline Depth _____ _ 20. HAS THE 01•/?;ER BEEN PROVIDED A COPY OF THIS RECORD kllD IllFOR.~.ED OF THE DEPARTM!:HTS R!Q:JIR!:~!!::;TS 1-.ND REC0M."IENDATIONS? 21. R.a'.A!u<S -:----:-:----:-:----------------------------1 do hereby certify that this well was constructed in ac=ordance with N.C. ~ell eonstruction Regulations and Standards and that this well record is true and exact. NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT WELL RECOl:O . OIVISIOri vt' ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT · P. 0 . Box 27687 -RAL,EI~, N,C. 27611 919-733-2020 DRILLING CONTRACTOR E2~e'/tf' ,,.ls~ .. [t'//j~ NO. WELL coNs·:nuCTION PERMIT No. 1. WELL LOCATION: (Show sketch of the location below) -;,:ii/ D33 YI Nearest Town: ~~,/1/~,A/" Iv'-~-County1 W~1UL°N LD4'..v:!v ____ _.;....,... ___________ -___ __,;Ouadrangle No. A/72JA./ ~.S &~. (Road,Co111111unity or Subdivision and Lot No.) /??/ • 2. owm:a: gE ~z:1;-4 C:~.r/h ~--?~:J;f'. -~ RILLING LOG 3. ADDRESS_: ____________________ _ 4. TOPOGRAPHY: draw,vAlley,alope,hilltop,flat(circle one) .. 5. USE OF WEI.Ls /?/{)1'1/J/,..£'///'i DATEz 8 -/8 ·8 .3 '1 6. DOES THIS WELL REPLACE AN EXISTING WELL? 0 V/S I I 7. 'l'OTAL DEPTBI S/ RIG TYPE OR METHOD: ------ 8. FORMATION SAMPLES COLLECTED: YES NO_...;cx'--'--- 9. CASING1 Depth {}f~3qzto2'i3 ft 10. GROUT: Depth From~to~O~ ft 11. SCREENz Depth Inside Dia. 'i'1 I Wall thick. type or weight/ft. // f :SC-1/ec,1.dE 1,1() ,..tVL Material Method ~e' c,,.., .... ;a, I I Dia. Type, Opening DEPTH FRO_M __ TO FORMATION DESCRIPTION if adaitional space is needed, use back of form From303to~ft Io' U>1V71;,.111~v~ SLIJ I LOCATION SKETCH (Sho~ distance to nwcbered roads, or other a:.ap reference point■) 12. GRAVEL: Depth Size Material From.?O3 to 2 'i / ft :t 22 13. WATER ZONES (depth): ____________ _ above 14. STATIC WATER LEVELz __ tt.belowtop of casing Casing i ■ __ ft. above land surface £LEV: 15. YIELD(9pm) :. _____ METHOD OF TESTitlG: ___ _ 16. PUMPING WATER LEVELi ft. ------- after ____ hour■ at ______ 9pr.1. 17. CHLORINATIOH: Type ______ N11ount. ____ _ 18. WATER QUALITY: TEMPERATURE (°FL__ 19. PERMANENT PUMP: Date Installed ________ _ Type. _____ Capacity _____ (gpr:1) HP __ _ Make ___________ Intake Depth.~---- Airline Depth _____ _ 20. HAS TH£ OW?:ER BEEN PROVIDED A COPY OF THIS RECORD k!lO IIIFOR.".£0 OF TH£ DEPARTME?lTS JU:Q:JIR!:!-'..:'.?:TS }'.NO RECOMMENDATIONS? 21. REl'.AIU<S ----:-----:--------------------~-------I do hereby certify that this well was constructed in accordance with N.C. nell Construction Regulations and Standards and that this well record is true and exact, ,; NORTH CAROLINA OE.PARTME.NT OF NATURAL RESOURCES & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT WELL RECOr.o DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT · P. 0. Box 27687 -RALEIGH, N.C. 27611 919-733-2020 DRILLING COtn'RACTOR c'Z,.e,f /7,?4',.t-" /4.:,.,l--_,r.·#:-:"JU:G. NO. WELL CONSTRUCTION PERMIT NO. l. WELL LOCATION: (Show sketch of the location below)..,,.,-.2 D34-U.2. Nearest Town :._...,;;;M--:.~.;..:;;;;.&;;;;;·..:·~'--;;.~-~'-"'-P--~_v....._"-A/.:..;.., ._t'_:-_________ county: ~,-~/Al 6,-,..,1 Yr t'. ______________________ Ouadungle No. Arro,v7 US6-_5 (Road,Community or Subdivision and Lot No.) /97/ 2. OWNER: .:5/4k '1/ /V,E# UA},,,;:,,,,/'7 DRILLING LOG 3. I.OD RESS: DEPTH 4. TOPOGRAPHY: draw,valley,slope,hilltop,flat(circle one) 5. USE OF WELL1 44,,"z/_e/;..,,,'1 DATE: 8-10-8 Z. 6. DOES THIS WELL REPLAC6N EXISTING WELL? Vf..5, 7. TOTAL DEPTH1 ~7 1 RIG TYPE OR METHOD: _____ _ a. 9. 10. 11. F0?.MATI0N SAMPLES COLLECTED: YES NO X: --- CASING1 Depth Inside Wall thick. type Dia. or weight/ft. /a From 3Z.f3 to 2.8/ ft ~ .. r' :t:'.: ~.c_/..,.-.,&v_:: / y~.,DYC- GROUT1 Depth Material Method From3Zt3 tc3O4"ft SCREEN: Depth -t ~~, Dia. Type, Opening t;,:J,,,/T;';./~pvs .Slo7'" FRO-H--TO FORMATION DESCRIPTION . ·' #"' ,e z.c ,t-ij.K'"~."..;/.,~--:.C-<( . 1£ aad1c1onal space 1s needed, use back ot form LOCATION SK.ETCH Fr0111 303 to..l&2_ft z..o' (Show diataoce to auitbered roada, or other .. preference pointa) 12. GRAVEL: Depth From3O3 to2.E/ ft Size Z 2' Material 13. I.ATER Z0NES(depth) : _____________ _ above 14. STATIC WATER LEVEL: __ ft.belowtop of casing Casing is __ ft. above land surface ELEV: lS. YlELD(gpm)1 METHOD OF TESTING: ___ _ 16. PUMPING WATER LEVEL: ______ ___,;ft. after ____ hours at. ______ gpr.i. 17. CHLORIIIATI0N: Type ______ Amount ____ _ 18. w, •• .:a QUALITY : _______ TU!PERATURE (0F) __ 19. PER:'J-.NEIIT Pl.~!P: Date Installed. ________ _ Type ______ capaci ty _____ !spir,l HP ___ _ ~!ilke __________ ln take Dcpth-'------ Airline Depth _____ _ 20. 1'-'1S THE c,;-::;.:a EE.E::-1 PROVIDED A COPY OF ';ii IS FJ::C0RD ;.1:0 1:;fC,R.~::o or 7i:E c,;;f;.!!71'.£:;.s REQUIRD'..!:l;.s Af;D RECO}!!~IH:>AT IC!IS? 2 l. REl·:l.!'J<S ---------------------------------------1 do hereby certify that this well was ccnstructed in ~ccord•~ce with N.C. ~efl Construction ~egulations and Standards and that this well record is true and exact. ,.. NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT WELL RECO~D DIVISION OF ENVIRONME:-lTAL MANAGEMENT P.O.Box27687 -RALEIGH,N.C.27611 919-733-2020 DRILLING ':ONTR>.CTOR,/ ..bf',1 ~..ac,, d~/-".:S REG. NO. \,;ELL CONSTRUCTION PERMIT NO. 1. WELL L('<:ATION: (Show sketch of the location below) :::r3 D JJ./-u. S Nearest Town: t-'.4.e,,~~✓ //,C, County: _tv,(~;;.,V 6~-v-/(/ . ___ .;.;.:;;;;;:..._.;.... ________ ...;.._________ / -~-,---------,------,-----,,------Ouadrangle No. /rr'TOV' . L/.<; &-<;" (Roa-J,Co111111unity or Subdivision and Lot No.) /77/ 2. OWNER:_:; .w.;;: 3/4 k ~/ /U,J:d; ~.MA-'-4 DRILLING LOG 3. ADDRESS ... 1 _____________________ _ 4. TOPOGRAJ•HY: draw,valley,alope,hilltop,flat(circle one) 5. USE or·au.:A,✓,·-6°..eJ',?"'~ DATE: 8·•7..-82. 6. DOES THIS WELL JU:PLA~ EXISTING h"ELL? \¥S, 7 7. 'l'OTAL DEPTH1 t(/ , RIG TYPE OR METHOD:. _____ _ 8. FORMATION SAMPLES COLLECTED: YES NO _ _.Xc:....:.,. __ _ t. CASING: Depth Inside Wall thick. type EP From 32Z to 263tt Dia. or weight/ft. 3 'f'' f ''.::sc✓.-~<!;o/ t:fJ ,/,.Z: 10. GROUT: Depth Material :t '.Ulf -4 , e , Fro~to~ ft _ _.__,;. __ _ 11. SCREEN: Depth Dia. Type, Opening Fro:11 3D3 to 2.83 ft DEPTH FRO-H--TO FORMATION DESCRIYTION II aad1t1onal space~• needea, use back of !orm LOCATION SKETCH (Show d!staoce to nu:bered roads, or other aap reference pointa) 12. GRAVEL: Elepth Size Material From3D3toZ8ftt :t 22 13. WATER ZONES (depth): _____________ _ H. STATIC 1·:ATER L.EV!:L: ft a~ovetop of casing "below Casing is ft. above land s• .. rface ELEV: 15. YI!:LO(gp:n) , ______ M.tTHOO OF TESTUlG: __ _ 16. PUl-lPING \,;ATER LEVEL: _______ ft. after ____ hours at ______ 9pr.1. 17. CHl.OiUllATION: Type _______ mount ____ _ 18. WATER QUALITY: TUIPERATliF.E (°F) __ _ 19. PER.'1,\NE?IT Pt::-:?: Date Installed _________ _ Type ______ Capacity _____ (9,::n) HP. __ _ Make __________ lntake Depth'------ Airline Depth _____ _ 20. HAS THE OWNER i:>EEN P;!OVl0!:0 A COPY OF THIS !'.ECORD ;.:;.:, 1:::C~.".LD OF Tii£ C!:?.0.:7!::'.NTS R:.QUIF-".!'.!::::-s !,:;.:, REco:--_v.£:m.r.T10:;s1 21. REMAF.KS ________________________ __: _____________ _ I do hereby certify that this well was constructed in ac==r~acce wi:h s.c. ~ell Construction Regulations and Standards and that this well record is tr~e and exact. NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT WELL RECOl:D DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENT AL MANAGF.i-,ic.NT P.O.Box27687 -RALEIGH,N.C.27611 919•733-2020 DRILLING CONTAACTORL£.,e',4 d'K ..4~6 REG. NO. WELL CONSTRUCTION PtRMIT NO. 1. WELL LOCATION: (Show sketch of the location below)~ ,Y D34 u+- . Neare'st '1'own l _ _,::LU-;;;;;;.:."':::J.t!..:.:~:..;Y._:v7:i....:..,1.=~:.,,,,,~/__._ • .LM...;1_~_. _________ coun ty: M,e'..eE/1/ L~#✓v Quadrangle No. A/;?2'/./ / V SGS. -,,..llo-a-d-,C-o_mm_u_n""'i"'" t.t_y_o_r __ S...,...ubd"'"1'""· v""i""a""'i""o_n_a_n..,.d_-Lo_t_N_o __ ..,.,------,.-:-;7; 2. OWNEll;:::7JE ,'2?7£: / ~ 4L"',;J/5Jv;j DRILLING LOG 3. ADDRESS,;..... ____________________ _ OtPTH l'RO_H_· -TO FORMATION DESCRIPTION 4. TOPOGRAPHY: draw,valley,alope,hilltop,flat(circle one) s. usE or wELL:4✓,kw~ DATE, 8-1:>-ez 6. DOES THIS WELL JlEPuc/4 EXISTING WELL? )1,-'_s:" • J 7. TOTAL DEPTBi __.3""-"r-✓_JUG TYPE OR METHODr _____ _ I. l'ORMATION SAMPLES COLLECTEDr YES NO X 9. CASlNGr Depth Inside Nall thick. type Ek From 32D to 2.$3 ft ----- Dia. or weight/ft. 37' -f/~-,/.,r.l:,pV P~ ?Y.C. 10. GROUT: Depth Material Method From.32D fo 30f'ft :f /&, I J)vP/? , ✓ ----- u. SCREEN: Depth Dia. Type, Opening FrOID.3o3 to US ft w' C.",vT,,NvDu~ :5Lor If additional space J.S LOCATION (Sho\l distance to nu.::bered roada 1 12. GRAVEL: Depth Size ~:aterial From.303 to Z61 ft '± ZZ. 13. ioiATER ZOHES (depth) : _____________ _ above 14. STATIC WATER LEVEL: __ ft.belowtop of casing Casing is __ ft. above land surface ELEV: 1S. YIELD(gpn):. _____ METHOD OF TESTING: ___ _ 16. PUM?lUG WATER LEVEL: _________ ft. after ____ hours at ______ gpr.i. 17. CHLORINnTION: Type _____ ....;A.~ot:..,t ____ _ 18. 1'ATER QUALITY 1 ______ ___,T.t::-\PERATURE (OF) __ 19. PERM.i~'IEllT Plll-U-: Date Installed Kake __________ Intake Dep~h ______ _ Airline Depth _____ _ ncedea, use back ot form SKETCH or other '"E reference eoints) 20. HAS THE OWNi:R BEE!I PROVICEO A CC?Y OF 'Ir.IS RECOFD 1-.!lO 11;;-Qp_v~o Of ';"HE OEPARTME!:TS REQUI:lE!iESTS 1-.tm llECOMMEHOATlO~S? 21. REMAl,.;(S-::---:-:------:--'."""