The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutNCD980602163_19970411_Warren County PCB Landfill_SERB C_Sampling Reports, 1994 - 1997-OCRCode \I 1JABT* \j JABB* 'v JABP* V NTAT"' I NlAB* y NIAP* 11DMA " SLB+ Pond ✓ AB Pond ,1 .LB➔-Pond ✓ PJD ADD / " ,OAR+ V EZM \I NOY BB JDH ALB .1 RPAB RBAB+ Exist. RPF Exist. mw CEH PSG JOK MMM BT cc ADJ/JDA RDRJ RAJR AJ ASH DRK OSW-2 RRAMOSW4 +RPS OSW-3 * Upper= T MID=B BOT=P Comments North Boring Soil (123,5 during drillin~ Excavation/Boring North Boring Soil 1. 1!!3,5 during drillinl! Excavation/Boring North Borinp; Soil I ~ ,3,5 duri.n£? drilling Excavation/Boring South Boring Soil 111.!23,5 durin~ drilling Excavation/Boring South Borin~ Soil 11. 1' ,3,5 during drilling Excavation/Boring South Boring Soil (D. ,3 ,5 durine drilling Excavation/Boring SEEP Soil /11 ~ 4/7-12 : 15 PM Upper6" 3 Soil --r,~1 3/13-ll:40AM 2 Soil i 3/13-12:05 PM l Soil 3/13-12:15 PM Sand Filter Soil 11 'I. 1-u~ 3/l3-10:45AM Carbon Filter Carbon m' rlilt:,J 3/13-11:00AM no. well (inlet) Water 11~ r~ 3/13-3:30 PM r.-----1~-=-=-_;:___ _ __;.-+------------➔ outlet Water 1t.:if.1 rv 3/1.3-5:30 PM southwell Water nLJ:.i Y 3/13-5 :00PM MW-1 MW-lA MW-2 MW-3A (P) MW-3 S MW-4 MW-4A MW-5S MW-5D MW-6 MW-7S MW-7D MW-8 MW-9 MW-l0S MW-10)) MW-ll MW-12 Alston-BG O'NeaJ-BG Davis-BG --,•·•--·• Gt.c,'ijtj~tw.a:ttr Water flrf?J:v.0<> Water rf_lW"" ~ Water ~B Water 1g Water ~ ~J Water Water Water Water Water Water Water Water Water Water Water Water Water Water Water Watei: ;J{41. 11 n :1 ( ,. Y,I :>J I r.Jl. ",5 1 =PCBs 2 = Dioxin 4/8-10:15 AM 4/9 4/9-11 :45 AM 4/8-12:45 AM 4/7-8:00 PM 4/8-19: 15 4/8-18:05 417-8:10 PM 4/7-4:30 4/8-13 :00 4/8-16:50 4/9-10 :00 AM 4/8-8:00 PM 4/7-l:05 PM 4/7-1 :05 PM 4/7-3:20 PM 4/8-5 :00 PM 4/9 4/8-12:00 PM 4/7-4 :4.5 4/8-12 J0PM 3 = BN/ AE -Pesticide & Herbicide 4 = voes Annroximate Time ApproximMt:, __ T_in_1_e __ ~ CEHT Scoarate Bailer VOA Note IDA -DUP + Split Samples 5 = Metals "ADF .,; MB JEN ., ··cBT KTB TB CAN AW ✓ BHB t' CB " 1.,MS .,, MR v 'AR+ ~'NCB "" so / PJR Above Br .,, CD Below B BJ RB • SB MBR BR 1MSS LESS H..ESS RSB ✓ KB V IMB v ISB • ✓ DA Above ";CA Below V DJ+ .., WM J KM ·~1,,DM 1" MM TM OSW-3 LE OSW-2 HE OSW-4 Blank Water ll'l !l ,• 4 S"' Equipment Rinseate Blank Water Ii~ I/· mc;J Drillin~ Water Trip Blank Water v.rr ·) -..... 3/ll/97 Dav-One Blank Water _ 'JJ 3/12/97 Eouip. Rinseate Blank Water N. rl4,15) 4/7-5:30PM Soil Equip. Rinse .Blan.k Water ('YI. f-W.Ws) 4/8-4:00PM Sub,Pump Rinse Trip Blank Water ~ 4) 4/7-9:00 One Shipment on 4/9 Blank Water /lt. i."~S) 4/9 Sub-Pumo Rinse Blank Water II,, ~ 4/9 Bailer Sampling Blank Sed. 1 Soi.VSed. / r2' 3/11-Il:J0AM Near 1st Occurrence South Sect. 2 Soil/Sed. Vi) 3/ll-12:30PM Sed. 3 Soil/Sed. ~ 3/ll-l:20 PM ., Sed. 4 Sediment I ~ 3/12-11 :00AM Confluence Sed. 5 Sediment ( 3/12-12:30 PM Serl. 6 Sediment /1 ll 3/12-4:30 PM Sed. 7 Sediment Iii 3/12-3:45 PM ',l, RCUS Sediment 3/13-2:45 PM RCUS Sediment ' ~ 3/13-2:25 PM ··· •· > ·· :r:: •:::s..,n:ac~So11 < : ••.. >· ........... . SurS-1 Soil 1 { 3/11 SurS-2 Soil l 3/11 SurS-3 Soil 1 3/11 Soil IT} 3/ll SurS-5 Soil ft 1 3/11 OSW-3 Surfa.ce Soil /1 M 4n-l0:00 AM OSW-2 Surface Soil 7i ~ 4n -11 :30 AM OSW-4 Surface Soil /1 rD5J 4/7-l0:35 AM SW-l Water /lf.1 3/11-12:J0PM Due south ofMW-6 lJIDS UTIJS RCDS RCUS RCUS SW-2 Davis-BG MW-7 MW-11 MW-1 MW-12 MW-5 Davis-BG Alston-BG O'Nea.J-BG Water t.. 1 3/11-1:05 PM Water Water Water Water 3/11-1:10 PM 3/12 3/12-5:00 PM 3/1 2-5:00 PM Water Ct ~ 3/12-l: 15 PM Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil ()ID during drilling , I I I, !Ji\ 1,2,3.5 1,2,3.5 1,2,3,5 during drilling during drilling during drilling during drilling during drilling during drilling during drilling durini:? drilling <li! Water Table @ Water Table (a! Water Table (dl Water Table (li.l Water Table (al Water Table (al, Water Table (ti; Water Table (OJ Water Table 2-12-1996 9:33AM FPOM WAPr:;.:Ef\l HEAL TH Dff-'T I'] 192572897 WARREN COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT 544 WEST RIDGEWAY STREET WARRENTON, NORTH CAROLINA 27589 February 11~ 1997 FAX TO: Mike Kelly Division of Solid Waste Management FAX Number: 919-715-3605 PAGE 1 OF4 FROM: Dennis Retzlaff Mike, p_ I TELEPHONE: 257-1185 FAX;;: (919) 257-2897 Thought you might like a copy of the test results for PCB in drinking water at two of our schools. Hope all is well_ Dennis r Ff?Ot-1 WAJ;:f?Ehl HEAL TH DEPT 191 925728~➔7 TRITEST, INC. 3909 Beryl Road Raleigh, NC 27607 Telephone: (919) 834-4984 Fax: (919) 834-6497 NC/WW Cert.#: 067 L a b o r a t o r y R e p o r t . Prepared for Mr. Jesse Brannan Page 1 of 2 Warren County Bd of Education Route 1, Box 146-J Warrenton, NC 27589 Project ID: 01 Report Date: Date Received: 1/23/97 1/15/97 Work Order#: 9701-15012 Cust. Code: WA2825 Cust. P.O.#: Project Info: DRINKING WA1''8R / P<:E ONLY No. Sample ID 1 02-93-480 / VAUGHAN Test Performed Date Sampled 1/15/97 Method Pesticides in OW; Full List EPA 508 PCB screen Ext~-, PCBs in DW PCB Allowable Limits EPA 508 EPA 508 No. Sample ID Date Sampled 2 02-93-483 / SOUTH WARREN 1/15/97 Test Performed Method P~sticid9~ in DW; Full List FPA 508 PCB screen Extr., PCBs in DW PCB Allowable Limits EPA 508 EPA SOB ----Continued on Next Page---- Time Sampled 9: 30 Matrix DW Condition 4±2°C Date Results Tech Analy~ed Qual SRB <0.1 ug/L SRB done DJ 0.5 ug/L Time Sampled 9:30 Matrix DW , 1 /21 /97 1 /21/97 1 /21 /97 Condition 4±2°C Date Results Tech Analyz~d Qual SRB l/2J./9i <0.1 ug/L SRB 1/21/97 done DJ l/21/97 0.5 ug/L 2 -12-1996 9:34 AM FF:m1 \,\iAPF:Er\J HEAL TH DEf="JT I Sfl S:➔25728S:➔7 TRITEST, INC. L a b o r a t o r y R e p o r t Warren County Bd of Education Project No. 01 Report certified by: tor Tritest, Inc. Report Date Work Order No. Page 2 of 2 1 /23 /97 9701-15012 F~:rn 1 WAR~:Ef\J HEAL TH DE!="0T I 91 S:➔25728S:➔7 En vironment 1, Incorporated .. P.O. BOX 7085, 114 OAKMONT DRIVE GREENVILLE, N.C. 27835•7085 . PHONE (919) 756-6208 FAX (919) 758-0833 CHAIN OF CUSTODY I SAMPLE REQUEST • P.4 CLIENT Y = t'~ ILL r/ Gl,.,.../4.. TELEPHONE# q 1 7. ;:I, SJ -l l'_2,5 __ ADDRESS & / 11 tJ-")f-/'!I&()_ LU/~ . ?re .:l 2S?9 ~ J CLIENT ,o, . TYPE oF sAMPLEs ____ f_c __ B ___ ~------------ # OF LOCATIONS ,:. . SAMPLE LOCATION • REQUESTED PARAMETERS • O'--9 .,::, ' .. :::>:+·i,"'.-_,,,·, ..... : .. ·::;· ... ';. ·_ • Please complete if requested samples vary from existing bottle labels. If there are no changes you may leave this section blank. _·. ~ TOTAL SAMPLING TIME AND SAMPLING POINTS AT WARREN COUNTY PCB LANDFILL Samplin2 period for-3/10-13/97 Samplin2 Units: Lab No. Total Volume (liters): Placement: PUF-1 011234 180,165 liters located center line on fence southside of landfill PUF-2 011233 183,852 liters located on top of landfill next to 2nd sprinkler south of vent PUF-3 011237 153,240 liters located on fence southside of landfill 70' east of PUF-2 I ' DAT E 05 .29 (15 . 29 05 .29 05 .29 05 .29 05 .30 05 .30 05 .3 0 05 .30 0 5.30 05 .30 05 .30 05.30 05 .30 0 5.30 05 .30 05 .. 30 05 .30 05 .30 05 .30 05 .30 05 .30 . 05. 30 05 .3 0 05 .30 0 5.30 05 .30 05 .3 0 05 .30 05 .30 TI ME 14 : 0 4 14 :09 15 :32 15 :33 16 :30 07 :32 07 :3 4 08 : 1 7 0 9 : 11 0 9 : 1 7 1 0 :5 6 1 0 :5 8 1 2 :4 7 13 :23 13 :28 1 3 :53 1 4: 1 0 1 4:30 14:33 1 4: 4 0 1 4: 4 1 14: 5 4 15 :06 15: 1 6 15: 1 7 15: 19 15: 38 16 : 12 16: 15 1 6 : 1 9 ACTIUITV REPI-.RT ··rv ") .. -· .. ,, ,··, .. 05.3[1.19"37 lE,:21 91 9 7153605 SOLID WASTE DI U DU RATI ON REMOTE ID MODE F'H6 ES F:ESUL T 0 0 ' 37 " 704 4225776 6 3 1 0 . K. 01 ' 0 1 " 9 19 7153060 ECM 3 0 . K . 0 0 ' 00 " 9733755 4 6 3 (1 ~L 6. 20 00' 3 1 " 9 1 9 733 7554 ECM 1 0 . K . 00 ' 5 1 " 919 5 7 1 3222 ECM 1 0 . K . 0 0 ' 4 7 " 9 1 98369692 6 3 0 tL G. 3'3 0 0' 00 " 98369692 G3 0 INTEPP UPT 0 4 ' 2 7" 919 733 941 3 ECM 10 0 . K. 00 ' 00 " 98369692 G3 0 N. 6. 213 0 0' 32" 9 19 833 6399 ECM 1 0 . K . 01 ' 0 3" 830 19 49 1237 ECM 2 O.K . 01 ' 18" 8 4 07896 1822 G3 2 0 . K . 0 1' 12" 9 19 7153060 ECM 4 0 . K . 0 0 ' 30" 7 7039630 91 ECM 1 0 . K . 0 0' 3 7" 9 198369692 G3 1 0 . K . 0 3 ' 11 " 70 4 384 534 9 ECM 6 O.K . 10'0 6" 1704 2 497 52 4 ECM 1 1 0 . K. 01 ) 45 n 8 40789 61822 G3 3 0. K . 01 ' 4 3" 4 90 0747 G3 ;:, 0 . K . 0 1 ' 2 4" 830 19491237 ECM 3 0 . K . 0 1 ' 4 5" 9 19 257 1000 ECM 3 0 . K . 0 0 ' 24" 9 197 150166 ECM 1 0 . K . 00 ' 00" 97 1530 60 G3 0 BUS'/ 0 0 ' 00" 97 153060 G3 0 I ~lT EPPUPT 0 1 ' 25" 9 19 633 63 16 ECM 4 0 . K . 0 1 ' 15" 9 19 7 153060 ECM 4 0 . K . 0 0 ' 52'·' 91 9 7153060 ECM 3 0 . K . 0 0 ' 4 7" 830 19 49 1237 ECM 1 O.K . 0 0 ' 36" 8 407 896 1822 G3 1 0 . K . .... 00' 5 7" 9 19 25 7 1000 ECM 1 0 . K . .... State of North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources Division of Waste Management James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary William L. Meyer, Director MEMO To: Dan Baucom Division of Epidemiology From: Bill Meyer Division of Waste Management Subject: Warren County PCB Landfill Date: February 4, 1997 .NA DEHNR DRAFT The Division of Waste Management has maintained a summary document for all PCB Landfill sampling and analytical events from 1982 until the present. The summary document includes data from the leachate exhaust collection pipe, gas vent exhaust, and ambient air. These samples were obtained on January 6, 1983 and January 12, 1983 by Howard Bridges. A copy of the PCB Landfill Miscellaneous Samples document is enclosed. EPA sampled the gas vent exhaust and ambient air in June and July of 1983 . Vent PCB concentration ranged from 105 . 7 -141. 5 µg/m3 with less than detectable level in ambient air. A copy of the EPA report is enclosed. The Science Advisors for the Warren County PCB Landfill Working Group have stated that the "PCB levels found in the winter of 1983 were significantly above the one in one million excess cancer death risk based concentration presented in EPA databases." Copy of Joel Hirschhorn' s analysis PCB Air Emissions and Health Risks from the Warren County PCB Landfill, is enclosed. I have attempted to find the data and calculations from Mr. Bridges 1983 study and have not been successful. John Neal has stated that the original analytical data is located in the Environmental Science Archive files. This data will verify the concentration on the air filters but will not suffice for rate of release nor allow prediction of exposure. It is important that all attempts be made to locate Mr. Bridges calculations and procedures for sampling. If this is not possible, I would appreciate some written statement from Mr. Bridges as to his best recollection of the procedures and calculations he performed in his study. C:wpfiles/pcblflmem-lett/baucom.mem P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Voice 919-733-4996 f@MAl/§i§f#i FAX 919-715-3605 An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/10% post-consumer paper • PCB LANDFILL SUMMARY OF SAMPLES ANALYZED FOR PCB'S PRIVATE MON. SURFACE STREAM WATER DATE WELL WATER SEDIMENT LEACHATE WELL SOIL OTHER 1982 2 1983 59 35 4 1984 8 16 16 19 1985 16 16 16 19 2 1986 16 16 16 4 1987 4 4 4 1988 8 8 8 1989 8 8 8 1 1 1990 8 8 8 12 5 6 1991 8 8 8 ,., 1 .) 1992 8 8 8 1993 8 8 8 8 37 1 1994 ** 4 4 4 2 5 1995 8 ** Does not include the following from the 1994 sampling event in July (i .e. the Pauline Ewald Data) PRIVATE DATE 1994 MON. WELL 5 SURFACE WATER 5 STREAM SEDIMENT 5 LEACHATE 2 WATER WELL 1 SOIL OTHER 25 6 't/lC ,.; "' , PCB LANDFILL ANALYTICAL RESULTS SUMMARY DATE MONITORING WELL SURFACE WATER STREAM SEDIMENT 1984 06-06 <0.1 PPB ( 4 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPB (8 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPM (8 SAMPLES) 12-11 <0.1 PPB ( 4 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPB (8 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPM (8 SAMPLES) 1985 05-24 <0.1 PPB (8 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPB (8 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPM (8 SAMPLES) 11 -13 <0.1 PPB (8 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPB (8 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPM (8 SAMPLES) 1986 05-06 <0.1 PPB (8 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPB (8 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPM (8 SAMPLES) 11-18 <0.1 PPB (8 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPB (8 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPM (8 SAMPLES) 1987 16-04 <0.1 PPB ( 4 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPB ( 4 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPM ( 4 SAMPLES) 1988 02-02 <0.1 PPB (4 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPB ( 4 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPM ( 4 SAMPLES) 07-06 <0.1 PPB ( 4 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPB ( 4 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPM (4 SAMPLES) 1989 03-21 <0.1 PPB ( 4 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPB ( 4 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPM ( 4 SAMPLES) 10-25 <0.1 PPB ( 4 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPB (4 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPM ( 4 SAMPLES) 1990 04-19 <0.1 PPB ( 4 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPB (4 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPM (4 SAMPLES) 10-25 <0.1 PPB ( 4 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPB ( 4 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPM ( 4 SAMPLES) 1991 04-24 <0.1 PPB ( 4 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPB ( 4 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPM ( 4 SAMPLES) 10-28 <0.1 PPB ( 4 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPB ( 4 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPM ( 4 SAMPLES) 1992 05-13 <0.1 PPB ( 4 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPB ( 4 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPM ( 4 SAMPLES) 11-24 <0.1 PPB ( 4 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPB ( 4 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPM ( 4 SAMPLES) 1993 05-93 <0.1 PPB ( 4 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPB ( 4 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPM ( 4 SAMPLES) 11 -93 <0.1 PPB ( 4 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPB (4 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPM (4 SAMPLES) DATE 1994 ** 11-94 PCB LANDFILL ANALYTICAL RESULTS SUMMARY MONITORING WELL SURFACE WATER <0.1 PPB ( 4 SAMPLES) <0.1 PPB ( 4 SAMPLES) STREAM SEDIMENT <0.1 PPM (4 SAMPLES) ** Does not include the data from the July 1994 sampling event (i.e. the Pauline Ewald Data). Analytical results from that sampling event were: DATE 07-94 MONITORING WELL <0.1 PPB (5 SAMPLES) PPB = parts per billion PCB'S SURFACE WATER <0.1 PPB (5 SAMPLES) STREAM SEDIMENT <0.1 PPM (5 SAMPLES) PPM = parts per million PCB'S , PCB LANDFILL LEA CHA TE SAMPLES all values expressed as PPB (parts per billion PCB'S) DATE INFLUENT EFFLUENT 03-07-83 0.42 0.24 03-07-83 0.44 03-08-83 0.34 0.28 03-08-83 0.25 0.043 03-08-83 2.80 0.062 03-14-83 <1.0 03-16-83 <1.0 <1.0 03-21-83 2.471 0. 