NCD980602163_19970826_Warren County PCB Landfill_SERB C_US-EPA Notice of Non-Compliance-OCR

~UG-2 6-97 08 26 FROM ,REGION 4 PESTICIDES ID ,404 562 89 73
.UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION4
ATLANTA FEDERAL CENTER
100 ALABAMA STREET. S.W.
ATLANTA, GEORG IA 30303-3104
P AGE
4 APT-TS
CERTIFIED MAIL FAX TRANSMITTAL ~d.p;,g,,o ► 3
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
William L. Meyer, Director
Division of Waste Management
Department of Environment, Health
and Natural Resources
P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
:;:----------,-------'-----To /.,; l-Fro,n h1,,_~ If,,..// C~,c
Fax•
IIISN 7540-01-317-~
Subject:
Docket No.:
Notice of Non-Compliance
TSCA-4-97-11844
Dear Mr. Meyer:
The United States Environmental Protectior-Agency (EPA)
finds the State of North Carolina in violation of the
Polychlorinated Bipheny l (PCB) regulations, 40 CFR Part 761
promulgated under Section 6(e} of the Toxic Substan ces Control
Act (TSCA) .
On Januacy 21 -22, 1997, an EPA representative perfonned a .re
inspection of the Warren County PCB Landfill (WCLF ) located in
Warren County, North Carolina and reviewed the facility operatin g
records located in the offices of the North Carolina Department
of Environment, Health and Natural Resources, Div ision of Wast e
Management (DWM) in Raleigh, North Carolina. The WCLF, owned b::•
the State of North Carolina, was approved by EPA for disposal o f
PCB contaminated soil. Requirements for construction, operation,
monitoring, reporting and recordkeeping were established as
conditions of approval in letters issued on June 4, 1979, and
December 14, 1981. During the inspection, it was determined tha t:.
North Carolina has violated conditions of the approval(s)
pertaining to monitoring and leachate management. The specific
deficiencies found by EPA and steps North Carolina must take in
order to achieve compliance are set forth below in this Notice o :
Non-Compliance (NON ).
~jolat~on l_ Condition II.A., Letter of Approval dated
December 14, 1981, requires monthly monitoring for leachate
quality and quantity and proper disposal of collected leachate.
Required leachate mo~itoring parameters are soecified in 40 CFR
§761 . 75 (b) (6) (iii ), fonnerly §761.41 (b) (5) (iii) and include
PCBs, pH, specific conductance, and chlorinated organics_ Nortr.
Carolina requested and was granted a waiver from the requirement
for chlorinated organics monitoring per the June 4 , 1979, Letter
of Approval. Monthly monitoring reports compiled by the DWI'1
indicate that leachate samples were never tested f o r two
k UG -26 -9 7 0 B 26 FROM ,REGION 4 PESTICIDES ID ,404 56 2 B973 PAGE:
2
monitoring parameters required by the PCB disposal approval, pH
and specific conductance.
Reco:rrrrnengation. Starting with the first monthly monitoring
event after receipt of this letter and continuing monthly
thereafter, North Carolina shall monitor leachate for PCBs, pH,
and specific conductance. Field instruments may be used to
measure pH and specific conductance.
Violation 2. Condition II.H.2., Letter of Approval dated
December 14, 1981, requires semi-annual monitoring of groundwater
monitoring wells and surface water for PCBs, pH, and specific
conductance. A review of the State's monitoring records
indicates that the State has carried out the required semiannual
monitoring during the post closure period with three exceptions.
On l y one set of samples was collected in the following years:
1987 , 1995 1 and 1996. Additionally, it appears that groundwater
and su~face samples were tested for PCBs but have never been
tested for pH and specific conductance as required by the PCB
disposal approval.
Recommendation. Henceforth, North Carolina shall monitor
surface water and groundwater semi-annually as required by
Condition II.H.2., of the December 14, 1981, Letter of Approval.
All water samples shall be tested for PCBs, pH and specific
conductance. Field instruments may be used to measure pH and
specific conductance.
Violation 3. Condition B.10., Letter of Approval dated
June 4, 1979, required installation of a leachate collection
system (LCS), above and below the liner, that would allow removal
o f any collected leachate. The LCS was installed as required by
the approval letter and North Carolina has removed nominal
amounts of leachate during the post-closure care period.
However, as evidenced by ten or more feet of standing liquid over
the liner, EPA has determined that the primary LCS (located above
the liner) does not meet the LCS performance standard specified
in Condition B.10. The intent of this condition of approval was
to require installation and operation of a LCS capable of
removing leachate as it is generated, to prevent a build-up of
leachate over the landfill liner system. EPA considers a
properly functioning LCS in combination with a liner system
necessary to prevent PCB releases to groundwater.
Recommendation. EPA recognizes that eliminating the large
amount of leachate that has accumulated in the WCLF may take
several years due to the degraded condition and/or limited
capacity of the LCS drainage layer and sump. There may also be
more than one contributing factor to leachate production. If the
leachate build-up was due only to storm water introduced during
the operational period, then upgrading the leachate pumping
system would be sufficient to correct the problem. There is some
ev idence indicating that the leachate build-up is due in part to
~UG-26-97 08 26 FROM ,REGION 4 PESTICIDES ID ,404 562 897 3 PAGE
3
infiltration of precipitation through the landfill cover systern.