--------------__: ______________ _ I do hereby certify that this well was constructed in accorda~cc with N.C. ~ell Constr~ction Regulations and Sta~dards and that this well record is true and exact. c,!i'i'r. (IS c. Estimated Waste Volume The landfill site will be constructed to accommodate up to 40,000 cubic yards of soil contaminated with PCBs. E. "Description of Environmental Setting 1. Roadside The discharge of material containing PCBs occurred on approximately 211 shoulder miles of North Carolina highways. The PCB spills have been identified in 14 counties. See Figure l for a general location of the . spill areas. The discharge of material containing PCBs occurred mainly in rural areas on the roadway shoulder within 24. inches of the pavement edge. 2. Disposal Site a. Location and General Description The proposed disposal aite is located in the northeastern North Carolina Piedmont Plateau of Warren county, approximately four miles south of Warrenton. See Figur·e 2 for a county map showing the site location. The proposed disposal site consists of ap- proximately 142 acres of which about five acres will be used for the actual disposal of the soil contaminated with PCBa. The remaining acreage will •~rve as a buffer zone for the disposal a~ea. b. Hydrology-Topography Surface water discharges are controlled by the topographic position of the land. The proposed disposal area occupies the crest of a gently sloping upland ridge which has 70 to 80 feet of relief. Surface water discharge from the site is toward ■even draws located in a radial pattern around the site. See Figure 7 for surface drainage patterns. Two large draws immediately Northeast, and West of the ■ite receive the major portion of surface run-off. Exposed clayey subsoils, topogra- phic poaition and side slopes tend to minimize . surface water infiltration and maximize surface water run-off. 15 V I\... .II""' 'lr-'ll "-/,.;.,/ ' ,./\ . '\ '-' // -~" ' SURFACE DRAIN GE FROM PCB DISPOSAL AREA I I . I ~ -' . . (i . ,r --·· . "-\ ~ $_~ LEGEND · ~ • SOIL BORING LOCATION ~ -SURFACE DRAINAGE ~· ~~<Z \ \ \sc~~l-~do·-- Surface water discharge is to Richneck Creek and an unnamed tributary to Richneck Creek via draws around the site. Richneck Creek discharges to Fishing Creek. The confluence of Richneck and Fishing Creek is approximately 3 miles downstream and Southeast of the Warrenton raw water intake. Stream classifications for Richneck Creek and Fishin9 Creek in the discharge area •is class C. Approximately 40 miles separate the site discharge area and the closest raw water intake. U. S. Geological Survey Flood Records of N. c. streams indicate that the 100-year flood eleva- tion is not more than 8 feet above average water levels in Richneck Creek and its tributaries. The site is 70 to 80 feet ~ove these streams and not subject to flooding. Recharge of groundwater +esulting from su~- face water infiltration and percolation is esti- mated to be low. There should be no significant fluctuation in water table elevations beneath the ridge occupied by the disposal site. All features on the site which enhance surface run-off reduce groundwater recharge. Rapid run-off and ti).e rela- tivelr small area of gently sloping ridge crest minimizes the volume.of precipitation available for infiltration and recharge. The close proximity of 2 deep draws for ground water discharge and the relative low retention and water storage capacity of deep subsurface weathered rock (silty sand and sandy silt) indicates a low potential for buildup of any significant hydraulic head or water table below the ridge. The net effect of constructing impermeable barriers on the ridge crest and divert- ing any off-site surface water will be to further reduce the potent~al for mounding of groundwater below the site. . Precipitation aata from the U. s. Weather Bureau Station at Arcola in Warren County indicated, that at the time of the September study, rainfall in Warren County was approximately SX greater than the preceding 5 year average. There were no observed evidence of reduced soil colors or mottling of soil colors to jndicate the presence of a permanent water table. At the time of the boring, no water table was observed at the 42 foot depth. It is concluded that the water encountered in the September study was a result of normal vertical movement of percolating surface water rather than ground water tables. 16 Representative Bydrographs of wells in Warren County indicate that during September ground water levels are declining. Ground water levels are at maximum elevations during the period from January to April. Borings performed during Februarr i, 1979 by the consulting firm of Soil & Material Engineers Inc. indicated a static water level of ~pproximately 303 1 to 306' in elevation or 37 to 32 feet below land surface. Boring depths were 45' below land surface. In the Warren Section of the report title "Geology and Ground Water R~sources in the Raleigh Area", compiled by the u. s. Geolo-gical Survey, the static water level of well number 122 was measured to be 47' below land surface. For location of well number 122 see Figure 3. This well is similar to the disposal site borings with respect to elevation, topographic position and time of water level recordation. Bydrographs of observations wells in Warren County show ground water fluctuations from approximately S to 11 feet. The study conducted by the firm Soils & Materials Engineers Inc. was carried out during the middle portion of maximum seasonal fluctuation of 9round water.· The measured elevation of groundwater 1n February, 1979, was 303 to 306 feet. Ground water elevations could be predicted to rise an additional S to 6 feet. The predicted highest ground water elevation would be 309 to 312 feet. Maximum surface elevation in the disposal area is 343 feet. The highest predicted water table elevation is 31 feet below land surface which would allow a maximum excavation depth. of 24' to remain 7 1 from the high wa~er table elevations. Construction of a clay liner would afford a 14 foot separation from the high water elevation. c. Soil Conditions Soils on the aite are characterized within the standardized engineering concept of surficial earth materials. Procedures established by the American Association of State Highway Officials (AASBO) and the American Society for Testing Materials (ASTM) were utilized for soil evaluation. The N. c. De~artment of Transportation and Soil & Material Engineers, Inc. independently evaluated site conditions and performed pertinent field and laboratory analysis on materials obtained from 19 soil borings in the disposal area .. Surficial soils on the site consists of red-brown silty clays. The top soil on the site is significantly eroded but where present extends to a depth of 3 to 6 inches. Subsoils are clayey 17 I '-- and silty and extend to depths of 38 to 45 feet. In general, a gradual transition exist between upper silty clays and deeper clayey silt.s~ Obser- vations of soil borings on site indicate that t.he clayey silts grade into sandy silts and silty sands. The general stratifications of clays overlying silts which grade to fine sands is typi- cal of the Piedmont province. Detailed analysis of the soil materials were performed by the N. c. Department of Transpor~ation laboratory and Soil & Material Engineers, I~c. ~he two laboratory analysis indicated an upper layer of clayey soils ranging in depth from Oto 38 feet below land surface. Soils at the 45' maximum drilling depth were classified as silty sands and sandy silts. Standard Engineeri"------oratory tests for maximum density at optimum moisture and permeabi- lity at 95 and 100 percent maximum density were performed on the soils. At 97% maximum density the permeability of 1.9 x 10-cm/sec and minimum permeability of 1.8 x 10-~ cm/sec. At 100 percent maximum ~,nsity no permeability was greater than 1.0 x 10 cm/sec, 'tbe 8 acres encompassed by de- tailed soil borings and analysis demonstrates that So,ooo to ?s,ooo cubic yards ol clayey materials lie available to construct highly impermeable soil nv1ronmental Profile The proposed disposal site occurs on open, rolling cultivated land presently utilized for soybean production. In addition to the soybeans, various weeds and grasses have been observed growing on the proposed disposal site and include such species as foxtail, ground .cherry, thistle, broomsedge, ragweed, aster, and horseweed. Mixed deciduous hardwoods in association with pine occur on the periphery of the soybean field. Oaks in- cluding white, southern red, blac, and post, red maple, sweetgum, tulip poplar, hickory and loblolly pine are the major canopy species present. Under- story species consists of redbud, dogwood, American holly, red cedar, and winged sumac scattered among small shrubs, saplings and vines -primarily honeysuckle. 18 A. II. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION AND THEIR POTENTIAL IHP.'\CTS Procedures Utilized to Evaluate Alternative Disposal site Locations The North Carolina Department of auman Resources, Division of Health Services conducted a site search for potential land areas that would be suitable for the permanent storage of the PCB contaminated soil. The objective of the investigaticn was to evaluate available State and offered private property for potential usage as disposal sites. It was anticipated that several suitable sites could be located. A set of general guidelines was developed ··to assist in the evaluation of potential sites. The following is an outline of general site criteria and EPA technical re~irements utilized in the location and evaluation of potential disposal sites for the PCB contami- nated soil. 1. General Area of Potential Site Locations The search for potential disposal sites was gen- erally limited to an area bounded by the counties where the PCB spills had occurred. Areas east of the spills were generally eliminated due to evidence of seasonal high ground water levels relatively close to land sur- face. Potential sites in areas of the western portion of the State were given a low priority due to the long haul distances. 2. General Site Screening & Evaluation Procedures (a) Site Relief A PCB chemical waste landfill should be loca- ted in an area that provides low to mode;,t; ~opg;- 1ra2hic relief to prevent landslides ors umping. eria! photographs,· U. s. Geological survey topo- graphy maps and field measured elevations were utilized to evaluate site relief suitability. Sites with potential of land slumping resulting from required construction activity were rejected. (b) Topographic Position Hill, flat, slope and draw are the four basic topographic positions for surface features. Wells installed on hill or ridge positions normally exhibit the lowest average yield of 9round water per foot of well. Hill or ridge positions are also amenable to diversion of surface water and control of local recharge to ground water by 19 minimizing areas available for recharge. Hilltop and ridge were assigned a high priority for topo- graphic position. Sites predominated by draws or difficult to manage slope position were rejected. U. s. Geological Survey topographic maps and on-site evaluations were used to determine topogra- phic position suitability. (c) Soils Surficial soils are formed by weathering of subsurface geological rock formations. The charac- teristics of the surficial soils are determined by the chemical and physical properties of underlying rock formations. Therefore, detailed geological maps of specific areas and State and County soil surveys were used to delineate sites with poten- tially suitable soils. Site specific surface evaluations, soil borings and field & laboratory testing of soil materials were performed on sites with reasonable probability of meeting the hi9h silt and clay content parameters for PCB chemical waste landfills. Sites with sandy surface soils, rock outcrops or exposed boulders, surficial soils with shallow depth to bed rock and insufficient on-site soils for clay liners were rejected. Surficial soils contained within the landfill site which could not meet the following EPA technical requirements were rejected. · (1) permeability 1.0 x 10-7 cm/sec. (2) percent passing no. 200 seive230 (3) plasticity index2:1S (d) Hydrology Potential contamination of ground or surface water were major considerations for screening all sites. Any site that could not be designed to prevent hydraulic cbnnection between the PCB con- taminated soils and surface streams or springs and ground water was rejected. Sites within the . 