184 03-22-83 1.408 0.294 03-23-83 1.349 0.107 03-24-83 <0.1 <0.1 03-28-83 <0.1 <0.1 03-30-83 0.279 <0.1 04-01-83 0. 10 <0.1 04-05-83 0.4 0.1 04-07-83 0.20 04-11-83 0.20 <0.1 04-12-83 0.50 <0.1 04-13-83 1.114 0.708 04-14-83 0.708 0.196 04-18-83 <0.1 <0.1 04-19-83 0.22 0.21 04-20-83 0.27 0.24 04-25-83 0.60 <0.1 04-26-83 0.20 <0.1 04-27-83 <0.1 05-10-83 0.20 <0.1 05-25-83 0.10 <0.1 06-01-83 <0.1 07-20-83 1.63 07-29-83 <0.1 10-21-83 <0.1 <0.1 11-29-83 <0.1 <0.1 01-26-84 0.30 <0.1 03-07-84 <0.1 <0.1 04-03-84 0.60 <0.1 05-03-84 0.60 <0.1 06-06-84 <0.1 <0.1 07-17-84 0.30 <0.1 08-16-84 <0.1 ' PCB LANDFILL LEA CHA TE SAMPLES all values expressed as PPB (parts per billion PCB'S) DATE INFLUENT EFFLUENT 09-11-84 0.20 <0.1 11-05-84 0.20 <0.1 12-11 -84 <0.1 <0.1 02-18-85 <0.1 03-26-85 <0.1 <0.1 04-13-85 <0.1 <0.1 05-23-85 <0.1 <0.1 06-27-85 <0.1 <0.1 07-16-85 <0.1 <0.1 08-13-85 <0.1 <0.1 09-18-85 <0.1 <0.1 10-24-85 <0.1 <0.1 11-13-85 <0.1 <0.1 03-04-85 <0.1 <0.1 04-24-85 <0.1 05 -06-86 0.18 03-21-89 <0.1 04-19-90 <0.1 <0.1 05-03-90 <0.1 <0.1 05-08-90 <0.1 <0.1 08 -28-90 <0.1 <0.1 09-27-90 0.20 <0.1 10-25-90 <0.1 <0.1 04-25-91 <0.1 05-30-91 <0.1 10-29-91 <0.1 10-27-92 <0.1 02-26-93 <0.1 <0.1 05-93 <0.1 <0.1 07-93 <0.1 <0.1 08-93 <0.1 <0.1 11-93 <0.1 <0.1 11-94 <0.1 <0.1 01 -95 0.2 <0.1 02-95 <0.1 <0.1 07-95 <0.1 <0.1 08-95 <0.1 <0.1 INFLUENT -leachate prior to entering treatment works filtration system. EFFLUENT -leachate after discharge from treatment works filtration system. f I PRIVATE WATER WELL SAMPLES DATE SAMPLE LOCATION RESULTS 08 -24-82 PRIVATE RESIDENCE WELL <0.1 PPB 08-24-82 PRIVATE RESIDENCE WELL <0.1 PPB 01-13/19-83 PRIVATE RESIDENCE WELL <0.1 PPB (35 WELLS FOR 45 RESIDENCES) 07-16-85 PRIVATE RESIDENCE WELL <0.1 PPB 6/93-7/93 PRIVATE RESIDENCE WELL <0.1 PPB** (37 WELLS) PPB = parts per billion PCB'~ ** (six of the analytical result~. indicated detectable levels of pesticides) . --' \ PCB LANDFILL MISCELLANEOUS SAMPLES DATE SAMPLE LOCATION RESULTS 01-06-83 GAS VENT EXHAUST 3.00 PPB 01-06-83 LEA CHA TE COLLECTION <0.1 PPB PIPE EXHAUST 01-12-83 AMBIENT AIR SAMPLES ND 01 -12-83 GAS VENT EXHAUST 2.00 PPB 08-28-89 LEACHATE LAGOON WATER <0.1 PPB 05-03-90 SOIL SAMPLE <0.1 PPM 04-18-90 GRASS ( 4 SAMPLE SITES) <0.1 PPM 04-18-90 SOIL ( 4 SAMPLE SITES) <0.1 PPM 04-18-90 CHARCOAL FROM <0.1 PPM TREATMENT WORKS 04-18-90 LEA CHA TE LAGOON SEDIMENT 0.27 PPM 10-29-91 SOIL <0.1 PPM 02-26-93 LEA CHA TE LAGOON SEDIMENT 0.12 PPM 07-94 ** SOIL 23 @<0.l PPM 1 @ 1.45 PPM 1 @ 0.22 PPM 07-94 ** LANDFILL CONTENTS 1 @ 301.4 PPM 1 @ 151.8 PPM 07-94 ** LEACHATE <0.1 PPB ND -none detected PPB = parts per billion PPM = parts per million ** from the July 1994 sampling event ( Pauline Ewald Data) PCB LANDFILL DATA SUMMARY FOR DIOXINS, FURANS & PCBS DIOXIN ISOMERS MW4 MW3 MW2 LFW LEA CHA TE-1 LEA CHA TE-2 all values in i;1arts per trillion (pQt) unless otherwise indicated 2,3,7,8-TCDD 0.011 0.017 0.013 BDL 0.009 0.083 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD BDL 0.028 0.021 BDL 0.011 0.011 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD 0.012 0.023 0.019 BDL EMPC 0.062 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 0.017 0.030 0.025 BDL 0.009 EMPC 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD 0.018 0.032 0.026 BDL 0.008 EMPC 1,2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDD EMPC 0.203 0.134 28.0 0.038 0.054 1,2,3,4,6,7,8,9-OCDD 0.559 1.05 0.606 1970 0.263 0.247 FURAN ISOMERS 2,3,7,8-TCDF 0.065 0.093 0.07 79.0 0.049 0.057 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF EMPC 0.092 0.047 32.8 0.013 0.014 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF 0.007 0.08 0.044 80.0 0.021 0.018 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 0.07 0.114 0.085 753.0 0.033 0.04 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.02 0.04 0.031 EMPC 0.011 0.011 2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.037 0.058 0.04 65.8 0.017 0.022 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF 0.018 EMPC EMPC EMPC EMPC 0.006 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 0.099 0.16 0.118 673.0 0.041 0.053 1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF BDL EMPC 0.014 628 0.005 BDL 1,2,3 ,4,6, 7,8,9-OCDF 0.105 0.205 0.115 4630.0 0.061 0.047 PCBs BDL BDL BDL 151.8 ppm BDL BDL PCB (1260) BDL BDL BDL 151.8 ppm BDL BDL PCB (1248) BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL = Below Detection Limit EMPC = Compound may be present but could not be quantified LFW = Wet Landfill Contents at Air Vent (Sample Number WL-002-LC) LEACHATE -1 = Filter System Inlet-Leachate (Sample number: WL-001-LE) ' LEACHATE -2 = Filter System Inlet-Leachate (Sample number: WL-002-LE) , .... . . I l -PCB LANDFILL SUPPLEMENTAL SITE JNVESTIGATION PLAN . \ .. ' I ·_,: Ii' .... .• ' : .\ \ l? ; I ii': I L~ u I ~ ; : u' UJ TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 BACKGROUND 2.0 PURPOSE 30 SITE SETTING AND HYDROGEOLOGY 4.0 SITE LOGISTICS 4. 1 Site Access 4.2 Work Zones 4.3 Site Control 4.4 Der.or.tarnination Facilities 4.5 Field Decontamination Procedures 5.0 SUPPLEMENTAL INVESTIGATIONS 5 1 Landfill System 5.2 Groundwater/Soils 5.2.1 Locations 5.2.2 Dtill.ing Procedures 5.2.3 Monitoring Well Design/Testing Procedures 5.3 Surface Water 5.4 Stream Sediments 5.5 Surface Geophysics 6.0 ANALYTICAL TESTING 61 Matrices and Anal11es 6.2 QNQC 7.0 REPORTING 95-017.00 -1- SIPTOC.DOC WARREN COUNTY PCB LANDFILL SUPPLEMENTAL SITE INVESTIGA TJON PLAN 1.0 Background Dq !~ j; :, u The State of No.rth Carolina Q\:1,11$ and maintains a closed landfill containing PCB-contaminated soils This landfill is permitted under the Toxics Substances Control Act (TSCA). This landfill is vinyl and clay lined and contains approximately 40,000 cubic yards of soils (24 feet thick) contaminated with polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). The landfill is located on a 142•acre tract ofland located just off State Road 1604 in Warren County. the containment area or landfill cell is enclosed by a fence occupying approximately 3.8 acres (Figure 1). 2.0 Purpose Banics. Ferland a .. ,d Associates, Inc. (BFA) has developed the foliowing "Supplemental Site Investigation Plan'' (Plan) to acquire more detailed infom1ation for detcnnining the environmental impact associated with the landfill and for planning the scope of the remedial design program The objectives of this Plan are to detem,ine the: c Geological setting including definition of soil and rock types, permeable and confining layers, fractures and faults. hydraulic properties and potential contamination pathways: • Direction and rate of groundwater and surface water flows and seasonal water table variations; • Location and extent (both vertical and horizontal) of soil and groundwater contamination at discrete intervals; • Quality of surface water where it first appears from the ground water system in each of the major draws surrounding the site; and, • Quality of stream :sediment in areas where sedimentation is most likely to occur. These objectives can be achieved through a phased data collection program involving upgrading the monitoring network, additional sampling and testing, and surficial geophysics if required In F ebrnary, 1995 the State developed a proposal to update the existing groundwater monitoring nenvork by insralling three deep monitoring wells and one additional shallow monitoring well . In Ocrober of 1995 the plan was reviewed by George Bain, P.G., who also recommended additional spatial coverage both in shaliow and deep zones. Mr. Bain's review also emphasized the difficulty of developing a groundwater monitoring system to detect the migration of contaminants in fractured rock. 95.0,7,01) n.::s&ip.d<>~ -1- ' :., We agree \vith the recommendations of both the State and Mr. Bain, and have incorporated their concerns foto the scope of this investigation. 3.0 Site Setting and Hydrogcology The I 42 acre site is near the nose of a NE trending ridge, whose ge.neral elevations are greater than 330 feet (NOVO). Part of the approximately 4-acre fill area are ,vithin the 340 fe~t (NGVD) contour which forms a small local closed high on the nose of the ridge. Surface drainage to Richneck Creek to the 1'1""\V/N/NE and E and to an unnamed tributary to the SISE. The site is underlain by a related sequence of mica schists, according to the North Carolina Geological Survey and the USGS re.port "Geology and Ground-Water Resources in the Raleigh Area. NC". Rocks that compose this complex of mica schists exhibit layering, but attitude and composition of individual zones cannot be observed in the site area because of deep weathering. Data from auger hoies at the site indicate the following general sequence of weathered strata: . Land surface to 10-20 feet -Red-brown micaccous fine sandy clay; 10-20 feet to bonom of hoic (max depth about 40 feet) -Brown micaceous sandy clay to sandy silt to ciayey. The above materials are thoroughly decomposed native rock; formed in place by chemical weathering and characterized by preservacion of structures that weie present in the unweathercd rock. These materials are also referred to as "residual soils". The exact depth to partially weathe, ed rock or to fresh bedrock is not kno\\'Tl at the site. Partially weathered rock, as used herein, refers to the zone between thoroughly weathered residual soiis above to fresh bedrock below. The tem1 saprolite is often applied to this zone. For the sake of consistency Mth other documents prepared for this landfill, we have also used the tern, saprolitc to refer to that zone. Permeability in saprolite zone has been enhanced by fracture/weathering processes, and it is commonly the most permeable zone in the vertical section. This enhanced penneabi!ity is often exploited by seating well casing within or immediately below the partially \veathered zone. The water table commonly occurs in the overlying residual soils but may occur or fluctuate within the saprolite Because of its higher transmissivity. this zone should be considered an avenue to transmit contaminants. The natural water table io this area should be a subdued expression of the surface topography: that is, mounded under the ridge with highest gradients toward the topographically iow areas in U•!neral N and S directions and lower ttradients to the E/NE. Heicllt of this mound which -~-,.. ' represents the water table, would depend on such factors as vertical and lateral permeability of the residual soils/saprolitic materials; distance to points of natural discharge; and duration and magnitude of recharge events. A smaller mound related to the closed 340 feet contour may occur under part of the site area. Recharge to the mound, or groundwater reservoir, occurs by downward infiltration through the unsaturated zone to the water table, where the infiltrating fluid becomes groundwater. General circulation of groundwater in this environment is downward from the water table to the zone of partially weathered bedrock, then laterally to points of areas of eventual dischaige (usually 9!--0! 7.00 rn:~ip.dl).: -2- 7!18.'96 streams or springs under natural conditions). Deeper circulation belo\v the partially we.athered zone is usually limited by rapidly decreasing occurrence of interconnected fractures \\1th depth in underlying fresh bedrock. Thus the most commonly expected groundwater flow path is predominately downward from the water table to the saprolite zone, then predominantly in the lateral direction to discharge areas. Discharge has been observed as would be expected emerging from the walls of the major draws in the saprolite zone. Deviations in this idealized flow path may occur related to inhomogeneities in the residual soils. In layered strata, as an example, differences in permeability may result in lateral flow components beginning to predominate above the saprolite zone, thus resulting in shortening the groundwater flow path and discharge to comact springs on the adjacent valley wall above the partially weathered rock. Thus, in summation. this is a very localized groundwater flow system in that all recharge to the mound underlying the ridge occurs from infiltration from the ridge. and most discharge occurs to adjacent valleys of Richneck Creek and its unnamed tributary. Deep circulation within the bedrock to eventual discharge in more distant areas is not expected. The most probable t1ow path for groundwater is downward to the partially weathered zone, then predominantly in lateral direction to the nearby discharge areas. This idealized flow path may be, in part, short circuited by inhomogeneities ir. the materials above the panially weathered zone, in which case discharge would occur at higher e1evations in the adjacent valleys . 4.0 Site Logistics 4.1 Site Access 4.2 Work Zones 4.3 Site Control 4.4 Decontamination Facilities 4.5 Field Decontamination Procedures 5.0 Supplemental Inyestigations Additional sample collection is needed to comply ~ith the regulatory requirements and to obtain current data for planning remedial activities. The supplemental sampling generally involves sampling and analyses of groundwater. surface water and sediment from existing stations and several additional locations (Figure l ). All sampling and testing procedures should be conducted in accordance with the existing Sampling Plan (Appendix 1). Table 1 is a summary of all proposed sampling points by matrix . It 'also includes the type of analysis proposed . 93--017.CO oc~ip.dl)<; -3- 7il 8:96 r-, ;-,""\ 0 ~ I [•! . ; : l.,.