Therefore, replacing the cover system, in addition to the pump
system upgrade, may also be necessary. Another factor that mus t
be considered by EPA in addressing leachate management problems
is North Carolina's plan to detoxify the WCLF contents. The
Agency does not recormnend replacing the cover system if North
Carolina plans to excavate and destroy PCBs in the landfill in
the near future.
North Carolina shall prepare and submit for EPA's approval,
a two-phase corrective action plan (CAP) to eliminate leachate
from the WCLF. Phase 1, shall include a plan and schedule for
replacing (upgrading) the existing leachate pu,.~ping system {i.e.,
the gas-powered diaphragm pump housed in a small shed at the
north end of the landfill). The existing pump can only be
operated when an inspector makes a monthly visit to the site.
The new system should be designed to operate on a more-or-less
continuous basis {e.g., a submersible pump installed in the LCS
sump pumps leachate to a temporary holding tank that when full,
discharges leachate to the existing leachate treatment system).
A contingent, phase 2 plan and schedule for replacing the
existing cover system shall also be submitted to EPA for
approval. EPA will require replacement of the landfill cover if
North Carolina does not submit an application for a n alternate
me thod of PCB disposal for the WCLF soil within one year from the
date of North Carolina's receipt of this NON. The two-phase CA?
shall be submitted to EPA within 90 days of North Carolina's
receipt of this NON.
Failure to correct the violations cited above could subject
NorLh Carolina to penalties under TSCA. Further, this NON does
not preclude EPA from taking additional enforce..~ent action,
including the assessment of civil penalties, in the event that
the remedies specified above are not imple..~ented or Norch
Carolina fails to timely submit a leachate management C~P.
Please contact Mr. Craig Brown at [phone], if you
have any questions regarding this letter.
i
Sincerely, . /}
C~.Y~v
Carol L. Kemker
Chief
Pesticides and Toxic
Substances Branch
Phase 2 Corrective Action Plan
PCB Landfill, Warren County North Carolina
Contingency Plan for Active Remediation of Landfill Closure Cap System
EPA has requested a contingency plan for remediation of the existing closure cap system at the
PCB Landfill in Warren County North Carolina. There is preliminary evidence that there may be
small amounts of periodic infiltration into the landfill. The evidence is evaluation of several
years worth of manual water level readings which have been taken in the landfill leachate riser
and a monitoring point installed in the landfill gas vent. The state is attempting to confirm this
observation through the use of continuous monitoring of the landfill. The state has installed
instruments which monitor and record, on an hourly basis, the ambient temperature, pressure,
rainfall, and the water level elevations in two wells which were installed in the landfill.
Data indicates that the measured water level in the landfill is influenced by the barometric
pressure. When pressure rises the water surface is depressed, when the pressure falls, the water
level rises. The historical data from the manual measurements was compared to the regional
ambient pressure ( measured in Raleigh, NC, the closest monitoring station which collects
barometric pressure data.) and it also correlates with the regional changes in barometric pressure.
This makes it difficult to determine if there is infiltration into the landfill, since it is not known
what the range of movement of the water surface is .
There are preliminary measurements that indicate the fluctuation of the water surface in the
landfill is in the range of 13 inches. Data from September 21 through October 21 indicates that
when pressure is high, approximately 30 inches of Hg, the water level does not drop below a
minimum level. A low pressure reading, approximately 29.15 inches of Hg has established a
"maximum water level" recorded to date. The data will be constantly monitored, and the
hypothesis is that as the landfill enters the wet winter months, when evapotranspiration is the
low, if there is measurable infiltration, the maximum water level should increase during the
summer when barometric pressures are lower than during the winter months. Conversely, if there
is an measurable exfiltration from the landfill, that should also be detected during prolonged
periods with no rain.
If it is determined that the closure cap system of the landfill needs to be remediated, the state has
determined that the following will be considered as part of the corrective action:
• Remove existing protective /vegetative cover material and stockpile on site.
• Remove, where damaged by the above activity, the existing 10 mil PVC liner.
• Repair, smooth roll, the existing compacted clay barrier, and add additional soils to areas
which have exhibited settlement.
• Install one or more layers of geosynthetics. The layers to be evaluated include, from the
bottom up, a geosynthetic clay liner, a 40 mil geomembrane, a drainage layer.
• Reapply protective cover at a depth of at least 2.5 feet, to provide moisture storage for
vegetation, particularly if a drainage layer is installed.
• The cap will extend over the current top cap/bottom cap interface, forming an umbrella
like protection.
• A lined drainage collection trench will be installed to collect seepage from the drainage
layer if installed.
• Reseed
To evaluate the proposed course of remediation the state proposes the following schedule:
• Within 60 days of Agency approval the state will prepare an RFP and hold a prebid
conference.
• Within 45 days of the published RFP engineers will be asked to submit proposals. The
proposals will include statements of qualifications, a conceptual design for a cap,
including an infiltration potential evaluation, a preliminary cost for the cap, and a cost for
engineering, preparing design, contract documents, bid documents, and construction
specifications.
• Within 30 days a joint committee will evaluate proposals and choose an engineer to do a
final design.
• Within 90 days of awarding of the final design the engineer will submit for review the
required documentation .
• After review and regulatory approval of the proposed remediation effort the project will
be put to bid. An additional schedule for completion will be prepared at that time.