100-year floodplain, within close proximit¥ of a class I or II reservoir utilized as a public water supply or within½ mile of an A-II stream as de- signated by the D.E.M. were rejected. A separa- tion distance of 500 feet from the site and water supply wells was used as a ·site screening para- ·meter. The depth to ground water would limit the depth of excavation and total storage volume of a given site. The standard for site evaluations with respect to ground water separation was 50 feet. It was acknowledge during the site evalua- tion process that the probability of locating 20 -sites with ground water levels below 50' from land surface would be difficult if not impossible~ Therefore, sites were screened according to the predicted or measured minimum depth from land surface to the upper limits of 9round water tables. Transmissivity, gradients and discharge areas for ground water were considered in site evaluations. Ground water fluctuations were predicted from data generated by U. s. Geological Survey publi- . cations on geology and ground water resources and field observations or measurements. Predicted, observed or measured upward fluctuation of ground water resulting in relatively &hallow water tables would cause a site to be rejected. Rainfall and evaporation data from the U. S. Weather Bureau in combination with U. s. Geological Re~orts and field measurements were used to predict the maximum : upper fluctuation from the measured static water levels on sites that were drilled. (e) Site Size The disposal site for ·the PCB contaminated soil should be large enough to allow adequate con- struction and protection of the disposal area. Considerations for sizing a site include: con- struction of disposal pit; storage area for stock- piling borrow materials to allow separation of earth liner, topsoils, leachate collection and spoil materials; access and turn around area for haul vehicles, separate sedimentation ponds for runoff from disposal pit and soil stockpile areas; areas for installation of monitoring wells up gradient and down gradient of disposal pit; berms or ditching for diversion of surface water and a buffer and security zone. A minimum 16-20 acres in a fairly regular configuration was the rejection criteria for site size. (f) Access Sites with deeded right-of-ways were assigned higher priority than sites with no road frontage, no deeded right-of-wars or property access by easement. Consideration was also given to the length and construction difficulty of access roads from state maintained roads to the disposal pit. (g) Isolation of Site Population densities within 1 mile of proposed sites and sites which would require transportation of the PCB contaminated soil through highly popu- 21 - B. lated areas were considered for site evaluations. The objective of this standard was to locate·sites which would impact the least number of citizens during transportation and disposal~ Alternative Sites Evaluated 1. Total Sites Evaluated The above outlined standards were utilized to evaluate approximately 90 sites in 20 counties. Every available tract of state-owned land considered to be a possible candidate as a site to receive PCB contaminated soil was investigated. These included properties assigned to the National Guard, institutions, tower sites, prison property experimental farms, state parks, state forests, utility-owned property and properties under Department of Transportation jurisdiction. Federal property on the Fort Bragg military reservation was also evaluated. · · The remaining sites were offered for evaluation by private individuals and corporations, and county govern- ments. 2. Site Rejection Approximately 90 percent of all potential sites were eliminated due to violation of one or a combination of evaluation standards. A majority of the sites were eliminated due to the location with respect to private or public water supply reservoirs, intakes and wells; high water tables and unsuitable soil characteristics. The range of site evaluations included sites from 1.5 to 1300 acres; soils from highly impermeable saturated marine clay materials in Wilson County and impermeable clay stone pits in the Triassic Basin to sand dune sur- ficial deposits on the Fort Bragg Military Reservation. Water table elevations varied from 3' to greater than 40' below land surface.· Topographic positions varied from relatively flat areas to areas with greater than 30 degree side slopes and population densities from a few homes per square mile to hundreds within a mile of the site. Eleven of the total available sites were considered to have a high probability for meeting the criteria for PCB chemical landfills. Detailed soil borings and sub- surface investigations were made on these eleven sites. Table II lists these eleven sites. Sites in Franklin County, the Nash County Prison Site, the Wake county Prison Site, Chatham County Brick Plant site and the Barnett County O.O.T. Borrow Pit site were rejected from subsurface investigations. The remaining 6 sites 22 • • in Person, Warren, Nash, Wake, Chatham and Granville Counties were evaluated by EPA and State personnel. Consideration was given to multiple site distribution by development of these sites; however 4 of the sites were rejected and more detailed subsurface analysis were required on the Chatham and Warren sites. Maximum density, ~ermeability at 95% maximum dry density and optimum moisture tests, volume of material suitable for clayey liners and water table monitoring test were performed on the Chatham and Warren sites. Both sites afforded essentially equivalent evaluations. The Chatham County site was unavailable for purchase by the State for development as a PCB chemical landfill and therefore rejected from further considerations. In order to increase the disposal site alternatives requests were made by the State to County Boards of Commissioners for permission to evaluate existing sani- tary. landfill sites as potential sites for disposal of the PCB contaminated soil. Table III illustrates the result of subsurface evaluations for suitable soil materials and water table elevations. The sanitary landfill sites were either unsuitable for development or were unavailable for deyelopment as a PCB chemical landfill. 3. Selected Site Of the six most suitable sites located in Nash, Person, Wake, Granville, Chatham and Warren counties the Warren County site on SR 1604 demonstrated the least restrictions and the greatest degree of protec- tion of the public health and environment. Additional tests were performed by an independent consulting firm to confirm the state's evaluation of the site. Appli- cation was made to EPA for site approval for this site to be developed into a disposal site for the PCB con-· taminated soil. Site and conceptual plan approval was granted. 23 RC -lichneck Creek UT -Unnamed Tributary DS -Downstream US -Upstream PCB LANDFILL MONITORING CODE SW-CON -Spring Discharge 30 feet above UT SW-HEAD -Spring Discharge 500 feet above UT Wl -Groundwater Monitoring Well #1 W2 -Groundwater Monitoring Well #2 W3 -Groundwater Monitoring Well #3 W4 -Groundwater Monitoring Well #4 A -Replicate A B -Replicate B 1 •• 1 LJF ' · • • · -'I I E°'T.' CjU · · T'.. 'l , .. ,1; • .rr A:::1:::,e>.1.J' 1,,:·~"-')1110. . : .. ••c-----·;• • , .. ; .... ,1 ' .. . IA,,•·!\'' ' I: ·. I .-'i1 ), ·li(.._:\J:it~_· 111~,':..' :---._,. .JI "".'·' ,:,,. \·· ? .... • ,, . ""=--/I~•-•,, ' \ •• ' I·•~· I '·.v ..... •·' i i: I· ,,,n I I O • ' , } '.' '1 . ' , • / I·. · • · ·: · ' '0 i ' ll. , ";,. , . i'. I .• -' 1/ :\ ··-',\, \ .,, \,•ff ,\ -· . '., f I . ,·t-~-· -....., ___ :U . ·, • -~,• .. ·.• ·; .'. ·~ 11_ ' . •. 1.i I, ,, . S... t . ·' ... ' . I . ' . ) I '1 I . ~· I\ . ·. I 1\' ·.•: ' ' • .1u;.___ , ! / ,/ ~ 1 •• ,, \ ·'• I • • , , . '· . ,\ • ,.\ .\ \ • I,. . · ~t~ ;7} 1· '\'. ·i <. ~,-,. ~ ·_t. }J_ I\·,.· ·r: .. fu .. ,: ,:i~~ f\~;, I,,, · .,\\,, · '· ,1' ' I r, t' l , ' r.,. . . %· 1, :') ' \ I •. , ' \ f\, . } / I :, I I \I' /• I ~. ,-, . ), . ,_ (\.. 11:.,_,f\11 •• ',, , ii"\· ,~.,\·;~ ;:,,,, s:t,< AM ,.,",,_, _ ,.,,. -,,~, .. _, ' . ' . .. \'.·.I,,,,, t/'' ~:\~;; '\ J .JI•--.._ r--J. ~ I It• /.· .• ~,,i1! :_;-✓r---j/'\'·::i~,,.,. ,,,,,,(·· ;·-·· -., •'-'·· :'J'' \''\)'-£.:,-...,_ -,,t\\\'•~·,.~., .... -"'"'·' ........ )-:0 \ . __ '··. ...... , .. _,. 1 _,., -,--:-• :,,, } -· 0 ':'i ,: / \~ -~ ·.·.) :.1 -~:.. -/:., \ f ,-· \ ~~,.... __ r, · ~; ,,, · .. : · 11;, • 0 · · ____ ,,,, ;11 ,'f_:·, · ,· ''r-.-\\1''. ,/.-·;·· lf[I .. _--= •-,~•• _'· ! .--~. '1\ l .• f/1' .. ' . -., . ._I, I\. · 11 • 0 II " I \•t-\ .. . . .· " '\ \ I ' \\ ,f ·-. ,, I,-· 'll.... ·,::•,' '. I • ,1~;.., > -. ,.'l\i: I} \ '• - \ I ,I \__ , ' -. W3 ' ' i ,,. , -.J.•o ,.,~u ' . -, . -~ ,,, II~ c-.;;i;:.;.;..;_,;] • ' -;...._(:\\.~ •~ ~---~~ I \j I -, ... :"\ I .;;...i_:;,~-----. • ,-\--~___,;;~I.... . ·, ·' . • \ \ -/ COi . .. ~o• .. ) _.-.:.~) -:~ ! -.-,.,--s ·, I\ ,r \ ,--no, I' , .,......,....., I • 0 <;: , I • -.. ,-_ .._,,_, • -• -· \.... 'J \ ' I \IT -'/ . w I ' :··(' • • • --• -.:P...::X'· . ( ,·~ ---:,-· ",_. ·: "_>·--\\ . .,.. r· Ii )\_-""! I ;• , . . t ,,-r1/.':).•;;, '1.11 ., · · : .\ ~ ~\\ '\._ 1,\ ~ll I 1/ -...·-•, ... -·-. _., --..__'--,,-.'--1· •. -. . . , ... ,·1 G f __ \,, ,~,. ,1•1 • ,_.,\.,~-·-·'/\ , 1 1·,---1 '•.' , ,;•• ••• !1,\'._' .• -···: • ; lJ':.:·_. ..-._, \•·',; ) ". ..... ,-\ /1 ...__ :_ '1 ·.• I ' ,,: . ·-,1• ( -:-·-~· '' , , ·-·"' · .-\ \--, \ • )' I -~-I ·' ,::.:.:..1/· • I ' · f · \.,r , · / /\ • -·----.. /0 ~ ' • \ 1:' • • ,.--·--,~'L ·· ,---) . ,•·1, )) ) . ·. . \ .• : .... :.."\.<...::· . -. . I ·, : I' • ---~a 1,-.,-) j~ I 1,1' I ' -?-: I \ \if~\',:._ <: I J \ I_ ~.< ' I --,-(,' / .. /\. I • -.,, ----• '' I \,. \ '°' « '-... _ t ---1/-· .. _ I r· ~ . ' ' -. ' \ 7 () \.)\ 1 (\ )N~~ ) \_.... /--~ _ ,. .. ..--} ~ , •~--•, -, i, -'· _\ i/ /· _. -" , • • \ I -::., 7 \ , '\~ I _ ..••• -I 2· I ,·,,. . I._,,·--.\-.., ' ' -' :.::;.:...::... -lf-.. "'\ ~'· ' . \ ... I ·' .' . _-) \ . , .169 ·, .. \ 'E, I \ ,.. , I • ,, : fl ,-._ '--\\,....JI '·-,.\.. lfl ~--...::,)) i __ , ' •.. , ·1 ~ ., ··\ ,·0} I,--' ' 1 l,. .. ,, ~ l ._ . ,, \" \ . )J' -----)'/.' --. '. ,. a ,-..._::: . . •· --'. } -.if \~, /1::-..\ )fr '\ \ , \ •, ~_, ... ·-,, ,.-• • ' ~-,' ••-, ,,• • i' • -•;::: --. f ' • , I , I' \'·~ ' \·-~-,-· # ....... , -! :, ' --~---.. ..·, . . ,,., • o "•-\' I• •1 • • I • • 1 • • ' ; , • ••• •, • 0 •• ,. • • . ' -I ' ,., : I -·-:..e:, -, I ' ... · \ 1 • , .. • .. , I J • , , r:1_1 :. ( ""·' '· .• .,_. -'· ''. . • · •. , \ -:--· • r -.. • • . . ·• ~ . ·.\. \\'a,...n • • -''\," • ..,_, • I _ ., \~ · , · , , I l,(.fo'\ , , --, / , Mh:~j.1 • J,,°" .. __ ".-. ·'"~...:· ... :_:;_.,,!•~-~-,,,•(\\1-..