(I : ;• I i !U t..:.) L;~ .r --· lJ 5.1 Landfill System It is important that some continuity with the pre\.ious analysis be maintained to establish trends whenever possible. The establishment of trends is critical to our ability to determine the real potential threat associated V\-ith migration of contaminants. It is panicularly important that locations \Vhich tested above detection levels be reanalyzed. Repeat the first round (July, 1994) for all locations and cc>rresponding matrices (see Table l) excluding soil samples collected on the landfill cap, which correspond to the landfill system. These locations include the leachate inlet and outlet, the settling pond overflow pipe base. soil at the center of the pond and the discharge pipe outlet. A sample of the landfill com ems will also be collected from the central gas vent. It is particularly important to continue to regularly analyze the landfill contents, which will enable continued evaluation of natural biodcgradation. Procedures to be followed in the collection of those samples outlined are in Appendix A. Funher analysis of landfill cap materials is not warranted because it was properly addressed pre"i ously and there is no mechanism for it to be contaminated . Reanalysis of J\.,fW-1 is not recommended because the well screens appear to be plugged. This is discussed in more detail later. 5. 2 Groumiwatt~r/Soi/s 95--017.00 n..-::;5ip.do.:: 5.2. l Locations Two additional deep groundwater samples from wells adjacent to MW-3 and MW-4 . These wells will yield samples from the weathered rock (saprolite) zone. These wells which will be designated Iv!W-3A and 3B are important to establish the vertical flow component at key existing locations. The new hydraulic and groundwater quality data will be compared to that of the existing wells at those locations. Comparison of these data will give us an indication of the relative transmissivity of each zone and how much of the recent recharge reaches the saprolite zone. \\.'ater table and ~aprolite zone groundwater samples will also be obtained at locations directly northwest, south and east of the landfill within 25 feet of the landfill footprint. These three clusters ofwells which will be designated MW-1AB, MW-5A,B and r..1\V•7, 7 A are critical to the establishment of a proper flow net for the immediate vicinity of the landfill. They will also yield key water quality data from areas directly adjacent to the landfill in the currently anticipated flow paths. Groundwater samples will also be coUect~d in the three major draws located to the north, northeast and northwest of the landfill and in the one major draw located to the southeast. -4- 7:18,'96 c.-::, i I ·~ Y~-017.00 n=ip.doc ;a-' r .,1 0\ ~ C":J . As discussed in Site Hydrogeology, it is very difficult, if not impossible, to develop a monitoring nenvork which \\ill capture l 00%, of the flow in a fractured rock system These four wells are positioned to minimize the guess work. The orientation of the draw features which surround the site is dictated by fractures (see Figure _). Enhanced directional groundwater flow will occur along these fractures. By locating monitoring wells within these features we have an extremely high probability of detecting groundwater flew as it leaves the landfill site. Of the seven draw features identified on Figure_. it appears that five intersect the filled area. Because of the uncertainty of flow patterns leading to these draws, it is important that they be monitored with wells located at approximately the 300 ft. to 31 O ft. elevation. Proposed monitoring wells tvfW-6, i\.1W-8, MW-9 and JvfW-10 are positioned to intercept gr~undwater flow along these features. With the exception of VOCs, surface water collected v...ithin these draw features should have the same quality characteristics as that of the groundwater; however, the monitoring wells are needed so that samples may still be collected during low flow periods. Background groundwater samples from three wells located outside of the landfill groundwater and surface water flow system are also proposed. At least one of these \veils will be screened at the water table. The other two will be screened \.Vlthin the sanrolite zone . The wells will be desii:mated BG-L 2 and 3. These back~ound \veils will ' .... . - enable proper technical review of data collected at the remaining locations. by allowing us to filter out the contaminants which might exist within the groundwater outside of the influences of the landfill. Monitoring well sample collection procedures are outlined in Appendix A. 5 .2.2 Drilling Procedures The environmental drilling will be accomplished by the Hollow Stem Auger drilling method. Soil sa.-nples will be collected using split spoon samplers. A.11 samples will be handled in accordance with Appendix A. It is anticipated that nine (9) borings will be performed; one at each proposed well location. At least four of the borings will be used as a litholqgy test boring, complete with continuous sampling to competent rock. The soil \viii be closely classified to identify geologic, not engineering, properties. The soil samples from the test boring at locations 1. 5 and 7 (Figure 3) will be collected from below the base of the landfill and above the water table in the silty clay strata (about 30 feet deep), within the sandy silt strata (about 50 feet deep) and within the saprolite zone (about 60-90 feet deep). Soil will be collected in the remaining five borings at five-feet intervals or change in lithology. It is recommended one soil sample from · each test boring will be analyzed. A.11 auger flights and split spoons will be thoroughly decontaminated before use and between borings. -5- 7/18/96 '. ' (; '\ 95-017.()(j n=i;,.1fo,: . -, : I ,.! I~ R '' ; ~· ,: • : I . ,q : L....I I" i i.J..:. II ........ 5.2.3 Monitoring Well Desifm!Testint! Procedures Currently only four monitor wells exist at this site. Figure 4 shows that the water level in MW-2 is consistently lower than the other welJs and that the highest water level varies seasonally in :MW-1, 3 and 4. However, review of the data provided indicates the MW-l has failed to respond to changes in water levels since approximately December, 1994 and prior to that consistently lagged the other \vells. Tius may be the result of a plugged well screen, but underscores the importance of having a proper well desibl!1 in order to collect representative environmental data . Since the landfill lies on a ridge crest, ground water is expected to flow radially outward from the site. All of the proposed wells will assist better defining the direction of ground water flow. They will be surveyed and static water levels measured in addition to existing well measurements. This information will be used to better define the water table contours. tlow direction and gradient at the site . Each of the proposed well clusters would include two we!is installed adjacfnt to one another and screened at different intervals. Within each duster one well should be screened at the water table but to capture the seasonally !cw water elevation and the other should be screened \Vithin the saprolitc zone immediately above the bedrock surface. All new permanent monitor wells should then be sampled and tested in accordance \:\/ith the attached Sampling Plan . A.11 field work shall be conducted in conformance with accepted engineering and geologic practices as well as the Groundwater Section's Guidelines for the Investigation and Remediation of Soils and Groundwater and the Hazardous Waste Section's Sample Collection Guidance Document. Well installation shall be in confom1ance with the Nonh Carolina Well Construction Standards. A site safety plan shall be developed and followed by all field personnel. All appropriate decontamination procedures documented in the references above shall be followed . During the installation of each boring/well. a qualified hydrogeologist shall be present and a boring log corn.pleted for each well. Split spoon samples shall be collected at each change in lithology and where there has been a significant change in the penetration/drilling resistance. Soil cuttings shall be containerized until the analyses of ground water samples have been received from the laboratory. At such time, the appropriate disposal option shall be selected . Each well shall be constructed : a) in accordance v.-ith the attached diagram; b) in conformance with the State's well construction standards; and c) to be capable of yielding a ground water sample representative of the ground water quality at that location. The well casing and screen shall be constructed of 2 inch diameter PVC The manufactured well screen shall be sized appropriately, according to the soil type. Each well shall be completed ,,.._;th a 10 foot well screen. The annular space from the bottom of ·, -6- u 5. 4 Stream Sediment Four stream sediment samples are proposed along Richneck Creek and the unnamed tributary. The locations were selected to detem1ine what impact to stream sediments may originate from the upstream areas of _Richneck Creek, both above and below SR-1604, therefore al!ov.-ing the road's effects to be filtered out, a5 well as to determine the quality of ?5-017 i,O n,ssip.i!oc -7- 7.-lS:?6 .. Cl -kl/ State of North Carolina &' ~ -t Department of Environment AVA ft,,, t '-Health and Natural Resources pcr-'l"J:'° cill"'Division of Waste Management ff'!'-> James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor (.A \,w J~~athan B. Howes, S~cretary W1l11am L. Meyer, Director DEHNR Project: Methane Sampling PCB Landfill Project Participants: Wendy Peacock Larry Rose Date: January 29, 1997 Methane readings are a vital part of the monthly inspection of the PCB landfill located in Warren Co. During this date, a methane reading using the GA-90 was performed on the central vent on the landfill. 11 :57am 3:45pm Temp F 42.7° 48 .3° Barometric Pressure Hg 30.51" 30.42" Other reading that were observed were: CH4Reading % vol in air % LEL 0.8% 16% 1.1% 22% CO1 % vol in air 0.7 Location Raleigh PCBLAN PCBLAN Raleigh 0 1 % vol in air 20.8 Warren County is located approximately 60 miles north of Raleigh, therefore you should expect a temperature decrease of 2°F to 5°F difference. As cold temperatures have an effect of the amount of gas measured from the center vent, another test will be conducted when temperatures are higher. It is shown that a small amount of landfill gas particularly methane is being produced within the landfill. Bore holes that surround the perimeter of the landfill will be measured and the results will be compared. A weather station should be completed within the next few weeks. P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Voice 919-733-4996 f ftMtiJJii?Jtfbt-..ta FAX 919-715-3605 An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50"/o recycled/ 1 O°lo post-consumer paper \ .. ·. t ,1•:: ,.$ f ,, ' -· .~ I • t ~ , 1 1 ~ /t'J O k I () [()a)· I' ·c n C. +y / 1 J:.Y~/ v1:'-/-( v, f -·;--')t;, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMEi\'T OF E!'l'VIRONMENT, HEALTH, AND NATURAL RESOURCES William L. Meyer Director, Solid Waste Management Division To~LUE, \~0Q'f¼.\-. Please: Draft a reply for my signature. Take appropriate action. Approve. For your information Date:_S.::.....!....~-----'b ~:....,::_? __ Note and return attached material to me See me about attached H andle and report to me Remarks: t€::£..E:'-l:1SD "'(bU.fZ._ ~/~ 0 V\. ~ - ~\!££ED \S ~'< 0 ~ v~ REC.-E:l C/4D . . :ir{l;Df'I\ ~,;:A 7 f IE, -J0E£;;{)S ft Co/ oJ. ~;}'.'8 ~ "T \-S. ®~ ~D-we 11/1£ uJ61ktr-z,, 00 \.T -t-\-~lk-~~ I;£{)~~ Or...,. lJcw( ~t5Df111Y~Pr<--s~u '\ \ \))W 1',dl./~ ~~ ~D fr~ft-<.)t5l~ -Sholl l,,f}{)G-- fi~ D~\"' ~ 'fl~d-t>wesd7-ltJtl.D A-\-\~-,~~~\~ 1't)CA ~ l'{\~ ~-L,-~~ ~e/b ~1 J ( ) . ? ' r l<.fc\..'. <£1/11/ J • r,-) l-< .• Jt' ..;;i,.,c ... l J)O /) i°f' 's:./ ~be.I/Ci l,; r~quf"-_/, to ~ f I t' (_ f-& . r-7 -1 t-, I r-i ':< c· ,.j a. b () I/ c.. + /,~ + ( ., < '-' '·-~ u /' p /c h '-, , Ir; / f t.1 sJ'°ll'C I f-'1 · 9 4:- August 6, 1996 Bill: What's happening with the work plan that we was to receive two weeks ago fra'r\ tM science advisor. I received the progress report fran Joel which was very disappointing in substance. We did not hire Joel or Patrick to give us an accessment on Pauline. :t-nst of us for rrnre than a year did our own accessment of Pauline. I truly hope that Pauline can be µ.it behind us so we can go on with what what the camtittee was charged to do. We have been at this now for alnnst three years without very rruch progress. I hope we can rrove forward on this project and not get side track with issues involving Pauline. The people of Warren County deserves better. I l10pe we can stop this stalling and get on with the 'WOrk of detoxification. Warren County should not have to continue to be treated this way. PLEASE LET US HEAR 801E'JHIM; so::N 1 07/21/1995 10:29 9132572504 EELC FERRUCCI□ PAGE 01 C7/18/199f, ,,. Cl7 :55 PCB LANDFILL SUPPLE:MENTAL SITE INVESTIGATION PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 BACKGROUND 20 PuRPOSE 3.0 SITE SETTING A-....rn HYDROGEOLOGY 4.0 SITE LOGISTICS 4.1 Site Access 4.2 Work Zones 4 3 Site Control 4.4 Decontamination Facilities 4 5 Field .Decontamination Procedures 5.0 SUPPLEMENTAL INVESTIGATIONS 5.1 Landfill System 5.2 Groundwater/Soils 5 .2 1 Drilling Procedures 5 2.2 Monitoring Well Design 5.2.3 Testing Procedures 5.3 Surface Water 5 .4 Sediments 5.5 Surface Geophysics 6.0 ANALYTICAL TESTING 6.1 Matrices and Analytcs 6.2 QA/QC 7 0 REPORTING BFA>Dune BFA.1Done BFA.,Done Dtt-?vf BFA.,70% Complete DWJi.1 or Joel H. ? BFA.,Done ,, PCB LANDFILL SUPPLEM.ENTAL SITE INVESTIGATION PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 BACKGROUND 2.0 PURPOSE 3.0 SITE SETTING AND HYDROGEOLOGY 4.0 SITE LOGISTICS 4. l 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 Site Access Work Zones Site Control Der.ontarnination F acil.ities Field Decontamination Procedures 5.0 SUPPLEMENTAL INVESTIGATIONS 5. l Land.fill System 5.2 Groundwater/Soils 5 .2.1 Locations 5 . .2.2 Dtill.ing Procedures 5.2.3 Monitoring Well Design/Testing Procedures 5.3 Surface Water 5.4 Stream Sediments 5.5 Surface Geophysics 6.0 ANALYTICAL TESTING 6.1 Matrices and Analy1es . 6.2 QA/QC 7.0 REPORTING 95--0 I 7.00 -1- SIPTOC.DOC . \ ' \ I., ... .• I I -~ : .\ \ I i I I . '~ lr u I ;·: 1 ··' Lu L:.J J 'j WARREN COUNTI' PCB LANDFILL SUPPLEMENTAL SITE INVESTJGA TJON PLAN 1.0 Background ,J ) J The State of No.rth Carolina 0\\-11£ and maintains a closed landfill containing PCB-contaminated soils. This landfill is permitted under the Toxics Substances Control Act (TSCA). This landfill is \,;nyl and clay lined and contains approximately 40,000 cubic yards of soils (24 feet thick) contaminated with polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). The landfill is located on a 142•acre tract ofland located just off State Road 1604 in Warren County. the containment area or landfill cell is enclosed by a fence occupying approximately 3 .8 acres (Figure I). 