•:1•·-,':. :--•''r\:• ·. . .,,.. ___ .. '.\._ •,i1::__:l..:~:--·_,..71(;l_.,·, ,;,_ ,<:. ,! :'•'' .!f'\i151n1 'l .-..._ ·--'· L---'-=-',, l ,, , .. -."\~--,~ ,-4 ,. . ' ... ---• I • I ' I • • _,. I ' • ~.'. ,.:-:-:-· .. \:.. ' ' . ... ._ \ • ~' . -.,, I fl( I _...,_ 0 'v' / ' 0 ' I o • )',,;·· "i•i ,.~;· '· .1,1615_)°~-',_,,,,✓, l / \I.;(//'' ·.,. _ ,., 'l I T " ..... ~I,! __ . .1!·· .,) ..... · . "u 'I . ·-If . . I# . .. I -. ~.:: . • • ....~ , . I ,. , l . . _,--'t• \.. r \_r.....__...., (-:•~;,.;_-,'.11 -~·:/, )· \1•~'r.1ttownv__\ .. f:((.,.-HI :~ ' •~ ( (\' -... ' \~ -~ 0 · 1/ I · · • --1 ' ~II' •, 'i ~--,,, . ·\'\~ ..... '·• .. , . ·-.. __ )/. ·, .. , ··\,,!, -.·\·, ~ 1\ : ' .1.v·. · .. , • !Ii . ,, · , , iY" •• · • ' ' '.' · ( I . 't . . ,' .. "-,. ---~\.... ! . . , -.. ·-: .,,, . '\ ,. --1 • • ' 1 · I I ' . \)\ . . ' . . . '-· . • I /I , • I • .,. • t I • I --'\ ' . • ,. . . -.,.. \ -. . , • '' \. .. I 'I-. I .. / • ... ·.• ,. I • . I . ----. , . \\ ,,.-. -. , , .. . . ,:-n\.-; .. ,---· , ,;;," r· , ,,n \ ·• ·,,. , .. -... . . . __ _, ,-• • (0f1/( , .: •. ;/ ,I,' •-I "-' . ~ ,.... . , \ , . , , ,, , "( ·\ 1 ~ . , . . , .. -:,.. : 'i,, ~/(' -··f '-/ 1 j' ' I ,' ( '· ' _, ·. "-~-. . •JI ! ·. ! : ,\ . \,r , • · , , . ,·• I\ <-· I ~ ., . . ,..,.~o \ ( -~ ' ' f? , · 0 ' · · ( · · · I ·, ' , , , I · ., . , / · 1 \ , ) C... • / / -, • , I I ,, I • • 1 ~ , \ • , , I I .. ' \ . • • l ' ' l· ... } \ . ' ( ( I . ' ., . ... I -. • . .'" . ' I .' . • " ' \ / I\ I. -I . \ i ,· . , \ • , , , , • 1 , , , , , I , • • · , . • , • \ \ \ · ' , · · .,y )1 ~\ '/( .·_ l\ .. ~~---_\l, .;'-fl'?.7t/( \-,~ \1)\,rc~/-'."}0( -'{\_CJ?.., , I_, ''n(l 1iK,1!f}~' .--<_: .. ,. ___ .. -~·:)IA(,\ \0' \' ·., (( ' • ' ... ... _•'-.../'i(_' .... -_!((1/if\\.\ /,.•,'·;1',\-, '·, 1'u-.\•11\-"'-:JWi~-----)~---/,•'!l\l)\ .. .n,:-r ·,\\\1 ·. ) \. . 'C' '- Su~F,4tE _,.,,~ S1'17P(G .S f c. l.JS l'l Re US a I Q. C b.S A ,c Dj ' ? lJ• u.s l'f .x. CJiOS B u T OJ ,9 CJ rosjl 'LU ·WI 14 wnl ~~'4 ui{i '-" .:SA "':s ~ "" '1 l'l w "{(i • t, JJO •'"<. Cl>N.O l~O~ $tfCtl I}; ~ Ef'-,fC£ lOCKJ ~-tr J;~~.r (. l ~V\O "'1' ;f "7/' ~• llf t l\tl..-A ll Du1 /4 tJ-' ;-o IYu,? rl~ Disposal Site The proposed disposal site is located in the northeastern North Carolina Piedmont Plateau of Warren County, approximately four miles south of Warrenton. (See Maps). The proposed disposal site consists of approximately 142 acres of which about five acres will be used for the actual disposal of the soil contaminated with PCBs. The remaining acreage will serve as a buffer zone for the disposal area. Surface water discharges are controlled by the topographic position of the land. The proposed disposal area occupies the crest of a gently ■loping upland ridge which has 70 to 80 feet of relief. Surface water discharge from the site is toward aeven draws located in a radial pattern around the site. Two large draws immediately Northeast, and West of the site receive the major portion of surface run-off. Exposed clayey aubaoils, topographic position and side slopes tend to minimize surface water infiltration and maximize surface water run-off. Surface water discharge is to Richneck Creek and an unnamed tributary to Richneck Creek via draws around the site. Richneck Creek discharges to Fishing Creek. The confluence of Richneck and Fishing Creek is approximately 3 milea downstream and Southeast of the Warrenton raw water intake. Stream classifications for Richneck Creek and Fishing Creek in the discharge area is class C. Approximately 40 miles separate the site discharge area and the closest raw water intake. U.S. Geological Survey Flood Records of N. C. streams indicate that the 100-year flood elevation is not more than 8 feet above average water levels in Richneck Creek and its tributaries. The site is 70 to 80 feet above these streams and not subject to flooding. Recharge of ground-water resulting from aurface water infiltration and percolation is estimated to be low. There ahould be no signficant fluctuation in water table elevations beneath the ridge occupied by the disposal site. All features on the ■ite which enhance surface run-off reduce ground-water recharge. Rapid run-off and the relatively amall area of gently eloping ridge crest minimizes the volume of precipitation available for infiltration and recharge. The close proximity of 2 deep draws for ground-water discharge and the relative low retention and water storage capacity of deep aubsurface ·weathered rock (silty ■and and aandy silt) indicates a low potential for build- up of any aignificant hydraulic head or water table below the ridge. The net effect of constructing impermeable barrier■ on the ridge crest and diverting any off-aite 8Urface water will be to further reduce the potential for 1110unding of &round-water below the aite. Subaurface boring, performed during February 1, 1979 by th• conaulting firm of Soil & Material Engineer ■, Inc. indicated a 1tatic water level of approximately 303' to 306' in elevation or 37 to 32 feet below land 8Urface. The study conducted by the firm Soils & Materials Engineer,, Inc. wa■ carried out during the middle portion of maximum seasonal fluctuation of ground-water. The measured elevation of ground-water in February, 1979, was 303 to 306 feet. Ground-water elevations could be predicted to rise an additional 5 to 6 feet. The predicted highest around-water elevation would be 309 to 312 feet. Maximum surface elevation in the disposal area is 343 feet. The highest predicted water table elevation is 31 feet below land surface which would allow a maximum excavation depth of 24' to remain 7' from the high water table elevations. Construction of a clay liner would afford a 14 foot aeparation from the high water elevation. Surficial soils on the site consists of red-brown silty clays. The top ■oil on the site is significantly eroded but where present extends to a depth . of 3 to 6 inches. Subsoil ■ are clayey and silty and extend to depths of 38 to 45 feet. In general, a gradual transition exist between upper silty clays and deeper clayey silts. Observations of soil borings on site indicate that the clayey silts which grade to.fine sands is typical of the Piedmont province. Detailed analyses of the soil materials were performed by the N.C. Department of Transportation laboratory and Soil & Material Engineers, Inc. The two laboratory analyses indicated an upper layer of clayey soils ranging in depth from Oto 38 feet below land surface. Soils at the ,s• maximum drilling depth were classified as silty sands and sandy silts. Standard Engineering laboratory tests for maximum density at optimum moisture and permeability at 95 and 100 percent maximum density were performed on the soils. At 95% maximum density the permeability of 1.9 x 10-7 cm/sec and minimum permeability of 1,8 x 10-8 cm/sec. At 100% maximum density no permeability was greater than 1.0 x 10-7 cm/sec. The 8 acres encompassed by detailed soil borings and analysis demonstrates that 50,000 to 75,000 cubic yards of clayey materials are available to construct highly impermeable soil liners. 26 ......_ . . L .. , • . -... .. . .. . lfARREN COUNTY -. -. . . • \ • \ . . .. -.... B. Background Information The first deliberate discharge of what was later identified .as PCB liquid . materials took place the last week of June. 1978, on remote roads of the 'Fort Bragg Military Reservation. The discharge was investigated by Fort Bragg personnel who secured liquid samples of the material. The next discharge occurred on July 27 and July 29 on the roadway shoulders bn NC 58, north of Centerville in Warren County. This discharge was reported by pr(vate citizens to the N, C. Highway Patrol, who alerted the Division of Health Services, Water Supply Branch. Water Supply Branch personnel notified Division of Environmental Management, Water . Quality Program personnel in the Raleigh Field Office of the spills, Raleigh Field Office personnel investigated the spill on July 31 as an oil spill and on finding no oil ponded or evidence in surface waters, returned to their office without taking further action. On August 2, the Water Quality Operations Br,Dch, Division of Environmental Management, received a call from a Johnston County farmer concerning a spill on NC 210 in front of his farm. Because of the description of the odor and the effects on field workers being reported. a ataff chemist was immediately dispatched to investigate the spill and to take appropriate samples. Grass, soil, and water samples were hand delivered to the Division of Environmental Management Laboratory for analysis later that afternoon. August 2, The same chemist who investigaied the Johnston County spill encountered a similar ■pill near Snow Camp, North Carolina on SR 1004, Alamance County. while returning to his home. A sample was taken from the spill area and hand delivered to the laboratory the foll.wing morning for analysis. On August 4, the Laboratory's Analytical Section Chief notified the Water Quality Operations Branch that the material spilled in Johnston County app.ared to be Aroclor-1260, a Polychlorin~ted Biphenyl (PCB) substance. The Water Quality Operations Branch immediately notified the Chief of the Environmental Protection Agency, Region lV, Emergency Response Branch, of the Laboratory'• findings. After briefing the Director, Division of Environmental Management, a meetin& was called with representatives of the Attorney General'• Office, the Department of Crime Control and Public Safety, and Public Information representatives of the Secretary of the Dep11rtment of Natural Resources and Community Development. A notification to all all enforcement officiala was prepared and sent over the Police Information Network syatem during the late evening hour• of August 4. A news release was prepared and sent to local newspapers for publication in the Saturday morning newspaper. The aame day, the laboratory confirmed material di1charaed in Alamance and Chatham Counties was Aroclor-1260, the aame form of PCB material found in Johnaton and Harnett Counties, Aho on August 4, the N .• C. Highway Patrol delivered ■611 aamplea obtained from Chatham County to EPA. The results of the EPA laboratory analy1i1 were reported to SBI on August 8. On Auauat 5, Water Quality Operations Branch met with concerned citizens in Johnston County, inveatigated the spill areas in Johnaton and Harnett Counties, and con,.•ted a ·,door-to-c!oor coetact with people reaUial alqna NC 210. Because of concern by aome re1ident• along NC 210, the Oiviaion of g11tn,,ay, Department of Transportation va1 requeated to cover the 1pill with a 1a1er of aand in order· to 1uppress the noxioua odora preaent. Thi• was completed in late afternoon Auaust 5 and continued on Auguat 6. 29 .ll1U8C .a.11 -~~-...••--••------- l\cency, National Institute of Occupat tonal ·safety and Health, 1'fat1ona1- lnstitute of Environmental Health Sciences, and the Center for Disease Control. State personnel in attendance were from the Division of Health Services, Natural Resources and Community Development, Department of Agriculture, and the Department of Transportation. Industrial users of PCBs were represented by a person from Carolina Power and Light. The purpose of this meeting was to assess the immediate risks to the persons who live along the spill routes and to discuss the safety of those persons who would be participating in the removal and storage of the PCB contaminated soil. On September 6, 13, and 19 alternative methods of removing soil from the roadway shoulders were conducted on noncontaminated sections of roadway shoulders. ~'hen the soil removal procedure had been formulated a test removal operation was conducted. The test removal operation was performed on October 5, 1978 on a one mile PCB contaminated section of NC 58 near Inez on Warren County. The PCB contaminated soil obtained during the test removal operation has been temporarily stored at a disposal site in Uarren County. The purpose of the test was to examine the practicality of picking up the contaminated material as well as any possible health or environmental effects. On November 6 1 test results indicated that the pick up of contaminated shoulder material was not harmful to the environment or personnel, On September 29, 1978, Governor James B. Hunt's request for assistance from the Federal District Assistance Administration, Department of Housing and Urban Development was denied. On October 4, North Carolina officials were notified by the Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, that the request for emergency relief funds was denied. During the month of December a Draft Negative Declaration was prepared pursuant to the North Carolina Environmental Policy Act. The statement was sent to State Clearinghouse on December 21, 1q7e for circulation. Comments received on the Draft Negative Declaration requested an EIS be prepared. Therefore, a Final Negative Declaration was not prepared. On December 12, an application was filed with EPA for approval of the Warren County site for placement of contaminated PCB material. On January 4, 1979 a hearing was held on the Warren County site at the National Guard Armory. During the period January 25-31, 1979 additional soil Ramples were taken by the Division of Environmental Management to 1ubstantiate the location of the contaminated material and determine if any migration had occurred. Test results indicated that the material was present and had not migrated. On January 29, 1979, a meeting was held in Washington, D. C. between representa- tives of the State of North Carolina and EPA officials to discuss the current PCB regulations and to discuss alternative solutions. On February 6, the state of North Carolina filed petition with EPA to amend the rules under the Toxic Substances Control Act to allow consideration of alternate methods of treatment, On February 15, 1979, a test was run on a contaminated ■ection of NC 210 in Johnston County and on March 22, on a contaminated section of SR 1004 in Alamance County to determine the feasibility of utilizing the theory of fCB fixation with activated carbon. On June 4, 1979, the EPA Administrator, Douglas Castle, ruled against the petition of February 6 to change the regulations to allow consideration of alternate methods of treatment. The Region IV EPA Administrator, John White, on June 4, .1979 approved the State's application to construct a land- fill in Warren County for disposal of the PCB contaminated soil. Definition of PCBs1 PCBs (polychlorinated biphenyls) are a class of chlorinated, aromatic compounds which have found widespread application because of their general stabilities and dielectric properties. PCBs have been prepared industrially since 1929 and are now produced in many foreign industrial countries. The Monsanto Company's preparations of PCBs were termed "the Aroclors". Produc- tion of PCBs ceased in the United States in mid 1977. The outstanding physical and chemical characteristics of PCBs are their thermal stabilities, resistance to oxidation, acid, bases, and other chemical agents as well as their excellent dielectric (electrically insulating) proper- ties. These ~nd other properties have led to numerous uses of PCB such as dielectric fluids (in capacitors and transformers), industrial fluids (use in hydraulic systems, gas turbines, and vacuum pumps), and plasticizers (adhesives, textiles, surface coating, sealants, printing, and copy paper). PCBs were prepared industrially by the chlorination of biphenyls with anhydrous chlorine, using iron filing or ferric chloride as catalysts. The crude product was generally purified to remove color, traces of hydrogen chloride, and catalyst which was usually achieved by treatment with alkali and distillation. The resulting product was a complicated mixture of chloro- phenyls with different numbers of chlorine atoms per molecule. (Thia fact is responsible for the physical state of PCB preparations). ?lost individual chlorophenyls are solid at room temperature whereas commercial mixtures are mobile oils. The most important physical properties of PCBs from an envoronmental point-of-view are solubility and vapor pressure. The solubility of PCBs in water is low and decreases with increasing chlorine content. Values given by Monsanto are 200 ppb (parts per billion) for Aroclor 1242, 100 ppb for Aroclor 1248, 40 ppb for Aroclor 1254, and 25 ppb for Aroclor 1260. Studies on the solubility of PCB in water are complicated by the fact that these compounds are strongly aorbed onto various surfaces. PCB has been ahown to sorb relatively rapidly onto charcoal, plastic, glass, and silt or soil particles. PCBs have a high apecific gravity (Aroclor 1260/1.500! and high density (Aroclor 1260 weighs 13.50 lbs./gallon at 25 C). by evaporation ii extremely ■low, i.e. Aroclor 1260 exposed to 1 Hutzinger o. et. al., Chemistry of PCBs, enc Pres Cleveland, Ohio, 1974. a relatively Loss of PCB 100°c for six .. 8. Landfill Monitoring four groundwater monitoring wells will be constructed and located North, South, East, and West of the landfill. The groundwater wells will be monitored in accordance with 44 FR 761.41(6) standards. Base line groundwater quality will be established by sampling the groundwater wells on one week intervals for 3 weeks. Groundwater Base line groundwater quality will be determined during construction and prior to receiving contaminated soil. Four permanent surface water monitoring stations will be located to determine water quality. Two receiving streams will be_ monitored, Richard Creek on the northern site perimeter and an unamed ttibutary to Richard Creek on the southern perimeter. Two stations, one on each stream, will be located up gradient from any site surface run-off event. !wo stations, one on each stream, will be located immediately down gradient from the site and through which all flow from surface runoff events will pass. Representative surface water and sediment samples will be monitored at each station in accordance with 44 FR 761.41 (6) parameters. [xcluded from analyses are chlorinated organics as indicated in a letter to Governor Hunt from John White {EPA Regional Administrator) dated 4, June, 1979. Twelve groundwater, 12 surface water, and 12 sediment samples will be monitored for· base line data. Three sets of samples will be obtained from each ground and surface water monitoring point on 30-day intervals during construction. Each set will consist of 1 sample from each groundwater well and 2 (water and sediment) from each surface water station. North Cw,1li11u I >,•pmtml'll/ o/ .fames 11 Hunt, ,Jr., Governor July 2, 1982 I lcman H. Clc.u h, Sl'cr< 1,11 y C- 0 f y Mr. Charles Jeter Regional Administrator EPA, Region IV 345 Courtland Street Atlanta, GA 30365 Re: N. C. Superfund Project PCB Landfill Deviation from Approved Construction Plans Dear Mr. Jeter: ~tEi ~ UL '1 1982 Groundwater monitoring wells have recently been installed at the Warren County PCD Landfill as part of its construction activity. While apparently meeting EPA standards, they do not conform to North Carolina Standards which require additional grouting and use of a bentonite seal above the well screen. I am requesting that North Carolina be al- lowed to install four additional groundwater monitoring wells to replace the four existing unsatisfactory groundwater monitoring wells. These replacement wells will be: l) Installed within 10 feet of the existing wells. 2) Installed with a bentonite seal above the well screen. 3) Installed with grout extending from land surface to the top of the bentonite seal. 4) Screened so as to provide monitoring capability for at least the top ten feet of the surficial saturated zone at its lowest expected elevation. 5) 6) Developed using drilling mud or revert as approved on June 24, 1982 via field letter (Tom Karnoski -N. C. Solid and Hazardous Waste Management Branch to Robert Boone -Sverdrup & Parcel). Installed as soon as possible. Mr. Charles Jeter Page 2 July 2, 1982 7) Wells will be clearly labeled as monitor wells, not to be used as a source of water supply . 8) Sampled (2 replicates) to assure background quality data is similar to background samples collected from the original wells prior to any waste disposal. If background water quality deviates from that of the original wells, a new background water quality data base line must be established for the new wells as originally required and prior to any waste disposal. Upon acceptance of the new wells, the original wells will be abandoned in accordance with North Carolina standards. If you have any questions, please contact me. WWPjr:jj cc: Jim Scarborough 0. W. Strickland Perry Nelson Gene Roberts Frank Rainey Jack Reavis Bill Raney Bob Jansen Tom Karnoski ~ AUG 19 198 North Carn/i11a Department of Crin1e Control~ . & Public Safety 512 N. S1Jl1slJ111y Stll•l'I I'. O. Hox 2d~7 lfo/..:~Jli 21611-7687 (919) 733-21~,i James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor August 17, 1982 l ll!man R. Clark, Secret,.11y C 0 f' r Mr. Charles R. Jeter Regional Administrator EPA, Region IV 345 Courtland St., NE Atlanta, GA 30365 Attn: James H. Scarbrough Re: N.C. Superfund Project -PCB Landfill Dear Mr. Jeter: The installation of four replacen~nt groundwater monitoring wells as requested by my letter of July 2, 1982 is currently being completed. On the morning of August 6 the well driller discovered the open hole that extended into the groundwater and was to replace monitoring well #2 had been vandalized. The vandalism consisted of the placement of dried cement, creosote treated lumber, and other foreign matter into the open hole and the saturated zone. Efforts to retrieve these materials were unsuccessful and the well driller relocated in close proximity to the original well as required in condition fl of the July 2 request. On August 10 Tom Karnosk1 of the Solid and Hazardous Waste Management Branch, North Carolina Department of Human Resources con- tacted Don Hunter of your staff to determine if this vandalized hole could affect the sampling integrity of monitoring well #2. It was Mr. Hunter's opinion that the backfilling of the hole with cement to the ground surface would minimize any impact on the replacement well. This remedial action would also satisfy North Carolina Regulations concerning abandonment of wells. Instructions have been given to the well driller to close the hole. .. Mr. Jeter Page 2 August 17, 1982 We would appreciate a written reply to this situation so that the integrity of the PCB landfill future groundwater monitoring pro- gram will not be in question. If further information is needed, please let me know. WWPjr:jj cc: Bill Raney 0. W. Strickland Tom Karnoski v Frank Rainey Perry Nelson Jack Reavis i. rely, 97 /'r!?!;., 'j 1/4:....