2.0 .Purpose Banics. Ferland a.'1d Associates, Inc. (BFA) has developed the foliowing "Supplemental Site Investigaricn Plan'' (Plan) to acquire more detailed infom1ation for dercnnining the environmentai impact associated with the landfill and for planning the scope of the remedial design program The objectives of this Plan are to determine the: 11 Geological setting including definition of soil and rock types, permeable and confining layers, fractures and faults. hydraulic properties and potential contamination pathways: • Direction and rate of groundwater and surface wate, flows and seasonal water table variations; • Location and extent (both vertical and horizontal) of soil and groundwater contamination at discrete intervals; • Quality of surface water where it first appears from the ground water system in each of the major draws surrounding the site; and, • Quality of stream ;sediment in areas where sedimentation is most likely to occur. These objectives can be achieved through a phased data collection program involving upgrading the monitoring network, additional sampling and testing, and surficicl geophysics if required In F ebrnary, 1995 the State developed a proposal to update the existing groundwater monitoring netv,:ork by installing three deep monitoring wells and one additional shallow monitoring well . In October of 1995 the plan was reviewed by George Bain, P.G., who also recommended additional spatial coverage both in shaliow and deep zones. Mr. Bain's review also emphasized the difficulty of developing a groundwater monitoring system to detect the migration of contaminants in fractured rock. 95-0l7.00 t=ip . .:!o, -1- ~ i ! , , , u , ' We agree \vith the recommendations of both the State and Mr, Bain, and have incorporated their concerns into the scope of this investigation. 3.0 Site Setting and Hydrogcology The 142 acre site is near the nose of a NE trending ridge, whose general elevations are greater than 330 feet (NGVD). Part of the approximately 4-acre fill area are within the 340 feet (NGVD) contour which forms a small local closed high on the nose of the ridge. Surface drainage to Richneck Creek to the N"\V!N/NE and E and to an unnamed tributary to the SISE. The site is underlain by a related sequence of mica schists, according to the Nonh Carolina Geological Survey and the USGS repor1 "Geology and Ground-Water Resources in the Raleigh Area. NC''. Rocks that compose this complex of mica schists exhibit layering, but attitude and composition of individual zones cannot be observed in the site area because of deep weathering. Data fi-om auger hoies at the site indicate the following general sequence of weathered strata: Land surface to 10-20 feet -Red-brown micaccous fine sandy clay; 10-20 feet to bottom of hoic (rnax depth about 40 feet) -Brown micaceous sandy clay to sandy silt to ciayey. The above materials are thoroughly decomposed native rock: formed in place by chemical weJ.thering and characterized by preservation of structures that weie present in the :.mwea!he:-cd rock. These materials are also referred to as "residual soils". The exact depth to partially weathe, ed rock or to fresh bedrock is not kno\lm at the site. Partiallv weathered rock, as used herein, refers to the zone between thoroughly weathered residual soiis above to fresh bedrock below. The tem1 saprolite is often applied to this zone. For the sake of consistency with other documents prepared for this landfill. we have also used the tem1 saprolitc to refer to that zone. Permeability in saprolite zone has been enhanced by fracture/\ve:ithering processes, and it is commonly the most permeable zone in the vertical section. This enhanced pem1eabi!ity is often exploited by seating well casing within or immediately below the partially ,veathered zone . The water table commonly occurs in the overlying residual soils but may occur or fluctuate within the saprolite. Because of its higher transmissivity. this zone should be considered an avenue to transmit contaminants. The natural water table i11 this area should be a subdued expression of the surface topography; that i$, mounded ur:.der the ridge with highest gradients toward the topographically iow areas in U•!neral 1\ and S directions and lower ttradients to the Ef!\J""E. Heicllt of this mound. which ---. represents the water table, would depend on such factors as vertical and lateral permeability of the residual so:ls/saprolitic materials; distance to points of natural discharge; and duration and magnitude of recharge events, A smaller mound related to the closed 340 feet contour may occur under part of the site area. Recharge to the mound, or grcundwat~r reservoir, occurs by downward infiltration through the unsaturated zone to the water table, where the infiltrating fluid becomes groundwater. General circulation of groundwater in this environment is downward from the water table to the zone of partially weathered bedrock, then laterally to points of areas of eventual dischaige (usually 9!--0! 7.0C n..-,.:,ip.d,)~ -2- 7-'18."96 : ,: : : ,. ... ''; ! ~ ... , ....... ; . \ . 1 : .. ~ : ..... ' streams or springs under natural conditions). Deeper circulation below the partially we.a.thered zone is usually limited by rapidly decreasing occurrence of interconnected fractures \Vith depth in underlying fresh bedrock. Thus the most commonly expected groundwater flow path is predominately downward from the water table to the saprolite zone, then predominantly in the lateral direction to discharge areas. Discharge has been observed as would be expected emerging from the walls of the major draws in the saprolite zone. Deviations in this idealized flow path may occ~r related to inhomogeneities in the residual soils. In layered strata, as an example, differences in permeability may result in lateral flow components beginning to predominate above the saprolite zone, thus resulting in shortening the groundwater flow path and discharge to comact springs on the adjacent valley wall above the partially weathered rock . Thus, in summation. this is a very localized groundwater flow system in that all recharge to the mound underlying the ridge occurs from infiltration from the ridge. and most discharge occurs to adjacent valleys of Richneck Creek and its unnamed tributary. Deep circulation within the bedrock to eventual discharge in more distant areas is not expected. The most probable t1ow path for ground,vater is downward to the partially weathered zone, then predominantly in lateral direction to the nearby discharge areas . This idealized flow path may be. in part, short circuited by inhomogeneities ir. the materials above the partially weathered zone, in which case discharge would occur at higher elevations in the adjacent valleys. 4.0 Site Logistics 4. I Site Access 4. 2 Jt'ork Zones 4.3 Site Control 4.4 Decontamination Facilities ./.5 Field Decontamination Procedures 5.0 Supplemental Inyestigations Additional sample co!lection is needed to comply '-"ith the regulatory requirements and to obtain current data for planning remedial activities. The supplemental sampling generally involves sampling and analyses of groundwater. surface water and sediment from existing stations and several addiiional locations (Figure 1 ). All sampling and testing procedures should be conducted in accordance with the existing Sampling Plan (Appendix 1). Table I is a summary of all proposed sampling points by matrix. It also includes the type of analysis proposed. 95-017.G0 OC!!!ip.d,)<: -3- 7118:% 1 1 I : I , 5.1 Landfill System ft is important that some continuity with the previous analysis be maintained to establish trends whenever possible. The establishment of trends is critical to our ability to determine the real potential threat associated ~ith migration of contaminants. It is panicularly important that locations which tested above detection levels be reanalyzed. Repeat the first round (July~ 1994) for all locations and cCJrresponding matrices (see Table 1) excluding soil samples collected on the landfill cap, which correspond to the landfill system. These locations include the leachate inlet and outlet, the settling pond overflow pipe base, soil at the center of the pond and the discharge pipe outlet. A sample of the landfill com ems wjl) also be collected from the central gas vent. It is particularly imponam to continue to regularly analyze the landfill contents, which will enable continued evaluation of natural biodcgradation. Procedures to be followed in the collection of those samples outlined are in Appendix A. Further analysis of landfill cap materials is not warranted because it was properly addressed pre"iously and there is no mechanism for it to be contaminated. Reanalysis of IvfW-1 is not recommended because the \.vell screens appear to be plugged. This is discussed in more detail later. 5. 2 Groumiwater/Soils 95--0 J 7.00 n.a:;sip.c!oc 5.2.1 Locations Two additional deep groundwater samples from wells adjacent to M\V-3 and ~fW-4. These wells will yield samples from the weathered rock (saprolite) zone. These wells which will be designated MW'-3A and 3B are important to establish the vertical flow component at key eXJsting locations. The new hydraulic and groundwater quality data will be compared to that of the existing wells at those locations. Comparison of these data will give us an indication of the relative transmissivity of each zone and how much of the recent recharge reaches the saprolite zone. Water table and Saprolite zone groundwater samples will also be obtained at locations directly northwest, south and east of the landfill within 25 feet of the landfill footprint. These three clusters of wells which will be designated MW-JAB, MW-5A,B and r-.1W-7, 7 A are critical to the establishment of a proper flow net for the immediate vicinity of the landfill. They \.vill also yield key water quality data from areas directly adjacent to the landfill in the currently anticipated flow paths. Groundwater samples will also be collected in the three major draws located to the north, northeast and northwest of the landfill and in the one major draw located to the southeast. -4- 7!18-'9G Y.S-017.no n=ip.cloc: 1=· As discussed in Site Hydrogeology, it is very difficult, if not impossible, to develop a monitoring network which v.ilJ capture l 00%, of the flow in a fractured rock system. These four wells are positioned to minimize the guess work . The orientation of the draw features which surround the site is dictated by fractures (see Figure _). Enhanced directional groundwater flow will occur along these fractures. By locating monitoring wells within these features we have an extremely high probability of detecting: groundwater flow as it leaves the landfill site. Of the seven draw features identified on Figure_. it appears that five intersect the filled area. Because of the uncertainty of flow patterns leading to these draws, it is important that they be monitored with wells located at approximately the 300 ft. to 31 0 ft. elevation. Proposed monitoring wells :tvf\V-6, l\1\V-8, MW-9 and MW-10 are positioned to intercept gr~undwater flow along these features. With the exception of VOCs. surface water collected v..ithin these draw features should have the same quality characteristics as that of the groundwater; however, the monitoring wells are needed so that samples may still be collected during low flow pedcds. Background groundwater samples from three wells located outside of the landfill groundwater and surface water flow system are also proposed. At least one of these \veils will be screened at the \vater table . The other two will be screened 'Wlthin the sanrolite zone . The wells will be desi1:mated BG-1. 2 and 3. Tnese back!rround wells will ' ...... . ..... e:1able proper technical review of data collected at the remaining locations. by allowing us to filter out the contaminants which might exist within the groui1dwater outside of the influences of the landfill Monitoring well sample collection procedures are outlined in Appendix A. 5.2.2 Drilling Procedures The environmental drilling will be accomplished by the Hollow Stem Auger drilling method . Soil s,unples i,vi1l be collected using split spoon samplers. All samples will be handled in accordance with Appendix A. It is anticipated that nine (9) borings "will be performed; one at each proposed well location. At least four of the borings will be used as a lithology test boring, complete ,vith continuous sampling to competent rock. The soil \vill be closely classified to identify geologic, not engineering, properties. The soil samples from the test boring at locations 1. 5 and 7 (Figure 3) will be collected from below the base of the landfill and above the water table in the silty clay strata (about 30 feet deep), within the sandy silt strata (about 50 feet deep) and within the saprolite zone (about 60-90 feet deep). Soil will be collected in the remaining five borings at five-feet intervals or change in lithology. It is recommended one soil sample from · each test boring will be analyzed. All auger flights and split spoons will be thoroughly decontaminated before use and between borings. -5- 7/18,"96 '. ' '' '. • 'I 9S-017.0(, n,;ssi;ufo,: : :' i : "' ... I~ R . ' i • ( • : I ; ~: ; LI ....... 1./ lr 5.2.3 Monjtoring Well DesiQn/festim.! Procedures Currently only four monitor wells exist at this site. Figure 4 shows that the water level in ;\fW-2 is consistently lower than the other we1ls and that the highest water level varies seasonally in i\1\V-1, 3 and 4. However, review of the data provided indicates the ~V-1 has failed to respond to changes in water levels since approximately December, 1994 and prior to that consistently lagged the other \Velis. Tius may be the result of a plugged well screen, but underscores the importance of having a proper well design in order to collect representative environmental data. Since the landfill lies on a ridge crest, ground water is expected to flow radially outward from the site. All of the proposed wells vtill assist better defining the direction of ground water flov,.