$. ~ ~ . 1 am W. Phillips, J . Assistant to the Secretary • .I . , NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CRIME CONTROL AND PUBLIC SAFETY FINAL REPORT . PCB WASTE DISPOSAL SITE WARREN COUNTY, N.C. SEPTEMBER, 1983 Prepared By: SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT BRANCH ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SECTION DIVISION OF HEALTH SERVICES NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES '. Introduction FINAL REPORT PCB WASTE DISPOSAL SITE VARR!N COUNTY The deci1ion to remove the approximately 40,000 cubic yard ■ of PCB contaminated •oil along public roads by the state of North Carolina was based upon the availability of a secure disposal facility. Such a facility is regulated under the Toxic-Substances Control Act (TSCA) administered by the United States Environmental Protection Agency. The State of North Carolina applied for permission to utilize a 140-acre tract of land, owned by the State and located in Warren County, to construct, operate, and maintain an Annex II PCB Landfill. The site and operational J plans were approved conditionally by the Environmental Protection Agency in correspondence dated June 4, 1979. Additional conditions were added on December 14, 1981. Pre-Operation Pha1e Activitie• The North Carolina Solid and Hazardous Waste Management Branch was chosen by the PCB Remedial Action Project coordinators in the Department of Crime Control and Public Safety to ensure construction and environmental monitoring compliance with the Environmental Protection Agency's approval conditions. Thi• was made clear in a pre-construction meeting located at the site on June 10, 1982. Of primary importance in pre~operation activities was the establishment of background data on groundwater and surface water around the site. This ia imperative for any long-term environmental monitoring program associated with 1uch disposal facilities. The initial groundwater monitoring wells were constructed according to the Environmental Protection Agency approved standards when general site construction ■tarted (June 21, 1982). These wells were found to be unsatisfactory by the North Carolina Division of Environmental Management and replacement wells were installed, with the Environmental Protection Agency's approval the first week of July. One of these replacement wells was vandalized on August 5, 1982, and was again reinstalled. The Environmental Protection Agency stated that the .. closing out" of unusable groundwater monitoring using cement would not jeopardize the collection of representative groundwater samples from monitoring wells in the immediate vicinity. Groundwater and surface water background chemical data was collected using the Environmental Protection Agency-approved methodologies and analytical techniques (see attachment I). Vandals damaged the 30-mil PVC liner on August 21 or August 22, 198,r.~ Repairs were made and certified by a representative of the liner supplier. The Environmental Protection Agency inspected the repair work on August 27, 1982, and gave verbal approval at that time to continue construction. Inspections by the North ,Carolina Division of Environmental Management to ensure compliance with North Carolina Sedimentation and Erosion Control Laws were conducted on August 3, 1982, and August 25, 1982 (see attachments II and III). Measurements of in-place saturated hydraulic conductivities of the clay liner were taken on September 12, 1982, in accordance with Environmental Protection Agency permit conditions. All measurements showed the liner to meet or exceed regulatory requirement (see attachment IV). Operation Ph••• Activities [ Placement of the contaminated soil into the prepared landfill commenced on September 15, 1982. The last load of contaminated soil was delivered on November 17, 1982. The total volwne of contaminated soil was estimated at just under the projected 40,000 cubic yards. An attempt to calculate the average concentrations of PCB in the contaminated soil was made on October 7, 1982, following advice given by Mr. Ralph Jennings, Toxic Substances Section, Environmental Protection Agency. Composite samples were collected at six locations in the contaminated soil fill. Each sample consisted of a composite of material from six foot deep borings. The average concentration of PCB's in the landfill•• determined by the October 7, 1982, sampling event was 135 ppm (see attachment V). Operational phase monitoring of groundwater, surface water, and surface water sediments was conducted on October 5, 1982, and October 28, 1982 (see attachment I). Post-Operational Phase Activities Final placement of the topsoil covering over the clay and PVC cap was impeded by wet weather conditions. The North Carolina Division of Environmental Management inspected the landfill for compliance with erosion control regulations on November 5, 1982 and November 17, 1982 (see attachment 11). The lack of an adequate stabilized topsoil cover resulted in the uncovering of the PVC cap due to accelerated erosion during January, 1983. The lack of the topsoil covering's weight on the PVC cap allowed decomposition gases to accumulate in bubbles under the PVC cap instead of being forced through the gas vent located at a single location at the center of the landfill. These bubbles w~re pierced and temporary venting pipes installed to prevent gas buildup until weather conditions allowed the contractor to repair the PVC cap and finish the placement of topsoil. Analyses of gases venting from the single permanent vent and the temporary vents by the North Carolina Department of Human Resources and the United States Environmental Protection Agency showed them to consist primarily of methane with concentrations of PCB'• far below OSHA standards. Post-operational phase environmental monitoring of groundwater, surface water, and surface water sediments was permformed on November 29, 1982, and Hay 16, 1983. Identical monitoring events will occur each November and Hay ~ until the United States Environmental Protection Agency Regional Administrator and appropriate authorities of North Carolina determine otherwise. , / The pumping of the landfill'• leachate collection system to remove --(. V' rainwater that accumulated during the operational phase commenced on March 7, ( 1983. Over 5,000 gallons of water were removed and treated in the site's treatment works by June 1, 1983. Any effluent from the treatment works met J the Environmental Protection Agency's drinking water standards for PCB's. / 2 ::---· , . · Final con1truction of the landfill was completed on July 14, 1983 : The State of North Carolina accepted the site conditionally on July 15, 1983. All k1y1 to lock• at th• faci~ity 1r1 in the cu1tody of the North Carolina Solid and Hazardous Waste Management Branch. The Environmental Protection Agency permit conditions identifying po1t-closure maintenance of the PCB landfill specify month¼f inspectio;Lof the phyeical 1tructure1 at the landfill and the leachate c~lection/detection eumps in addition to the twice a year environment!! monitorinc .. program. The Solid and Hazardous Waste Management Branch retains responsibility for these ' actions until directed otherwise by th~ Secretary of the Department of Human Resources. 3 I I .• -~19y11 Ronald H. Levine, M.O., M.P.H. DIVISION OF HEALTH SERVICES P.O. Box 2091 Raleigh, N.C. 27602-2091 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: June 30, 1983 0. W. Strickland, Head Solid & Hazardous Waste Management Branch Environmental Health Section Thomas C. IC.arnoski, Environmental Engineer )CCX' Solid & Hazardous Waste Management Branch Environmental Health Section Environmental Monitoring of the PCB Disposal Facility ST A TE HEAL TH DIRECTOR Environmental monitoring of the PCB disposal facility to identify releases from the landfill consism of select sampling and analyses of groundwater, surface water, and surface water sediments. Analytical parameters dictated by EPA are pH, specific conductivity, and total PCB for groundwater and surface water and total PCB for surface water sediments. All sampling, analytical, ·and security chain ·of·· custody procedures rigidly follow EPA and N. C. Division of Health Services accepted methodologies. Locations of the four groundwater monitoring wells were designated by EPA •• were the four 1urface water and 1urface water sediment sampling points (see attachment). · The following identifies the dates that environmental monitoring events took place: Pre-Operation Monitoring of Groundwater to Determine Background Quality August 20, 1982 August 30, 1982 September 6, 1982 Pre-Operational Monitoring of Surface Water and Surface Water Sediments to Determine Background Quality July 7, 1982 August 3, 1982 August 10, 1982 Operational Phase Monitoring of Groundwater, Surface Water and Surface Water Sediments \ October 5, 1982 , ___ _:O~c:_:t~o~b::e~r~2.:8.!'-=.1:..:.:.8L.:.~-.--. -,.