-. They v/211 be surveyed and static water levels measured in addition to existing well mcasuremc!ltS . This information will be used to better define the ·.vater table contours, t1Nv direction and gradient at the site . Each of the proposed well clusters would include t,vo welis installed adjacent to one another and screened at different intervals. Within each cluster one well should be screened at the water table but to capture the seasonally !cw water elevation and the . orher should be screened \Vithin the saprolitc zone immediately above the bedrock surface. All new permanent monitor wells should then be sampled and tested in accordance with the attached Sampling Plan. A.ll field work shall be conducted in conformance with accepted engineering and geologic practices as well as the Groundwater Section's Guidelines for the Investigation and Remediation of Soils and Groundwater and the Hazardous Waste Section's Sample Collection Guidance Document. Well installation shall be in conformance with the Nonh Carolina Well Construction Standards. A site safety plan shall be developed and followed by all field personnel. All appropriate decontamination procedures documented in the references above shall be followed. During the installation of each boring/well. a qualified hydrogeologist shall be present and a boring log completed for each well. Split spoon samples shall be collected at each change in lithology and where there has been a significant change in the penetration/drilling resistance. Soil cuttings shall be containerized until the analyses of ground water samples have been received from the laboratory. At such time, the appropriate disposal option shall be selected. Each well shall be constructed: a) in accordance "with the attached diagram; b) ir. conformance with the State's well construction standards; and c) to be capable of yielding a ground water sample representative of the ground water quality at that location. The well casing and screen shall be constructed of 2 inch diameter PVC The manufactured well screen shall be sized appropriately, according to the soil type. Each well shall be completed \\-ith a 10 foot well screen. The annular space from the bottom of -6- 7iJ&''J6 v u 5.4 Stream Sediment Four stream sediment samples are proposed along Richneck Creek and the unnamed tributary. The locations were selected to detemune what impact to stream sediments may originate from the upstream areas of _Richneck Creek, both above and below SR-1604, therefore alloVving the road's efiects to be filtered out, as well as to determine the quality of ?5-01 7 ,i{) n,ssip.tlvc -7- ?.13:?6 •.r ·~· w (f"", ,:[ Q_ ,-) ,=1 (Y1 l_fl <r ;:.:i ~ _J Q:'. w lJ... IS.I \!! it 4 i:.u ('l (,a OJ rl •.D en (0 r-·-i:S) -;j• ('·I r•, r·--,.::, •.(• •T• i1,i'1 [•1,l r11 rr' 1., I · I .. I ,1• I j 1' I . l•L l.Jtl J I I --;;:-~, --1 . : ' I ~ ) '1 7 . t ,·, I ,,' I, \ / 7~ I /..., ,, ,, ' l l ·----' I ',,, I ', •• I ' • ' ', I • I ,' •• •• , I • i \ . . i ... ·•.:: .. \ .... I. .., :1 .... .,, I . . ,.... i ..... /Jt.-.. \ I ..... .... \ '---· ,.. ,· -•• I l. r ) I / ... \.., /.: ,· "' .. -I \ ! \ ·-::.1 11 •• ! ,1 , ... • •; , / ,/ ' • ••••• II !1 \. • • • / / \......_ / ... -, • , ·, 1 ';; ' , •• . ' I ' •'j ' I I • I I I ' I . ' '-•, . ' I ' --• I 11 ', \ \ I 't I •• ' I 1 / / I , \ ·• I ', • -, ,' ·, ~ I ' I ', \ \ I '1 I I, -,.;,, 1· i ' ,! ,1 ·) 1' I //,I ', . ·,\ '•,. ' . \ . ... ·,. ', \ _.. ,I I I \ II 'J \ .-1 \ , ; ,; '1'• t ,I I, ,..-,,• / I 1' / / / '1 •, \ '\ • ••• -.. ~• r, ... \ -, -• _,...... .. , I I I I I \ ~ I \ -•• •' ', '/, ) I I 1 _.,· / / i l i ·1 I ', \ --~--_.... , \ I , '\\ \ -----............ \ , '· ' Ii', • •, , ' I, _.,,,,.. / ,' ,1 .' , ,' '1 -----~-. : • ,,. I J I • \ I f ·,,_"-.,_ J -·*( (\ '•1 \ / J', \ ( .... _./ / l/ ( I I \,.-;.,;~ -\ . . l 1' ,1 ~ )\'· /_ ___ - . \ \ J I ,__ > \., J \ '-,_/ ('--\1 ·1·) ,· // .,. 11 ,l.t.../ ... ------.. ·-. \__ l '-. ....... --._ i, ~~ ' lr11 _.,"' I -. . ,, , I I , , , , , V' ; 1 ·1 ·, '-" -\ , I , • -I • •,', < '< 0 1 ,' 1 ••• \ \ ' ' • • • ' 1 ·, ' '-" I / I I 11 ,.·, I ,~•,:•,,1) \ \ / _) 11/,,: _,,.,,..------. '.', {_ ... • .... • .-l_'. ·, __ ·-, '-----,'~'-\ \! \ / 1,11···,_,,_..., / \ ,, \ ·~ _/ ,-, I l,•· 1' lJ \\ \ '.,·I ... .' /·,' ' '-... ... I' \ \.,.. . '1 : ~ ,, ... , . I ' l I • J • ' ' • ' .... .. .. ... .. ' • \_ '\ ·, \ J // ( {,f ; ( ....._ \ \ I,,'/ .1,.',, _ -----:., •• 0\ : ,.,,.\ ·, --•• \ 'J 11 ·, -: , \ / [ 1, '--. 11 '\ .--tt \ ~,/ 1' .l)1 '.1 i,I // \"'1'<\t/,('\/( q\l ') ),\ /_/_....!P--5' ~;----~-...... ~>,, \\\\\"\\\~->----i} 111~·,_ '-.... I \' \ / ." I • "-\ \ I I \ I \ I I / ... ,' lo<-.. --\ \ • . --\ ' ' ,' ! ,, ... _...) I 1'111 \ ( ) ,;/ f7 ,I I, / , .. ··, .• \ \1~ '1 \ \\ ,,'/~·,:,.,,., • .:, ! -. -,'' \ ''---....... '-... --><·:-··,-.::.--·-...... -· ,/ ___., ,' I \ , / t ... I I I i ', \ 'j 'i '· I \' -'1 ', . ' \ '· --' '-I ' ', ... I (I , I~;. \ / ,i;' /' / ,' / / '\. ,. •1 , •, 1 -' ,.......:::: ' \ .. ·, ·----, __ '-....__ '·· .. :.'_ .. , · .. ',· , ,1 -. '• I' .-.• • \.;' ,• ·, . •• , , \ , I . \ _./ "" , 1 -.. , ,......--....., , / fr. •,. ____ ., I (•/ Q ,.. 1· ~ !' -·--. \~I :' ,1 \ \j'·,; .· ·---,] l i ',,. ... -....... _ '\'-..., ,,· \ ', I I ,. 1l, / ,1~ \ } .,' \ ,I ', ',, / \'. • -' • ' ,1 / I ,1 /--.... • • \ \-....-«~,._ I 11 \ \ ,--. _, I ·. , / \ / / I • ',. \ :' I ..,,, , / / _.I 1, _' ,-----'< \ \ ~/ \ I ) I ·-.... -~ --.. _ _.. \ ' 1 / .' II 11 \ ✓ .. -' ' : '\ I I r----.:::::..__ -·· '1 l'f ·-------·,/ ,' i i I \ ~ Q· I \I.·. ··1 / ,' ,\ ,\ 1'-·\\...-, \ .... \ ~1 .. --._ I Yi ~ . ·-v ,, r I I .-, •, ' ·' I ; / • '~' '\ ' -. .. . ·, '/ ,,.,) I,'/ --~~-~:.~<-~ :>:;;ktr~--_/7@ {(<.---->~~s\ [I \/ ~l•-~{;i; __ ,, --,J II~·-----------\\\_\----~~~:~;--~\\ l,1 V;>:>;·,;,-_,~ \,·-/, __ _,,.. ~\.\ ~ 0~ ~l_ I IL 1, IM.W:-'7 ·, -) I' _.. .. ...... , I ~ I ~ ~ ' T T . I ..... / ,' I ... / ·,,,._ I -------------:-·-··:_'-\.!. . \ \ I I -/ ·, 1' j' . J' \ ,_ .. ·-. -\ ',. \ '"' ~--& / / // . ,, __ . ----... _,.. ..... _,,-. ,\...... ,, , .... , ) \ I { '·, ,.• .. ··-... \ '·-...... I \ '·\ \ -, ... / //' / I~ ,.--· -------, \j\. f ~' ""' ( 11 ,1,tr· .-U--.\ ·1 -t .. , ( \ . ···,.. / I I __ ./ ./ l <l i Ii /UC/:' ' I / ,,--· ~, / \ \ \ '· ,, ,.. • ', 1'"" \ ·. ,' / I l _. , ,.· ,~, ,' ' I 1, I ' ·-., .,.,/ ,,..--· • • I l.~. .-\ •... ' , I I I .. ✓-/' } ,1 .,,...-----:"\.) ( '' ,,.··.,,,, / ,' ,I 1' / \ ,.. , ,I ... ,, \ 0 ! .'. •, '. ~ 4 ', ... I ,,. I / / , .. ) ,,,'• \ ... ,✓-_,, ·'·' i I i' \,. .• ,.·,,,.,,,, /// ·o ·..,1, i 1 \ _,,. ,1 •• ,· ( ..... ·_ .... ,,,/,' /:{t .-·'..' I / / , ,. -·--I ' (" ' '. ~, \ t *\ •, . , / \ __ ../ _.,-,0/ ... I I .!--..I ( 1· ,-.'-) .. -~// ,·---1· ///~.---\ J(\j t')' ---~---/ ,.--...... __ _J I ~',, ____ .. ---·;\------. ,/ ./ \ .~' \ \ r·_,.,··/,vi;-_./,..--,' n('\ (,, I'( 1../ -\ i '---r / 1 / ( • I ...J / \ I ) _ -~ _ • -, .. ..-, ~) J ) ,. ." .,o \ _) \, \ . . 0 \ i II ·,,' / '· { 1\ L /\. l ( / ,---~'-.__ I,' .. --·····-.. _,,· ,;/'.. , ,,...--· ,,.-· ···... i .. /~\, / ,--f' -.. , \ \ ,))\ _ _j (-<,:-:::::-. ..:)) \\:I '/:·.-,\ \,\ \ I --~~/ \ \ _/ _..-., \ '1 /; / \ J .... ,/ • •,, / r· ,·· \, ) .1 -~ • (./ /.,-:~--'\., i /'r -_ __l Li_ C.--__,c .!_..._ _) 1' \\ 1 I) / ~I,\,~_.,,/ 1 1 1 I / '_I ,,/ .'~ ',_j ) ,r-· \\\ ·,_ -' _,-· i,' / I '--,,-j LE_(_;F,"-.JD I ... \ I I ' ' ~ / \ / ,/7 .... .,,..,, ' \ ... / ,--.__ ,l l l ,,1 / ,· , '1 ) i1 // / I ) (., ,,,·-......\ \) \) / / ,,· / ·,, ,I sr,,,_L ·\~1 /,,/ .~) / 1,--::-:::::::: / • E:<ISllNC, i1lll il4W) -• I \....... .... I , , ,,.,. J ' '" ., , ... _ _,,..... • J , { I~ ........... .,J / . 1 11 .: I j . 1 / .,:-;, / ·-..... ·' / "'-\ • ). 1,···•.,, / v1,. , t\ ruw \\'ft• c,p I I ' ,, , / ~, ., -~.,,. .,. -..._ , /' 1, / 1v / ,1 I .--.. \ \ } ~ ./ / --:.-: ___ / @ / _,..l / • YJ/-. '<, .// H'fli~Xl PI_INC-i ~/,/ll'L~ ,\ l, / / / 111 I ·1 's.,_ \ \ \ f /)1 '1 . _.,;,:->: / ,,/ ~---1 -. · · /~,'f~----,·· //-· ~/_· ___ .. >,,.! /@S(•lit.•.cf 'A·.•,,ri; :OJ.tH•,_L '\\ '\ I I l i1 \ \ J ( j I J / / '1 f Y ,· • -_/ ~--r-_/ __ ,,., :,,., -• ✓ .-' • / //', ,,.- -...... ___,. \S'~) lrlRSf ·=•~(UllW.-C,I \ 1 ,./1 "--' / / v ,I ... ;j \ ,: M ..._"-.....__....)J .-------_,.-..... ,--·-.,,.'{' 1e s.Foo,4rn1 ,;.~un1. rs:;; \ \ / 1, 1'' / /' II ..-_f '\ .... ._._ ""7 ' • ~----.. :-.:-_::;:::..-._ / -•---• •~JI \ I\/ ', I 1111 \ ,/ / / / . !',,;,' ,I ·. '·., \e~~.--·· ---= --_.-_--.:.'>, 11r ~ .1( ,.....r_, .. ) @ ~•[W l'lll! CLU$flR llWI I , • I . . ./ --. , -~ ~ ----------, ---. J r . . _ _,., .-, ..• -.. ,·' 1111 \ ~--/ , . ./, ··. ·,... ·---, --.......'·---.... _,,.--· _..--... \ .1 \ .,, I \' EB 0Isr,n,:; s.uliF ... r[ 1·,~1F~ L., ,' ,,. __ ...., '1 ' / f" I '1 '-·.. " ./ ~ I I <1,1I0N \ / ./ i',' ·•1 ___ ,-/.,,;f~ I · ....._ , .......... -.~--\ ,I I \ _. ' t'f'-.,-:,:-:-1•:,~ 11-c,:o "'" .11 \ __ ./.,., ~--.:!" '--... \ ........ ----. -... ...._ .... _ .......... -~ . -~ ,-. ·1 ----i9,1fl'f-,,u·, 1 '·--.... -L'.~~~~·>C:::\"2..'.>Ern.1ronmenlaJ~ '"-... =::.~=-.;.~::~--,:..::::-..:.:::.~=-::::::-:-.. :::::: . .-~~---=--~---= ----·-----._ ', aarn.a, FMtiUI Md ANOCldaa, tlte. \. ...,. COUffY flC8 &NOU EXISfNO a Pla'O!IED ~ m flGUIH I ·.r .::.:_. w i.D ,:[ 0.. f) .~. U) 1n ;,r ;:::i ~ _J Q'. w l.J... iSI w a:: <[ P-"i ('I 1>1 1)) rl 1.D en OJ r-·-1~1 ,1· ("'·I ,., r··. ,,:::, ,,·, ;J-. ll•1) [11,l ftl 1r' 1., I · I 'j I ,'-1 I 1' I · l1_, utJ J --,---~-I I I l -\ 1 --o:;;--;---1 , ', : , I \ ,1 I 7 • f ,,', -,---,,--,-I 1 \ / 7, . I /,-, I I, ! t 1• I ' I • • '-I ' ' • , I '1 '•,', I •. I •, ' I ,' .' . ,I .' .. . ... I \I ·, \ \ '--,,· .. ' ,' . l i . '1 '· .1 • ' • I •, ',', I '• J ·, • ·' I ' •1 .' .. •• It\ I •, •, \ ,· I '1 1 1 , ', ·' ,-_. I , • I I .... , ·1 •• 1• : / .. 1 .. .. 1 ,' .. 'Jt, ., , ,· ._ ... .. . .' I I . r . ) 1 ., ., . C, , I ' I •'I I ' ' ' I/, ' I • ' ' I ' /. .. \ • \ II ', \:,, i . 1' • I /. :1 1 · ,I /' ,'.. i \ . \ \,. '-, . '', I,. • --I. .' I • ', ', ...___ ,• • ,' I I \ \, . I', I 1, ' ', I .. I )' ' ''1 I '1 ·,. ', ·: •,\' •' I 11 I\ II ' I ~·.i, } I •, • I / I •' / / ,' '1 .,\ ',. \ ... ,. . ,· '· ... ,, ,, I \ ' I \,\ .. ) •;,~ \, ) 1: / 1'-__ / /-~· __ ,./ ) .'/ ,,.. .... /:,,/ ·1· \\, \ ·,.: -. ·_ ·-~--~----... · .. .1·,..-1, '\ Ii'\\ ( ·. ~---"___) J ~I<:,:.::.}/\ /1\ \ \, ___ / /'J \\(·:1~-1// /:,,.(/ /f t ) ';J,·;r.~-~-·~--:<~., · --l\ l\" '·-.,. _ t ( 1~\~.\ /(· ; ,__ · •• •. , ,, l ' ' I•/ . \ \ ' I . I -... ' " \ \ \ I I I I ·, I 1,11 \ ' 1' ,'' ' • --~ \ ' .. .--• ~ I ....... _ ' ' ' \ I ,· -\ ,' } (-----1,:,,,) \ \ / \__) ,I,''/ / / -·,.. '· '-,, ,i _/ / . . ' l . ' . '·--.... ', --.... -, "' . I \ / I ,1 I '-', _ .. \ . ·' \_ ~ \ --_/ , ' ,i' i'.' .... . / \., \,. ' I ,' / ... ,/ ' ....... ' ' "'\~ .. .... '. "\ J I I \ • ' \_, i j : ' "',. -.. \ \ ,, I' .,) / ( ,,:1 1' ' ', ·, ll/1 _:,' / --·· ' I .,-.\ • --\ '· 11 . ' \ 11 I'--·, ·, I • ~ / I.' I I --.... \ 1, ' .. ,, ' .... ''•, \ f ' ~ \ . • ,, ' \ ' •• ' '1 \·--·\:t'\. // ). J,..i i1 i, / \ ... \··<\t:,..:1/·\/t n\ -) ).\/./,....t;T--s-\::';'-·<>--....>-,,, ,\\"\\l ... ~>,.' }II r~-,, ....... I \• \ / .~,/ I, I / "''\'I 1 \ l\\ //ii/.<-·--\ \ ·, ·,-_\\\ ,' .... '. ,''I ,...._.) I 1'11 \ / / i;/ f7 ,I 1, / ... -·,.,\\~·I \ \\/:'~'-•( ! -•.. __ -, \ ''--------,_·-..._-·----:_---,-.__.,,;'I _ __.,, I I \ ) I , .. f ... ,'/ / ', ', ,~ J, I 1, 1,·' 1·-.-''\ ',, --... _,_) ' • .. ..,,(I 11 ·• •. ,• ,..., '1 ,. ,, .' '\ Cf.-\ .. , '. . ---...._ -.... ... I • ..._. ' ,,,.,. \ / . !l, l ' , ·1 I ... \ .-' I I '· \ ~,----:.,.·,, \ ·--"'-·-.• __ • ~ ·., / 11? ..... ____ ., r.. /:·/ Q ,. { ~ 11· .-· --. \~1 ,,. ·1 \ \I'·,; . --, 1' I \ _... --...... __ \'--.. ,,· '\ \ 1 , / l . . ,/ \ / / I ' I \ \ / I ..,_, / / ) --, .,---·-' \ \ ~/ f I ) \ I ,...:.-......_., . .... _., \, ,1 /. I I,, /' ... ,. I ,· '\ I -I I,--===--/ k. / l~°:' \ ,I 1' I II ', ',, ... ,·' 'Q, ,..... ,1 I I/ /--·---·, \ ',-«•4 1 \ \ .---. .· '1 1·, ···-···--'1/ ' , / ,1 ... )f's, 1·' I \I,•', , / ;' I \ I~. /\\......, l : ) \/,:-····-.1 Yi1 ,---~ / ,f I' ·1·•. ··.'. ,1 \ ; / ~·'-J '-\\ \ -., / \) "·/ _,, 11'/.--. . . .. . • -I /I / \ ' I ' ', ' 4----, I ' ~ ___ , \ I / , ., I ... ,,....._ '~=:.~-~<--):;;»~----_/~, /-----·---:'sl.1_,,.( I ll l Q::..1r,j.,;; ·.,J II b' ---\\. _ _--_-_--.. ,. __ -\\\ LI ".~//Ii \ , • ./ '• It \Y / JW•~ \ I .Jr.w...i:"~'0Ni! t v.' .. ··-· ,_ ---~--,V I I , --\,·. / -, I'·::?'° I \ ~ .. + f' \ 1: N,.~7 ·,._ . , . ·1 \ '. / .' ,' _,, 1 ·' ··-. // -... •------····'---\~(\~\\I 1-· • lf 1\ '----. \ ',. \ 1 ......,~~i//i / ·,.,_,.11--.... _ .. ···--·-,.-··--\'t (''\.!. ( ,,·,, ) '•,, \ [,/ '•.\r ,.-•··-·-.. ) \ '••-.,, I \ ) '-._ \) //,/,/ / II /---· :~~:-··i ·1\_J ,' ""'\ I\ '-~-'1 .,--~.~\I 'IA./ ( \ ·. ·-.... .. , } 1' I ___ ./ .,/ ..' -1'·1 i / Ii/ ,..-' I ,· ' I r---, ' I ' • I I"'" ,, . I / l ( ./ _. 0\ 1,, ·' ' ' ' '1 • ,-• ---. I ' ' ', ·.. I ., \ L * \ . _, . / \ -----' ,.. ' ... I I • ·-. ,' .,,/.,,,.-·, '-~ .-. \ '· ' t , I , / } ,1 ,..-----=")( .•.,,./,,.,,,. ,1 11 • 1 .. \ , _ , .1 / I \ ( .-, , ., .. \ 11Mkv 4 , • . I /.. • r _ , .. 1 ,,·-.... ..1.,, / 1. I 1 ' _,. / , 1 , ) ~ ' •, '1 ·~ ' ' I • ,' .. _,-' ,, '\ I.,•,· '10 I I l \. _,..--_.,,. ..... / /,// \ '~ \._ ·' 1, I \ / ... / I , ...... _____ ./ / t, ,,,-/ •'f''' /'/, '-'~} ,-_J ( I (--,~--////_.,,-)(//L///~'\J(·..f (J /. <.. :;-·-...._~) ) \ _\.'..::.:.JA/ --~ .. '(_'···-., / (,./ \\ ;~' J \ ,\ . ..-\.-<,o,<:-~'\/ _j \{~\ I\ I' \ ( i . I i I //\ ,,. "\ . • ..------/ ,;~-..:;:,.., ,.---_.,·-\1 -~-, /'° --.--:fl'--.. r-----') \ \, ' ('\ I I I / \ \I, , / ·,\ ;;· .,·----\\_ j ,./ ,/' , ,, " / ,. . ,.., \ i / '-.._ ,/ ,:;/ -----,..,l \__.I I ,' -----:..~~:.. / } ' .. • \ I ----/ ' ,/ l / ~ 1' ,;,'/ • ~,.. • --'\ ,' ,' ,; , ' ............ , , /' -· .__,J_ LL,,:' _---,,::-" .• /11 \\ 11 1 ,,-I,. \ l_.,, ,,,..--\ 1 I I / ....__, / -~ '· / l1r-· \\,.,, 1 ,--·· ..-,, / / , __ ..,._..,_J Lic-:..;F,"-JD • , \, \ 11 11 , } ~ / ,,f .,,,..,,. , ..__ I \ ~,, -/ ,-...... / / / ,/ / , -. '1 ) \ 1' 1 I ! ( t>--\ \ l \J) l ,; ~, -· l ·., .I @,,_L ··0/ /_ / .~) / I .r::~ / • GI<, llNC. illll ( ~l\\') --I / ' \. ..--\ I ,' . ' ' ,.. .. '· _.... . , ' ' I ,..._ .,J I 1 1· .,. 1 j · . 1 _,/,-· /, ··._. _ _,. _,,. ,_...._ , _,, ( 1,,-,., l v11,.. • t\ 1uw l\'fL1 c,R •1 I ' ,,,, •' .,.,,. ,' ~, ,,. / -, ,,. .---··-..... ' /' \ j 1v / / I .-~,, \ \ I..-., ,.,/'/,--,-::.::_ ,·· ---• .... _/ @, ,/,...---1_,· • ~/ ... · -:.-.l/1 H'{l)k'(: PIJNC-l ~Ml>'Lc , I, ~ (( i / 111 ( \ '\ \ \ / /j' '1 .. .,) ...... , 1 / '-'·-· , · · _,,1J,'t~---·\ / /-~i ____ .',Ji' @ Slltif,•.,:E w,vr" ~Jo,H•1.L '\'' \. 11 / I\ \ ) ) / '1 f ,•) ,.-·,' / W ,-r----✓' ,/ ),.. -. , ' 1' ,1;r ....__j ,;s11) lflRSl (,~(l)IWK(I \ \ I 1\1 I ', _) , I V I I _,·( \ / • ____ ., ~~_,,/ . -·--. /. /' _ .. / . . ,.,,,,,--., ./)/, I. SFDIM£rll :i~IAF'U. (S:,; \ , , ,11 ,, l f1/ \ ~--...... e J . ,--:.,,. .. --::: _:;::.::..-_ ,... _______ ,. . ~;. . \ '1 / \ l 11/ \ ./ / / ( C-•f ,I '-., ,,,,_ ~~.::.::_ ____ _..:::-:: ---·:-:-__ ---..:.~;-, ur 5 .11(_,---?_, .. ) @ ~•cw l\lu CLUSTlR :_,◄111 j ,' / --· ~-1 I l1' ,; (__.. . ..,./ ,1 A '•.. ·---.. -,_ -------,_ ......... ---', ·1 \ ✓, I \I EB OISfittG SUf:F.\r[ l'1AlFR ··-' L-..... ./ . .r· __ _.,, 1 \'. / /f,I' ·1 • .. , ... ........... ... ...... •,. -.......... . _/✓-----... 1 · 1 ,, s l ,\ TION --\.,I / h \ ~------,,ff/ I I. -----........ ::----1 I 1 ' ! I •, ..,.:,3,1·,.-, Ill•' •• \ ...... , ./~ \ /,,. ./ ............ '---...... ..... .. V/ i,b·.·,-1 --~ \ --1, '-----,. 0 ... fc0 ,5'•, .J Q~s·• .e::,-i.::. Em.1r0nrne111aJ ~ ::::::~=-.:.-=~..;.-:, ~=-:::::-:-~"":::::~---~--=::== ._,_,, FH1tiid ud IINocl•t••• t-.c. ....,. C0UfTY f"C:I lNCftl. EJaSTNO • PfQI09ED IINr<at:I m flGUIH l July 2, 1996 MEMORANDUM To: Bill Meyer From: Bob Glaser, Grover Nicholson, Larry Rose, and Pete Doorn RE: Proposed Sampling for the PCB Landfill Mr. Barnes, Science Advisor for the Warren County Working Group, has proposed another sampling program for the PCB Landfill. This program is described in the 6/13/96 draft document titled "Warren County PCB Landfill, Supplemental Site Investigation Plan". Members of the Division staff have reviewed the sampling program and discussed, at length, the program with Mr. Barnes. From the review and the discussions, the staff believes that Mr. Barnes is approaching this site as if little or no previous work had been done. It also appears that Mr. Barnes' approach assumes that the contents of the landfill are in question and a release may have occurred anytime between 1979 and 1996. In response to Mr. Barnes' proposal, the staff has developed an alternate sampling program. The staff's program will generate data to supplement the existing data. In the development of this plan, the Division staff assumes that: 1) if a release has occurred, then the release is continuous or cyclic; 2) the movement of contaminants would be limited because of their low soluability; 3) the contents of the landfill are known; and 4) the landfill construction and filling procedures are known. After reviewing both sampling programs, one can see that there are significant differences in the approach and scope of work. Mr. Barnes' approach is to sample along each of the contaminant pathways (overland flow and movement via ground water) from the landfill to the adjacent surface water. The scope of work includes: 1) the collection of soil and ground water samples adjacent to the landfill; 2) ground water and surface water samples in each of the draws; and 3) surface water and sediment samples from Richneck Creek and the unnamed tributary. The Division staff's approach considers ground water as the only transport mechanism for the lateral movement of contaminants. The scope of work includes the installation of nine additional wells, to further characterization of the ground water flow adjacent to the landfill, and implementation of a ground water monitoring program. As mentioned above, the staff has discussed the merits of both proposal's with Mr. Barnes. These discussions have helped the staff understand the rationale used in developing Mr. Barnes' proposal, however, they have been unsuccessful in moving us towards a compromise .. One approach the Division/Department may consider in resolving the differences in the two proposals is to hire an independent, third party contractor, to review both workplans. GOAL: NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF WASTE MANAGEMENT PROPOSED PCB LANDFILL SAMPLING PROGRAM The goal of this sampling program is to confirm the ground water flow direction in the vicinity of the landfill and monitor the ground water quality downgradient of the landfill. The Division staff considers ground water to be the contaminant pathway of concern for the contaminants in the landfill. SCOPE OF WORK The scope of work includes the installation of nine additional ground water monitoring wells and implementation of a ground water monitoring program. The nine wells would complement the existing monitoring system and should address any unresolved questions pertaining to ground water movement in the vicinity of the landfill. Once the wells are installed, a monthly water level monitoring program should be implemented for one year. The one year monitoring requirement is necessary to evaluate any seasonal variation in the ground water flow direction. At the end of the one year, a ground water quality monitoring program would also be implemented at each of the downgradient monitoring wells and an upgradient well(s). The specific locations for the nine additional wells are identified on the attached figure. The list of constituents to be monitored in the ground water would include each of the constituents on Table 1 (under the heading of groundwater) in Mr. Barnes 6/13/96 draft "Supplemental Site Investigation Plan" . EVALUATION OF DATA After each water level monitoring event and each ground water quality sampling event, the data would be evaluated to determine if the appropriate zones are being monitored and adjustments to the ground water monitoring program would be made. ,,. C5 /0~!l99S 07 :32 fax Date ; I s inc u mg cover sheet Number of page · 1 d" To: (:,£if!f it~u ___ _ Phone Fax Phone CC: REMARKS: I' O Urgent D For your review □ Barnes, Ferland and Associates I 3535 Lawton Road Suit~ 1n1\ Orlando, Florida 32803 Phone j407) 896-8608 Fax Phone (407} 896-1822 ReplyASAP 0 Please comment (?~i.1~~ ---3/ ti'Jtddu_ th, w,J-~ ~ ~ ~ r---- ~ 05 185/133~ 07 :32 BARNES FERLAND ASSO: .... .BF A Environmental Consultants ~ =-=-=-=---== == Barnes, Ferland and Associates, Inc. June 4, 1996 Mr. Bill Meyer North Carolina Department of Environmental Health and Natural Resources 401 Oberlin Road, Ste 150 Raleigh, N.C. 27605 BFA #95-017 SUBJECT: Coordination of and Responsibilities for Sampling and Testing Activities Dear Bill: Relative to the above I understand the following : • The State Vv-ill assemble a team of samplers who will collect environmental samples in a phased approach as outlined in our memo dated May 28, 1996 • The field team leader will closely coordinate all activities with the Science Advisor. • The sampling activities will be in accordance with the existing Sampling Plan and our proposed supplement. • Approximately 25% of samples will be split with the Science Advisor and analyzed by a fully qualified but independent laboratory. • BF A will provide a location map containing all proposed sampling points. • The State will advise me as to whether or not it can make available all terrain drilling equipment and when. Other issues which have resulted from two recent attempts to field verify proposed off-site sampling locations are: • The potential need to coordinate with and/or obtain easements from adjacent property owners. • The need to perform clearing and grubbing activities such that the samplers can easil y access each sample station The Hollister Building• 3535 Lawton Road• Suite 111 • Orlando. Florida 32803 Office (407) 896-8608 • Fax (407) 896-1822 Mr Bill Meyer June 4, 1996 Page'.?. At this time it is assumed that these activities will be performed by the State. Please notify me if you recommend otherwise. Attached is a draft map of the proposed sample locations. Several of these locations have already been verified and flagged. Substantial clearing will be required to access sites to the west of the landfill . Larry Rose of your department is very familiar with the procedure being used to identify surface water, sediment and groundwater sample locations. If the State is to arrange for and contract the necessary clearing activities. it is recommended that. if possible, he be involved in that process cc Working Group Members Joel Hirschhorn John Watson, BF A Sincerely, Barne:'..~d and Asso~!a ~/✓,;"V'···'/~ Patrick A. Barnes, PG Science Advisor .B.FA =-= cw: r::r-t=-,: t1 1:,/D1:./ l ':,':i-~ 407:3%1822 F'A(,E ' AGENDA I. Call to Order II. Reading And Approval of Minutes: April 25th Meeting Ill. Reports IV. New Business Accountability: Expenditures It would seem that the Integrity of the process necessitates that the committee formulate a mechanism for accountability concerning expenditures because the committee is responsible for appropriations concerning the landfill. 1) Should the technical committee have the authority from the full committee to authorize expenditures and to keep a record of expenditures? 2) If so, should Bill Meyer's office submit at the end of each month, or at intervals determined by the Joint Committee, a statement of expenditures to be matched against the technical committee's record of expenditures? 3) Should Bill Meyer's office submit a report on all expenditures thus far by a date to be decided by the Joint Committee? V. Unfinished Business Reading And Approval of Minutes: (February 22, March 7, March 28) Do we need to refine the committee? Do we need to revisit the question of keeping on the committee folks who cannot or who choose not to attend regularly and make room for people who would like to participate? VI. Other Business VII. Adjournment ,0 \ , , /'J I l, , , (~ : ) J Cl 1 ; _; y ~ I'<"\ ru. t ~u \' \ \ ~ ~ WARREN COUNTY PCB LANDFILL SUPPLEMENTAL SITE INVESTIGATION PLAN Barnes, Ferland and Associates, Inc. (BF A) has developed the following "Supplemental Site Investigation Plan" (Plan) to acquire more detailed information for determining the environmental impact associated with the landfill and for planning the scope of the remedial design program. The objectives of this Plan are to determine the: • Geological setting including definition of soil and rock types, permeable and confining layers, fractures and faults, hydraulic properties and potential contamination pathways; • Direction and rate of groundwater and surface water flows and seasonal water table variations; • Location and extent (both vertical and horizontal) of soil and groundwater contamination at discrete intervals; • Quality of surface water where it first appears from the ground water system in each of the major draws surrounding the site; and, • Quality of stream sediment in areas where sedimentation is most likely to occur. These objectives can be achieved through a phased data collection program involving additional field methods, upgrading the monitoring network and additional sampling and testing. In developing this Plan, we have reviewed existing files containing background information and previous recommendations made by others involved in this project. Pertinent information has been incorporated into this Plan. The data collection program is recommended as follows: Phase 1 Data Collection: Phase 1 data collection is needed to comply with the regulatory requirements and to obtain current data for planning Phase 2 activities. Phase 1 generally involves sampling and analyses of surface water and sediment from existing stations and several additional locations (Figure 1 ). All sampling and testing procedures should be conducted in accordance with the existing Sampling Plan (attached). The following sampling and analyses are recommended: 1. Repeat the first round (July, l 994) for all existing locations and corresponding matrices (see Table 1) excluding soil samples collected on the landfill cap and monitor wells. 2. Two (2) surface soil samples taken in the northern settling basin. 3. Six (6) sediment samples along Richneck Creek and the unnamed tributary in depositional prone areas and as close to the landfill as possible. 95-017.00 ncssip.doc -1- 6/13/96 4. Four ( 4) surface water samples, one from each of the major draws and as close to the landfill as possible. The sample should be collected from the first occurrence of water. Phase 2 Data Collection: Phase 2 work primarily involves collecting additional information to further understand the site hydrogeology and possible plume movement. This will involve the use of surface geophysical methods, a drilling and sampling program, monitor well installations and additional soil and water laboratory analyses as described below: Surface Geophysical Program -It is recommended that a combination of electomagnetic and seismic surveys be used in the vicinity of the landfill (Figure 2). These techniques may be useful for further defining: • Geologic characterization (top of rock, fractures and faults, lithologic correlation, and clay confining layer mapping); • Hydrogeologic characterization ( water table mapping, aquifer thickness, confining layer continuity); • Plume delineation (soil/groundwater contamination); • Anamolous areas in the landfill; and, • Possible locations and depths of additional borings and wells. Drilling and Sampling Programing -The environmental drilling and sampling program should include collection and testing the in-situ soil and ground water and installing monitor wells to better define the ground water flow direction. These data will be used to detect if leaks have occurred from the landfill as well as planning locations and depths of permanent monitor wells. At this time it is assumed that at least one monitoring cluster will be located at each draw, as also reflected in Figure 1. Environmental technologies such as Push Probe and Hydropunch are recommended to obtain vertical distribution of soil and ground water quality. All samples should be handled in accordance with the attached Sampling Plan. It is anticipated that ten (10) borings will be performed directly adjacent to the landfill as shown in Figure 2. At least one of the borings will be used as a lithology test boring complete with continuous sampling to competent rock. Three soil and two ground water samples will be collected from each boring using in-situ technology. The soil samples (Figure 3) will be collected from below the base of the landfill and above the water table in the silty clay strata (about 30 feet deep), within the sandy silt strata (about 50 feet deep) and within the saprolite zone (about 60-90 feet deep). Ground water samples will be collected using hydropunch technology at the water table and in the saprolite zone of each boring. 