-,----------------------~ ~o,oh T Morrow. M O. M PH ,l/,rJlflJJtR Memorandum Page 2 June 30, 1983 At tachuu~n L L Post-Operational Phase Monitoring of Groundwater, Surface Yater, and Surface Water Sediment• (to occur indefinitely twice each year) November 29, 1982 May 16, 1983 To date, all monitoring activity has indicated no release of PCB'• are occurring at the disposal facility. All analytical data is available as a part of public record. A functional aspect of the landfill'• design is a mechanism to remove free liquid from the waste mass and hence eliminate material that has migration (or releaae).potential. Pumping of the leachate collection system commenced on March 7, 1983 and continued at various intervals through June 1, 1983. t Approximately 5,000 gallons of free liquids were removed from the landfill and treated at the landfill'• treatment works. Below are dates where water analytical work was .conducted on influent and effluent water of the treat- ment system: March April May June 7, 11, 1, 5, 10, 25 1 14, 16, 21, 22, 23, 24, 28, 29, 30 7, 11, 12, 13, 14, 18, 19, 20, 25, 26, 27 .. . ., . The highest concentration of PCB's detected in the influent water was 2.47 ppb Q..47 (10-7)% by·we,ght]. All effluent analyses show PCB concentrations less than .1 ppb £1(10-}% by weight]. Attached are allowable concentrations of PCB's in food and feed products according to 29 CFR 109(B}. Effluent from the treatment works meets EPA drinking water standards. Over fifty-five private drinking water wells from resident• in the area around the landfill were ■ampled in January of 1983. All analytical data ■bowed no detectable level• of PCB'•· TCK:ct Attachments .. North Carolina Department of Crime Control.,,,~ & Public Safety 512 N. Salisbury Street P. 0. l3ox 27687 Ruleigl, 2'i611 -7687 (919) 73.'J.2126 James 8 . Hunt, Jr., Governor September a. 1982 I fomm R Clark, Sl:cr~lary {) f I Mr. Al Hanke Environmental Scientist EPA, Region IV 345 Courtland St., NE Atlanta, GA 30365 Re: PCB Landfill Warren County Dear Al: Enclosed are the results of the background water monitoring conducted by the Division of Health Services. N. C. Department of Human Resources. I trust.thh meets with your approval. WWPjr:jj Enc. cc: 0. W. Strickland Tom Karnoski Jim Scarborough Gary D. Babb .,.,,--- Sincerely. .-t!!f'' ~A 1~-71, 1/r· ~lliam W. Phillips, r. Assistant to the Secretary ... , GROUNDWATER & SURFACE WATER KlNITORING All groundwater, aurface water and atream sediment samples were analyzed for PCB by gas chromatograph utilizing electronic capture detector as apecified by E.P.A. Samples were collected at the following frequencies: Groundwater August 20, 1982 August 30, 1982 September 6, 1982 Surface Water July 23, 1982 August 3, 1982 August 10, 1982 Stream Sediment July 23, 1982 August 3, 1982 August 10, 1982 All samples showed less than 1.0 part per billion PCB. This is the detection limit of the analytical equipment used. , .. -·•. ~ GROUNDWATER IDNITORING ' H 5 ecific Conductivit August 20 1 1982 Well 1 9.6 80 Replicate 10.0 80 Well 2 5.9 450 Replicate 5.9 470 Well 3 5.1 160 Replicate 5.1 160 Well 4 5.4 170 Replicate 5.3 160 August 30 1 1982 Well 1 5.1 250 Replicate 5.2 260 Well 2 5.0 400 Replicate ,5.0 400 Well 3 4.4 110 Replicate 4.6 110 Well 4 5.7 60 Replicate 5.6 65 Se2tember 6 1 1982 Well 1 5.4 465 Replicate 5.3 465 Well 2 ' 5.8 450 Replicate 5.9 455 Well j 5.0 65 Replicate 5.0 66 Well 4 5.8 63 Replicate 5.8 63 I . ' I July 23 1 1982 UT-DS Replicate UT-US Replicate RC-DS Replicate RC-US Replicate August 31 1982 UT-DS Replicate UT-US Replicate RC-DS Replicate RC-US Replicate August 10 1_ 1982 UT-DS Replicate UT-US Replicate RC-DS Replicate RC-US Replicate SURFACE WATER KJNITORING H S ecific Conductivit 6.2 65 6.2 70 6.3 65 6.3 70 6.0 70 6.1 70 6.1 65 6.1 65 7.4 77 7.5 76 7.3 76 7.5 76 7.3 78 7.4 78 7.2 74 7.2 73 7.3 67 7.2 69 7.2 64 7.2 63 7.0 68 7.3 67 7.1 62 7.1 63 DIVISION OF HEAL TH SERVICES P.O. Box 2091 Raleigh, N.C. 27602-2091 James H. Scarbrough, Chief Residuals Management Branch EPA, Region IV 345 Courtland Street, N.E. Atlanta, Georgia 30365 Dear Mr. Scarbrough: . Ronald H. Levine, M.D., M.P.H . ST ATE HEALTH DIRECTOR October 11, 1982 The original groundwater monitoring wells for the Warren County PCB Landfill were identified according to the well numbers on the engineering drawings. Specifics are as follows: Coordinates From Surface Wel lf Engineering Drawing Elevation (ft.) 1 10112 N 341.6 10146 E 2 10667 N 327.8 9667 E 3 10235 N 322.5 9454 E 4 9662 N 320.5 9669 E A request to install replacement monitoring wells was made on July 2, 1982. These replacement wells were completed on August 18, 1982. While exact coordinates were not detennined, they are located within 10 feet of the original wells. These replacement wells retain the identifying numbers of the original wells. The original well casings were filled with cement from the bottom to the ground surface. On August 6, 1982 it was discovered that the half finished well 12 had been vandalized with creosoted lumber. This vandalized hole was closed out by filling it with cement from the bottom to the ground surface. The second replacement well 12 was installed within 10 feet of the original well. If you have further questions, please advise. Sincerely, (!~sir~ Solid Hazardous Waste Management Branch Envi nmental Health Section Jomes 8 Hunt, Jr/ Sarah T Morrow MD. MPH STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA r,_ .. ,.,.,,...... DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES tcrnc,. ~v .R. I!. IIEUMl!R C. LCUTTING l!LI Ll!MCOI! C. N. LIITl!LLll!R W. UTT\.l!Fll!LD SVERDRUP & PARCEL Q. R. Pl!NNINGTON R:-fGl:-fP.P.A"-AAC-lnTWC."n,--C-ONHTAt.•c-no:-, MA.-.AO-■ UII WP.MT MRAl>OWVIP!W ROAD fl1.'1Tl!l 114 UARP.:-rRHOAO, !'IOATR C-AAOl.l!'IA •T"41T W. H. RIVl!R5 G.l!.ROSENKOl!TTKR H. G. SCHWARTZ. JR. II. R. SMITH. JR. I.A.VERON R.C.WE5T J. 0 . WHITl'll!LD August 2, 1983 Mr. William W. Phillips, Jr. North Carolina Department of Crime Control and Public Safety P. o. Box 27687 Raleigh, North Carolina 27611 Subejct: PCB Waste Disposal Site Code 14900 Item 1111-1990 Dear Mr. Phillips: .JOHN . PARCl!L 10211-1095 L J. IIVt:Rm.U .. 1 0211· I 079 919/1155-0290 Enclosed is the corrected PCB Final Report. Please discard the Final Report sent to you on 7-22-83. Very truly yours, .J:-A---4!_ 13-~~·d-· Frank B. Rainey, Jr. C Manager cc: T. N. Wilson -NC Department of Administration Tom Karnoski -NC Department of Human Resources ..... · .. ::··-,. ,.. , ..... . . .. -·· ,. GENERAL DESCRIPTION' . PINAL REPORT PCB WASTE DISPOSAL SITE . WARREN COUNTY The PCB Waste Disposal Site is a hazardous waste · landfill, • ' t .': containing approximately 40,000 cubic yards of polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB} contaminated soil, located in Warren County, North Carolina. PERTINENT DATED Contractor's bids for the construction of the site were opened on January 21, 1982, and the contract was awarded to Jim Lineberger' s Grading & Paving Inc., of Gastonia, NC on May 28, 1982. Construction work began on June 21, 1982. Continuous heavy rains and vandalism of the groundwater monitoring wells and the 30-mil PVC liner curtailed job progress throughout the month of Augqst, and construction was not ; completed to the stage necessary for PCB placement until September 15, J .. 1982. NC DOT trucks began hauling PCB contaminated soil on from Fort I Bragg on · October 6, 1982, and finished on October 27, 1982. Construction work was completed on July 14, 1983. The final inspection of the completed project was conducted on July 15, 1983 and final acceptance was on that date. CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE AND DESCRIPTION Initially four groundwater monitoring wells were installed, located north, south, east, and west of the landfill. These wells were determined to be unsatisfactory, as designed and installed, by the NC Department of Natural Resources and Community Development. Four -1- : • · •. !.♦ t : ·f •. '. I repla~ement , well• ,were ·;tnatalled, immediately adjacent to : ~he ,original ' ' . wells •. ::These .. well• were vandalized during cona~ruction, and weri r•p~ired or 1redrilled.-(: The well• utilized 4" PVC pipe and screens, with lockable steel capa •. An earthen containment structure, 476' long and 232' wide . was · built · ,by excavating to bottom elevations sloping· from elevation ,320 to 314, and filling to a berm elevation of 342. Side slopes are 3: l on the north, west, and east sides, 5: 1 on the south. Topsoil, clay, and silt materials excavated were stockpiled separately for later,use •. A 9" layer of permeable sand was placed on this subgrade aa a lower leachate collectio~ system, draining to a collection sump and 6" PVC extraction pipe in the northeast corner of the landfill. A 30-mil PVC liner, manufactured by Staff Industries of Detroit, Michigan, was ins~ailed over this sand layer. This liner was slashed in 23 places by vandals and was repaired by patching with additional liner material. A one foot . thick.layer of compacted bridging fill was placed over the 30-mil PVC liner,,uaing previously stockpiled clay and silt materials • . , An ! upper leachate collection system was placed above the clay liner, using a 9". layer of ·per11eable sand, draining to a collection sump and 6" PVC extraction pipe in the northeast corner of the landfill. Aa final .preparation for the placement of PCB material~ a carbon ·filter system was installed. This system consisted of a sand filter, carbon filter, and t~mporary holding pond, located just northeast of the landfill. , The ., intent of the system was to treat excess rainwater collected .in the diaposal area during PCB placement, but the system was Alfl!>n not used during construction because a'1:S.H.R. Discharge Permit had not been obtained prior to construction. The system was left in place to facilitate the :: State in removing water accumulated in the upper leachate collection system during construction. -2- t I l I I ... I I I I I r Supac -filter fabric material, manµfactured by the Phillips Petroleum Company, wa■ placed over the upper leachate collection sand layer, to ·prevent ;•migration of the contaminated soil into the sand • layer. · · The PCB contaminated soil was then hauled and dumped by NC DOT trucks,· and by Propst , Construction Company on contract with the Department of , Defense; and placed and compacted by the construction contractor, to · a final top elevation shown on the plans. The actual volume of PCB material placed was approximately 40,000 cubic yards. ·,: A one foot thick layer of compacted bridging fill was placed over the PCB soil, again utilizing previously stockpiled clay /silt materials. A two foot thick compacted clay liner was constructed over the briding fill, using aele.ct clay material obtained from a second clay borrow area on the site. A 10-mil PVC liner, also manufactured by Staff Industries of Detroit, Michigan, was installed over this clay liner and sealed to the lower liner. Another one foot thick layer of compacted bridging fill was placed over the 10-mil PVC liner. A 4" PVC pipe gas vent was installed, located at the center point of the landfill. The entire top surface of the landfill and the 5:1 outslopes were then covered with a one foot thick layer of topsoil, utilizing material previously ·removed and stockpiled. This area, and all adjacent disturbed areas, were limed, fertilized, seeded, and mulched. A steel chain-link fence, with steel posts was installed around the p~rimeter of the disposal area. -3- EXHIBIT "A" -AREA FIGURES The PCB Waste Disposal Site is located on a 142.3 acre tract, of SR '1604' .near Afton, in Warren County. Within this tract, a 19. 