95-017.00 ncssip.doc -2- 6/13/96 It is recommended that both samples be analyzed. However, only one soil sample from each test boring will be tested. Currently only four monitor wells exist at this site. Figure 4 shows that the water level in MW-2 is consistently lower than the other wells and that the highest water level varies seasonally in MW- 1, 3 and 4. However, review of the data provided indicates the MW-1 has failed to respond to changes in water levels since approximately December, 1994 and prior to that consistently lagged the other wells. This may be the result of a plugged well screen, but underscores the importance of having a proper well design in order to collect representative environmental data. Since the landfill lies on a ridge crest, ground water is expected to flow radially outward from the site. In at least four of the new locations drilled (Figure 3) adjacent to the landfill, wells should be installed to better define the direction of ground water flow. These four wells should be surveyed and static water levels measured in addition to existing well measurements. This information will be used to better define the water table contours, flow direction and gradient at the site. These new wells should be screened across the first most productive zone below the water table to standards described in the following section. Monitor Well Installations Monitor wells will be designed and located based on site geology results of the Phase I tests, surface geophysical survey, environmental drilling program and ground water flow direction. It is recommended that six monitor well clusters be constructed to detect the migration of contaminants based on the potential for enhanced migration. In addition to that basic network which is outlined in Figures 1 and 2, if contamination is detected in Phase I. Supplemental locations may be prudent. Each of the proposed six well clusters would include two wells installed adjacent to one another and screened at different intervals. Within each cluster one well should be screened at the water table but to capture the seasonally low water elevation and the other should be screened within the saprolite zone immediately above the bedrock surface. All new permanent monitor wells should then be sampled and tested in accordance with the attached Sampling Plan. Well Construction Guidelines All field work shall be conducted in conformance with accepted engineering and geologic practices as well as the Groundwater Section's Guidelines for the Investigation and Remediation of Soils and Groundwater and the Hazardous Waste Section's Sample Collection Guidance Document. Well installation shall be in conformance with the North Carolina Well Construction Standards. A site safety plan shall be developed and followed by all field personnel. All appropriate decontamination procedures documented in the references above shall be followed. During the installation of each boring/well, a qualified hydrogeologist shall be present and a boring log completed for each well. Split spoon samples shall be collected at each change in lithology and where there has been a significant change in the penetration/drilling resistance. Soil 95-017.00 ncssip.doc -3- 6/13/96 cuttings shall be containerized until the analyses of ground water samples have been received from the laboratory. At such time, the appropriate disposal option shall be selected. Each well shall be constructed: a) in accordance with the attached diagram; b) in conformance with the State's well construction standards; and c) to be capable of yielding a ground water sample representative of the ground water quality at that location. The well casing and screen shall be constructed of 2 inch diameter PVC. The manufactured well screen shall be sized appropriately, according to the soil type. Each well shall be completed with a IO foot well screen. The annular space from the bottom of the borehole to a distance of 2 feet above the top of the well screen shall be filled with an appropriately sized sand pack. A two foot bentonite seal shall be placed on top of the sand pack. Above the bentonite seal the annular space will be filled with a bentonite-cement grout. Each well shall be completed with a protective steel outer casing and a locking cap. A sloping pad shall be constructed around the base of the well in order to direct water away from the well. Upon completion of the well, a water level measuring point shall be established and the elevation determined to the nearest O. 01 foot. Each monitoring well shall be developed after the seal and grout have stabilized and no sooner than 24 hours after completion of the well. The well shall be developed until all suspended materials are removed or a reasonable volume of water has been removed. All well development and purge water shall be containerized until the analyses of ground water samples has been received from the laboratory. At such time, the appropriate disposal option shall be selected. After all wells are completed, hydraulic conductivity value(s) will be developed for the aquifer. A minimum of six slug tests or one pumping test shall be performed in order to develop the hydraulic conductivity value(s) at selected permeable zones. The specific wells to be used in the aquifer testing shall be selected after an evaluation of the soil sample descriptions has been completed. S~mmary Report At the conclusion of the field work a data summary report will be prepared. The report shall concisely summarize methodologies employed and results of activities including Phase I sampling and testing, surface geophysical surveys, environmental drilling program, permanent monitor well placement and construction, hydraulic testing and analysis, and soil and water quality. Essential text, graphs, tables and figures will be included in the report. 95-017.00 ncssip.doc -4- 6/13/96 TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF ANALYTE TESTING Groundwater Surface Water Landfill Contents (Wet and Dry) Landfill Leachate PCB Volatile Organics Semi-Volatile Organics Pesticides/Herbicides Inorganics <1> Dioxin Isomers Furan Isomers PCB Volatile Organics Semi-Volatile Organics Pesticides/Herbicides PCB's Dioxins Mono-Octa PCB Dioxin Volatile Organics Semi-Volatile Pesticides/Herbicides Inor anics 0 > Surface Soil PCB Carbon & Sand Filter PCB Sedimentation Basin PCB Air PCB Notes: EPA-8290 EPA-8240 EPA-8270 EP A-8081/8141 Various Methods EPA-8280 EPA-8290 EPA-8290 EPA-8240 EPA-8270 EPA-8081/8141 EPA-8081 EPA-8290/1311 EPA-8081 EPA-8290 EPA-8240 EPA-8270 EP A-8081/8141 Various Methods EPA-8081 EPA-8081 EPA-8081 EPA- ppm ppb ppb ppb ppm ppt t m ppb ppb ppb ppb t ppb ppt ppb ppb ppb <1> Inorganics include: Arsenic, Barium, Cadmium, Chromium, Lead, Mercury, Selenium, Silver 95-017 6/13/96 lIDmill~u ·~ IJ!ff3Iff' £Environmental Consultants 11.,v,11/itc, IF~vl.,m/1 .,m/J /iJccccl.,e~c, Om:. PHASE I '7A SURFACE WATER SAMPLE '01 (SW) (FIRST OCCURANCE) • SEDIMENT SAMPLE (SS) ffi EXISTING SURFACE WATER Q7 -STATIONS PHASE II. • EXISTING WELL (MW) A TEST BORINGS, HYDRO PUNCH £...:. SAMPLES & POSSIBLE WELL LOCATION ~ I @ NEW WELL CLUSTER (MW) 200· &00· 06-13-1996 ll:03 AM WARREN COUNTY PCS LANOFIU. EXISTING ct PROPOSED MONITORING srn:s I FIG~RE PHASE I AND PHASE n 6 TB-9 @ MW-5 ~~Environmental Consultants @tllD'ITil@~, l?@D'OtlllTil<dl ®ITil<dl fi1~~@@6t11«@~, DITil@. _____ __. NORTH \ ) I I I ) I ( /~PPR / LOCATIO / < ' LEGEND XIMATE OF TRAIL \ \ \ • EXISTING WELL (MW) 6. TEST BORINGS, HYDRO PUNCH SAMPLES & POSSIBLE WELL LOCATION @ NEW WELL CLUSTER (MW) SCALE 0 200' 400' 06-12-1996 J:15 PM WARREN COUNTY PCB LANDFILL EXISTING & PROPOSED MONITORING SITES FIGURE 2 Wl°JOj~ NORTH A ,-,.J 71 u DRAY 290' NOTES, 'wo. ter Level Meo.surer1ents on October 5, 1995 <Do.shed Areo.s a.re lnfered) Bo.sed on Do. to. Received Fror, Sta. te Files 100' 354' MICA SCHIST <70'-90') V AntIcIpc, ted Approx. Locc, tlon of Groundwc, ter Divide ------240' ~~Environmental Consultants /BIJITIID,.", f}',-fT/IJWcrl/ IJIJDq/J /1!"t:ll/!JC46Ja,-i:i, One. 0 0 ~ HORIZONTAL DRAY 280' 200' VERTICAL 25' SOUTH A' 400' 50' 06-12-1996 07•29 AM Generclized North -South Cross Section of the WARREN COUNTY PCB LANDFILL FIGURE 3 ELEVATIONS (FT) 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 11/2492 12/2:3B2. 1/26F.13 2126F.13 3/26F.13 4123193 5l2!)Jg3 6fl5/f13 7/'Z3f::13 81D'93 9/27F.J3 ~ ij 1 Of]2jgJ . !!) "'l ~ 11/18F.J3 Ii, T ~ 12/17F.J3 ~ ~ s: 1/25J94 . ~ ! !!) 212494 ~ ~ m ::, 3/25,94 ~ S. s: ~ ... 4128/94 ~ 0 ~ ::, ~ 3 rv 5/18/94 e.. Ci) ::, (I<) -f,/27/94 @) ~ IQ) C) s: 71213/94 =, ~ !!) 0 ""' w Ii, ::, 8/2694 ~ en t C ;:; 9/2694 ~ I» ::, s: ~ -10/2494 en ~ l,. 11/1694 12/19/94 1/25B5 G') ::0 2r2:3Jgj 0 C 3/291'i:15 z 0 -0 ~ (') 5/2~ m ~ ~ 7/211'i:15 81281':15 i 0 ::!l 9f25F.J5 F :::1 10/2~ 0 0 11/2095 · z (J\ (/) ..!. w 12/20/95 I '° 1/26/96 '° (J\ ::!l I\) 2123/96 G') C) ~ C I\) ::0 " l"'1 3: NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF E:!\v'IRONMENT, HEALTH, AND NATURAL RESOURCES William L. Meyer Director, Solid Waste Management Division To: 0(1, \-°ilu Please: Draft a reply for my signature. Take appropriate action. Approve. For your information Note and return attached material to me See me about attached Handle and report to me Remarks: ~~~C...\t..)\,w ~a \..~~t~ l;}b .._\(l,{'f\Lf'lsU-~ ~~ ~TP t,)At#-DtiiJ,~ ~ ~lf-s-rzcr E-ff 2,0 M DlO ..,, o dJt Jr Iii it S IJ16f/fe J) /j2'i {) W ~,i, @2{~ +«KJi ,,,wtlr.P ,~ii ~7~ /CfOc O IC(~ Jt)')D~~J II 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 June 3, 1996 MEMORANDUM: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Jimmy Carter Jack Butler · Dexter Matthews Bill Meyerjyi.J Sampling of PCB Landfill I appreciate your effort in the sampling of the PCB Landfill. The Working Group has hired a new contractor, Patrick Barnes, to evaluate environmental conditions at the landfill. Patrick is a PG. and has spent several days on the site to determine sampling locations and parameters. He has requested that the division implement a phased approach at the landfill. I am enclosing a copy of Patrick's proposal. The sampling event should commence within the next three weeks. The previous sampling event was accomplished by three teams of two to three members each. I assume that the same process is appropriate for this sampling event. Team members from Superfund included: Grover Nicholson, Harry Zinn, Bob Harding; Hazardous Waste -Pete Doorn, Gray Stephens, Tom Walker, Surabhi Shah; Solid Waste -Larry Rose and Mark Poindexter. Larry Rose served as the project team leader. Pat Williamson will serve as project facilitator for the division. I would appreciate your consideration for supporting this effort. The team needs to meet this week to outline specific responsibilities. I have asked that Larry Rose continue in his role as team leader. Please contact Larry with your appointment to the team as soon as possible. Enclosure cc: Larry Rose Pat Williamson Mike Kelly 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 407E:'3El 1322 BF A Environmental Consulta1 Barnes, Ferland and Associates, In MEMORANDUM Post-It" Fax Note 7671 Co./Dept. PhOne II TO: FROM: DATE: Bill Meyer and·W-orlcing Group Mrs Pat Barnes (Science Advisor) /4,,/- May 28, 1996 '1 l 5 -3<.o05 SUBJECT: In1pleme.ntation of Phase I Supplemental Environmental Sampling at the PCB Landfill As we agreed, the analytes, QA/QC and Health and Safety procedures for the existing Field Sampling Plan are acceptable for fi.tture sampling activities. Several additional sampling locations: however, should be added for a more comprehensive evaluation. I would recommend a phased approach for the next group of samples We are in the process of preparing a Phase I sample location map and a supplen"lent to the existing plan. Proposed Phase I sampling would include the foUowing : 1 . Repeat first round sampling and analysis for all locations and corresponding matrices excluding soil samples collected on the landfill cap and monitor wells, 2. Surface soil samples in the northern settling basin. 3. A total of six (6) soils sediment samples, one from each of the major draws surrounding the site. 4 A total of five (5) sediment samples locared in sedimentation prone areas along Richneck Creek and the unnamed tributary. 5. A tota.1 of six (6) surface water samples, one from each of the major draws as close to the landfill as possible (if water is present). Proposed Phase II sampling will involve the following: l . Hydropunch technolOf>'Y will be used to collect groundwater samples directly adjacent to the toe of the landfill The hydropunch data will be used to identify if leaks mav have occurred as well as the vertical distribution of water quality. · " 2. Pem1anent monitor wells will be designed and located based on results of the hydropunch data. At a minimum, one monitor well cluster should be placed uphill from each of the draws, · The Hollister 81,.1ilding • 3535 Lawton Road• Suite 111 • Orlando, Florida 32803 Office (407} 896-8608 • Fax (407) 896-1822 fl>=i · :•vu· L·=i•::.1----;,·-'-· ,"'-' 13 :05 MEMORANDUM May 29, 1996 Page 2 3. Groundwater sarnples will be collected and tested from each of the monitor wells. F'AGE 02 We are in the process of reviewing the previously proposed, expanded groundwater monitoring plan and will incorporate its recommendations into our Phase II supplement. It is recommended that the State move quickly with the Phase I sampling activities. A Phase I supplement should be submitted to your office by June 7, 1996. cc: Joel Hirschhorn -05/30/1 996 13:05 BF A Environmental Consulta1 Barnes, Ferland and Associates, In MEMORANDUM Post-It' Fax Note 7671 TO: FROM: Bill Meyer and.Working Group M;;"s Pat Barnes (Science Advisor) /a'r May 28, 1996 DATE : SUBJECT: Implementation of Phase I Supplemental Environmental Sampling at the PCB Landfill As we agreed, the analytes, QA/QC and Health and Safety procedures for the existing Field Sampling Plan are acceptable for foture sampling activities Severa! additional sampling locations; however, should be added for a more comprehensive evaluation. I would recommend a phased approach for the next group of samples We are in the process of preparing a Phase I sample location map and a supplement to the existing plan Proposed Phase I sampling would include the following : 1. Repeat first round sampling and analysis for all locations and corresponding matrices excluding soil samples collected on the landfill cap and mon_itor wells 2 Sutface soil samples in the northern settling basin. J. A total of six (6) soils sediment samples. one from each of the major draws surrounding the site. 4 A total of five (5) sediment. samples located in sedimentation prone areas along Richneck Creek and the unnamed tribLttary. 