32 acre area contains the landfill and will be retained in state ownership. The remainder has been deeded to Warren County, as a buffer zone surrounding the landfill. The inside dimensions of the earthen containment structure are 476'x 232', or 2.54 acres. The area within the chain-link fence is 300' x 550', or 3.79 acres. ;,. • I I -4- CONTRACT General . EXHIBIT "B" -COST DATA CONSTRUCTION COST ORIGINAL COST CHANGE ORDER ADDITIONS $362,619.00 $58,828.09 COST $421,447.09 CONSTRUCTION COST SUB-TOTAL $ 421,447.09 ...__ __ ~...:....;....;..;..;;..;;..;.. DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION FEES Sverdrup & Parcel $ 78,118.51 Soil & Material Engineers $ 14,810.11 DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION FEES, SUB-TOTAL $ 92,928.62 TOTAL PROJECT COST $ 514,375.71 ~------ -5- I I I I I I I ! i I i I GENERAL CONTRACT C.C.O. NO 1 2 ·1,4 ' 5 6 7 8 ·•·. 9 10 ·.·, · EXHIBIT "C" -CHANGE ORDERS DESCRIPTION .. New Monitoring Wells Time Extension Time Extension Security Guards Security Guards Security Guards Security Guards Additional Fencing Spray Irrigation System Temporan Seeding & Additional Erosion Control TOTAL -6- AMOUNT $ 6,987.50 -0- -o- 4,214.00 3,923.75 11,558.40 5,493.25 3,323.32 7,456.00 15,871.87 $58,828.09 ·:··~ :~ ··: .. : ~ t-~-' • :.~-1 . -.-v :. ~--~ .... . : ......... : . ~:---... . . . . '. L :: t ', ... : ~ ,. . ' 1-,,,' I.: : _ ... ._ . . -· ..... . . • . -"'· . ,' ~··t.:1 . ·,,;...:..__, ~~7\j .. -.-... , ... :.,. ;_;:.• .. -: .. ~ : _:• •, ... • i1"• • ...... ~ .. -.. , • EXHIBIT "D"" :--.CONTRACTORS• SUBCONTRACTORS, & MATERIAL SUPPLIERS GENERAL CONTRACT . Prime Contractor -Jim Lineberger Grading & Paving, Inc. Rout• 2 -Box 77A Gastonia, North Carolina 28052 SUBCONTRACT CONTRACTOR Groundwater Honitoririi Wells Ezra Hier Associates, Inc. 401 Glenwood Avenue Surveyors PVC Liners Seeding Chain-Link Fence P.O. Box 12447 Raleigh, NC 27605 Southern Survey, Inc. 1006 Lamond Avenue Durham, NC 27701 Arkay Corporation 1321 Romany Road Charlotte, NC 28204 Lineberry, Inc. Climax, NC U.S. Steel, Cyclone Fence Charlotte, NC -7- -.. : .. .... · ... ~· ,._ . > ·• -• -... -·1 .... ,·.~,;.-~ • (feet)• MP Elev for Well MW-4 Date 11/24/92 322.82 12/23/92 322.82 1/26/93 322.82 2/26/93 322.82 3/26/93 322.82 4/23/93 322.82 5/20/93 322.82 6/25/93 322.82 7/23/93 322.82 8/30/93 322.82 9/27/93 322.82 10/22/93 322.82 11/18/93 322.82 12/17/93 322.82 1/25/94 322.82 2/24/94 322.82 3/25/94 322.82 4/28/94 322.82 5/18/94 322.82 6/27/94 322.82 7/28/94 322.82 8/26/94 322.82 9/26/94 322.82 10/24/94 322.82 11/16/94 322.82 12/19/94 322.82 1/25/95 322.82 2/23/95 322.82 3/29/95 322.82 (feet)• WL below MP 20.58 17.84 17.84 19.04 17.82 17.36 18.16 18.86 19.58 20.54 21 .12 21.5 21.76 20.86 20.26 19.32 18.7 18.61 19.06 19.98 20.8 21.38 21.88 22.24 22.46 22.72 22.06 20.94 20.48 Ground Water Elevations MW-4 (feet) • Elev of Water Level MW-4 302.24 304.98 304.98 303.78 305 305.46 304.66 303.96 303.24 302.28 301.7 301.32 301.06 301.96 302.56 303.5 304.12 304.21 303.76 302.84 302.02 301.44 300.94 300.58 300.36 300.1 300.76 301 .88 302.34 302.6907 Page 1 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 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: Bill Meyer, Director, Division of Solid Waste Management ~ Ed Mussler,E.I.T., Solid Waste Section, Division of Solid Waste Manageme ¼ Greg Eades,E.I.T., Solid Waste Section, Division of Solid Waste Management ; L RE: Volume of Soil Estimated in the PCB Landfill The approximate volume of soil in the PCB landfill has been calculated. There is approximately 36,500 cubic yards of material in the landfill. Assuming an average weight of 1.5 tons per cubic yard, there are approximately 54,750 tons of material in the landfill . The volume and weight of the wet and dry soil that may be available was determined. The amount of wet and dry soils in the landfill are conservatively estimated as: Volume of Dry Soil-21,500 cubic yards Volume of Wet Soil-15,000 cubic yards METHODOLOGY The average-end-area method of calculating the volume was employed. This method tends to over estimate the actual volume, so it should represent a maximum amount of soil in the landfill. The supplied drawings were consulted. It was assumed that the final contours were as depicted and that the grading plan was the subgrade. Five feet were subtracted from the top elevations to account for the closure cap system, and 7 feet were added to the grading plan elevations to account for the leak detection layer, clay barrier layer and leachate collection· system. Seven cross sections were chosen and the geometry plotted. Given the simple nature of this design we were able to determine the area of right triangles . These areas were summed and multiplied by two to account for the entire cross section of the landfill. The volume of soil was estimated using the following formula: V= L (Al+A2)/ 2 (27ft3 per yd3) The weight of the soil was conservatively estimated by assuming that the soil has a unit weight of 1.5 tons per cubic yard. The cross sections and calculations are attached. Water level measurements in the landfill are available from two measurement points, the leachate sump pipe and the gas vent well. The water level readings from the two points were obtained and translated into an elevation. The two measurements are within six inches of each P.O. Box 27687. Raleigh. North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone 919-733-4996 FAX 919-715-3605 An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper other. The top nineteen feet (at the maximum point of the landfill) is dry, and the maximum depth of saturated soil is ten feet. The approximate volume and weight of soil which may be recovered from four cased wells, each two feet in diameter was also determined. The wells were assumed to be evenly spaced across the flat bottom portion of the landfill (i.e. no wells were located over sideslope portions). Each well could yield: Volume of soil in two foot diameter well,-91.11 cubic feet Dry Weight of soil per well-89.48 pounds per cubic foot Total Dry Weight of Soil from four wells -4 tons per well The soil was assumed to have a dry denisty of 111 pounds per cubic foot. The weight of saturated soil was adjusted to its dry weight equivalent. The adjusted density per well is 89 .48 pounds per cubic foot. LIMITATIONS The information and numbers generated herein are based upon commonly accepted engineering methods. All of the drawings and measurements have been supplied by others and the resulting information is as correct as the data supplied to us. The actual conditions and amount of saturated and unsaturated soil within the landfill may vary, dependent upon the variance of the actual conditions in the landfill. A reasonable dry weight and density of the soil was assumed for computational purposes; the actual soil is highly variable. If there are any questions, please do not hesitate to call on us . Edward F -Muss r, ID, E.I. T. Environmental Engineer Solid Waste Section C:\WPDOCS\COMMENTS\PCBVOLl.DOC · NORTH CAROLINA DMSION OF SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SOLID WASTE SECTION CALCULATION SHEET j i i I i I ! i I i ! i I I ! I ! I I I ! I I I I I I I 1 , I r I I l 'l 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 ! ! I I I I L ... s· .. , ., r -0 i I i I I I : .. 411 I l I ! I ! i I i I i i ! I I I I I I I I I ! I I . I I -I I ! : ! ! i ! ' I l .I '--......._1 I i ; I ; ' .....;....__ I i i---,--------------! -;---: --' I ;n:T ; I i ' i 1 1 ' ••. _!_3_4-_'i-, _~----'-------'---'----'----;!____; __ ___,.I ___,;.__,.;.!__c_ I ' ! . -: I ~ o 1 1 I I I j ! 1 ! I I ,1 - l ! I 3t.S' : I i ! ' I I . i ! ' ' ' I I ; ! I ! ! L4-= l'3o' I , I ! ., i i ~, i i I I ! I I I I i I I l I I i I ! I : ! l i I I . ! i I I j I i i ! LF lvMe --✓ l- Date: /o/e,i', ~ Date: ;i/,/4 /f S: I I · NORTH CAROLINA DMSION OF SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SOLID WASTE SECTION CALCULATION SHEET i I • • ;I· I I ! i i . . I I ... i I I I i i I ! i i i. I ! i I I I i I i I i ! I I I L i I ! I I I I I I I 27c.· • I c.-1,, i Is~ ! ! I ! I I' j I r -, I ~ I ' ! i l I i I ! I I ! I I I I I ! f I I ' I \I-:; ~c1 f'o ._ 11-0 I: l 1'=4 c'."". I I I i -! , ,;4 I \ 1 \ i i I I I U I I ! I I I i ! ! ' i I I I i I l I I I I I I 1 l I I i i ! ~i;.' I I i I ! ! ! I I ~ ! i I ! ' I ! ! . 1· i : I ! ! ! i ! I . s-+ l , : i ! i I I ! -,, i_,t ! I i ,. j i : i ' ' ; ! I ' i i I : .. 54 ! : I ! : ! : ; j ! ; i I ' , ! ! : I I I ! i I I I I i : i i I I I I . i I ' I I ! I , I i i i ! j Project Title: --Pc-3 LP Vo/v!Jfe 7Z1Ti4 l- By: Jl'l Date: lcl&/4, Checked By: $~ Date: /b t~/o- Sheet _6.._ of -1:::=_ i i I ! , I : i i ! i i I : i I l I i I 1 i i . NORTH CAROLINA DMSION OF SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT · SOLID WASTE SECTION i I I i I I I i I ! ! I i ; . , I I \ ' I ! I ! I i I i i \ ! I ! : • i j I i i : ! I , ! I i I ; I i ! j : i I t I I CALCULATION SHEET I i i i : I I I I I . • . I I I I ! I i I I I I I , : 1 I, I I. 1· i I" i I r . 1.-I , " I' I I • 11 t,~ ! I ·1 i ! : I' ; (J r· . j I j I ] I ; i ": l r 11, 1 i ! I I i i ; I I : ! ! i I i I I ! I ! I i ' I , I I 1 I -! i 7 i I I I . I I I . I I ! I I ! I : I I ? Z.. .!Z, o 7 ; I i , , I i I I i ! , I ! ! ! i I ; ! i I I i i ! I I I ! i I I ' . I I ' I ! ' I . · NORTH CAROLINA DMSION OF SOLID WASTE MANAGE1\1ENT SOLID WASTE SECTION CALCULATION SHEET I ; I I I I I i I -' I I i 1 : I i i I I ' I I i I ., i I I ! ! I I I I I ! I I I : i-! i J ! I i I T I . ! I I L., !-= i Scl i i l I I I 1 ! I I i I i ! I I I ' L,~ i{U/; ! i I i i i ! I ! i i ! _I i I ! ! _! ! I I ! i i I j . ! i ; ! I i ! I I , , I i I I I tH·'i ! i i i i i ! : i I ! ! I i i ! i ' ' j ! ! i ; , i l ~J =· 5l> ( O+'f (.6) ~ ~¥1 c.1t : s4 i • l , ! 'I I I : I I ! I . I I ! r-4 I ! : ; i. i i f ; -=, ' I ' ! ! ! i ; ! i 1 l I ! I I I I i i ; I ' , I ; Ji s-+ : I I ! ! : i I u I ! ! I I l i ! I ! I i T ' I i I ' ! I : i ! : I i I'' I ! i' I ! V ' : i I \ \ l ' i II I i i I • I ; i i i I j ' / !O i ! i ! l"'; I I I u Project Title: ,\u,'-\-e.5ATVi2Ai1::7)5oi'l • YcE LF. By: JI~ Checked By: ·1?~ Sheet_/_of_t_ Date: 10/1-~~ Date: toh /9 s-r t I I . NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SOLID WASTE SECTION i i I l i i I : i I i I CALCULATION SHEET I i ! I I ; I I I ! I I i ; I I i I i i I I ! ! I I I I I I I I I I I . I I I I -- i ! I j 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 :' 1 / 11 I ,~ 1 jf i i 'i , r ' ' . '!' ' ' i I I ! I . : t' I I i I !L wH~ £1 IL vl·h L" I-= SS" ~ . 4 :--; -,--_,_I -,----,---i ! ! i I 20.s'i i I i I i i -: 1 #-. ~ ! I i i I ' I I ' i I I I V i 'T I I I ; i ! i I I --,--+---t---,--'----.--------------.....;.'_._-i _ ___,. ___ ~1____;-----,i____;j____; __ ---f I I i i ' I j ; I ' II i j, ',, 11 .. 1= I • T 1· ' ' I ; i i . I ! I ; ,~,, i ✓, : ! , ! I i I ! 1 ! i I ! I ! i I j l. i I ; ! ' i j I I : ! ! I i I I · , Project Title: By: // 4 L c.kH,A.TF L1:ve=t--?cB LF Checked By: 1z".-t£ Sheet __l__ of _L_ Date: "-( ,fr,,;· Date: 10 /<: /~J' I I ! i I l . i ; I !