5 A total of six (6) surface water samples, one from each of the major draws as close to the landfill as possible (if water is present). Proposed Phase II sampling will involve the following: 1. Hydropunch technolo~'Y will be used to collect groundwater samples directly adjacent to the toe cf the landfill The hydropunch data will be used to identify if leaks may have occurred as well as the vertical distribution of water quality Pem1ancnt monitor wells will be designed and located based on results of the hydropunch data At a minimum, one monitor well cluster should be placed uphill from each of the draws The Hollister Building• 3535 Lawton Road· Suite 111 • Orlando. Florida 32803 Office (407) 896-8608 • Fax (407) 896-1822 05/3011996 13:05 MEMORANDUM May 29, 1996 Page 2 3. Groundwater samples will be collected and tested from each of the monitor wells . We are in the process of reviewing the previously proposed, expanded groundwater monitoring plan and will incorporate its recommendations into our Phase II supplement. It is recommended that the State move quickly with the Phase 1 sampling activities. A Phase I supplement should be submitted to your office by June 7, 1996 cc : Joel Hirschhorn . -\ -~~ .. ~ -~- Department of Energy Oak Ridge Operations Office P.O. Box 2001 Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831 -861 o July 17, 1995 Ms. Sharron Rogers North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources 401 Oberlin Road, Suite 150, 27605 Post Office Box 27687 Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Dear Ms. Rogers: POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENYL (PCB)-CONTAMINATED SOILS FROM NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH, AND NATURAL RESOURCES (NCDEHNR) On May 26, 1995, Dr. K. T. Klasson of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) received approximately 3.5 kilograms of soil from the NCDEHNR for analysis of PCBs. The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) regulations exempt from the manifesting requirements in 40 CFR 761.208, samples that are being transported to a laboratory for the purpose of testing [40 CFR 761.65(i) (1994)]. Thus, the soils shipped from NCDEHNR were not manifested to ORNL. After analyzing the soil for PCBs, Dr. Klasson determined the remaining soils from NCDEHNR would be desirable for use in a treatability study previously approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency-Region IV (EPA-IV). In written guidance, EPA has stated that transporting a sample for treatability testing without a manifest is a violation of the PCB rules. On June 6, 1995, Stuart Perry of EPA-IV was contacted to determine whether ORNL could use the soils from NCDEHNR in a treatability study since the soils had not been manifested (see enclosed memorandum of conversation). Mr. Perry confirmed that the soils could be used in the treatability study and that your department should be notified of ORNL's intention to use the soils. In addition, Mr. Perry stated that if ORNL uses the soil in its treatability study, ORNL should assume responsibility for disposal of the soils. Samples sent to the laboratory for analysis are usually returned to the sample collector for proper disposal [40 CFR 761.65(i)(3) (1994)]. However, ORNL intends to use the approximately 3.5 kilograms of soil sent by NCDEHNR to Dr. Klasson in a microbiological treatability study approved by EPA-IV. ORNL will assume responsibility for proper disposal of the PCB-contaminated samples in accordance with 40 CFR 761.65. Ms. Sharron Rogers -2-July 17, 1995 If there are any questions, please contact Mark Belvin at (615) 576-7321. When replying, please refer to 95-6453. ER-114:Belvin Enclosure cc w/enclosure: E. M. Atkins, SE-31, ORO D. W. Frazier, ORNL E. C. Jones, ORNL C. A. Schrof, ORNL Sincerely, ~1,it~ ORNL Site Manager Date: Parties: Topic: Discussion: Memorandum of Conversation June 6, 1995 Crystal Schrof, ORNL-Office of Environmental Compliance & Documentation Stuart Perry, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency-Region IV Modification to ORNL's research and development (R&D) approval on stabilization/solidification techniques (vitrification) On June 6, 1995, Stuart Perry of EPA-IV Toxics Unit returned a phone call placed earlier by Crystal Schrof of ORNL's OECD. Ms. Schrof explained to Mr. Perry that ORNL would like to make several modifications to the Stabilization/Solidification -Vitrification Treatability Study approval granted by EPA-IV in October 1994. Ms. Schrof explained in the original application Dr. Alan Bleier and Michael Gilliam were listed as the principle investigators. ORNL would propose to add Dr. Thomas Klassen as an investigator. In addition, the original application stated the research would be conducted in laboratories in either Building 4500N or Building 4505 at ORNL. Dr. Klasson would be conducting his work in Building 3592. Ms. Schrof explained Dr. Klassen would be using sediments from the Y-12 Plant, located on the Oak Ridge Reservation, that are contaminated with mercury and 300 ppm PCBs. Dr. Klassen would be extracting the mercury from the sediments to prepare the sediments for the vitrification process. After the mercury was extracted, the sediments would be managed as a waste in accordance with the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). Dr. Klasson would then use the sediment in a RCRA treatability study. Dr. Klasson would be using less than 2 kilograms of sediment. Mr. Perry said he considered the changes to R&D approval minor, and work could begin immediately. He stated ORNL should send a letter to him outlining the details of the modifications. EPA will not send an official communication approving the modification. )f On another topic, Ms. Schrof explained Dr. Klassen had received soils contaminated with PCBs from the State of North Carolina. The soils had been sent to Dr. Klasson for analysis for PCBs. Because the State of North Carolina had sent more soil than needed for the analysis, Dr. Klasson would like to use the soils in another approved PCB treatability study at ORNL. Ms. Schrof explained ORNL was concerned about using the soils that had not been manifested to ORNL because they were originally sent only for analysis. Mr. Perry said it would be acceptable for ORNL to use the soils from the State of North Carolina for the treatability study, and not to file an unmanifested waste report because it would be "unfair" to the State of North Carolina since they had properly followed the TSCA regulations. He suggested ORNL send the State of North Carolina a letter explaining we would not be returning the soil because we planned to use it in a PCB treatability study since they sent so much of the soil. Mr. Perry said the letter should state ORNL would take responsibility for proper disposal of the soils, and may need to provide the State of North Carolina a certificate of disposal. He said it would not be necessary to copy him on the correspondence, but suggested we keep a copy of the correspondence with the R&D approval. Action Items: ORNL will send a letter to Mr. Perry outlining the modifications to the vitrification treatability study. The letter should state Mr. Perry granted verbal approval. ORNL will send a letter to the State of North Carolina stating ORNL planned to use the soils it had sent for analysis in a PCB treatability study and ORNL would take responsibility for disposal of the soil. N. S. Dailey, W. D. Hollinger, E. C. Jones, K. T. Klasson, J. L. Reid, J. E. Thomas 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 April 7, 1995 Mr. Ken Ferruccio Route 2 Box 163J Norlina, NC 27563 Dear Ken: Henry Lancaster indicated that you had asked for additional information about the PCB Landfill content sample that we recently collected and sent to the EPA Athens Laboratory. I am pleased to share this information with you. This effort began during the design of the July 1994 sampling event to characterize the landfill environment. One of the questions that needed an answer was, what had happened biologically to the contents of the landfill during the 13 years since closure of the landfill? I learned that much research was being conducted nationally on a method to dechlorinate PCBs in river sediments using natural anaerobic bacteria (i.e., bacteria that live only in a no-oxygen environment). While talking with key scientists in this field, they expressed strong interest in our site. Both the EPA Environmental Research Laboratory at Athens, GA and GE's Corporate R&D Laboratory requested samples of the wet contents of the PCB Landfill. The plan to provide those samples was included in the Final Sampling Plan for the July 1994 event. The samples were taken, delivered, analyzed, and a report provided to the state and to Pauline Ewald . Both laboratories confirmed that significant dechlorination of PCBs was occurring as a result of natural bacterial action in our sealed wet, anaerobic landfill. The reason for the scientific interest stems mainly from the fact that the Warren County Landfill with its trapped water and oxygen-free atmosphere is very similar to an undisturbed river sediment. They were enthusiastic because the PCB Landfill gave them an opportunity to extend their work to another similar environment, and the PCB Landfill to them represented a more than 10-year-old sealed "bioreactor." To document our contacts regarding the original samples and continuing discussions, I have included a number of items with this letter for your review. 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 Page 2, K. Ferruccio, 4/7/95 I believe that the Working Group and the state can be proud that it has the opportunity to be involved in this valuable scientific research, and that we can continue to explore potential applicability of the information as a possible detoxification method for the landfill -one that could be potentially be completed in situ, that is, with the PCB materials contained within the existing protective liner systems preventing accidental or process-caused releases. ~yours, Sharr~ Assistant Director Enclosures CC: Henry Lancaster Bill Meyer ·. June 27. 1994 Dr. John Rogers EPA Environmental Research Laboratory 960 College Station Road Athens, GA 30605-2720 Dear John: Thanks so much for the excellent insight into anaerobic dechlorination. The materials you sent me, together with the literature that Dan Abramowicz provided has certainly confirmed the need for our continued investigation. I waited to thank you in writing until our citizen's working group had a opportunity to approve our draft workplan, so that I could provide you with a copy. We are currently fleshing this out into a pre-mobilization plan for their final approval on July 19. Hopefully, very soon after that date we will be sampling the PCB Landfill. We do, very much, wish to take you up on your offer to analyze a sample. I will be in touch shortly to plan any necessary logistics. EPAs interest in this project from both a research and a practical remediation perspective is very important to us. Very truly yours, Sharron Rogers Enclosure xc Bill Meyer ts'706 546 3252 EPA-ATHE:\S,GA UNITEO STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY 960 COLLEGE STATION ROAD ATHENS. GEORGIA 30605·2720 September 12, 1994 OPl 11')N11. f:()J:IM ll!l (7 ~ OFFICE Of' RESEARC:H AND DEVELOPMENT Sharon Rogers FAX TRANSMITTAL State of North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural P.O. Box 27687 Raleigh, Norti:i Carolina 27611-7687 Dear Sharon, 0s?l·'"'"'ICY G DE rt-Ai tf l"no~•?ti6 -.S-'!-0-::?f6 r: ... 91~ -71.S--:160.S" F""*7oo-.)c./6--g2.s2. NS\ 7540~:i:•21 7•73iii! 50Sft-'.:'. C~1'\fP.A;. ~t:1\11(.;i:::i AJM N $ ~AT:~· Please find attached a preliminary report of congener specific PCB analyses for the North Carolina (Warren County) landfill samples that we received on August 2, 1994. Although the report contains data from only one of the two samples, the results are essentially the same for both soil samples. Be advised that these results are preliminary and are for research purposes to assess the extent of PCB transformation in samples originally contaminated primarily with Aroclor 1260. The data have not been subjected to ri~oroU! statistical analyses and additional standards should be ana1)'7.C,d prior lo final congener identification or quantitat.ion. Aho note that the extraction procedure used in this investigation (12 hour solvent shake) is a modification of the EPA sonication procedure. Results from this modified extraction proct:durc have be.en comparable to the extraction efficiency of both the Soxhlet and sonication methods approved by EPA. I will be available to discuss these preliminary re.suits at your convenience. Sinccrff y yo~, µI . I . I /. V W.Jack Jon~ Ph.D. Research Microbiologist Athens Environmental Research Laboratory cc: Dr. Robert Swank (Director of Research, AERL-US EPA) Dr. John Rogers (AERL-US EPA) Mr. Cun Fehn (Region 4-US EPA) . 09 :13,94 12:23 !r706 546 3252 Table 1. Results of congener specific PCB analyses (weight % determination; mean of triplicates) of a landfill soil sample (sa.mpJe 112) collecled in July 1994 from the Warren County PCB landfill, North Carolina. eon,ener specific PCB analyses of Aroclor 1260, as reponed by Schultz et al. (1989). are also presented for reference. The differences in the weight 9b of congeners in the N.C. sample and that reported by Schultz are presented. The weight ~ values c.alculated for the PCB congeners from the N.C. sample were based on a standard PCB congener mix consisting of Aroclors 1232, 124~, and 1262 (2.5: 1.8:1.8). Results indicate a decrease in the wei&ht % of some higher chlorinated PCB congeners, compare.d to lhe PCB congener profile of Schultz et al. (1989) for Aroclor 1260, and an incrtme in the weight % of some lower chlorinated PCB congeners. Some specific examples are as follows, and the decreases in the specific congeners listed below indicate a pattern in which meta chlorines are removed if flanked by either ortho or para chlorines. This type of dechlorination pattern (pattern N) is similar to lhal ubserved hy Quensen et al. (1990) and Bedard et al. (1990), but other dechlorination scenarios must not be rule.d out at ~ time. Congener Decre.ase Congener lncre.ase 22'455' (#101) 22'45' (#49) 22'34'5'6 (#149) 22 '34 '6 (#91) 22'46' (#51) 233'44'6 (#158) 24'6 (#32) 22'344'5' (#138) 22'44' (#47) 22'33'44'5 (#170) " Other dechlorination patterns are possible, as the preliminary results suggest significant de.creases in congeners #179, # 153, #132, and #136. References &dard, D.L., H. Van Dort, S.C. Bunnell. 1990. General Electric Company Research and Development Program for the De.ffl"UCtion of PCBs, Ninth Progress Report. General .t::1.ectric Corporate Research and Development, Schenectady, New York. Quensen, 1.F., m, S.A Boyd, J.M. Tiedje. 1990. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 56:236().2369. Schulz, D.E., G. Petrick, J.C. Duinkcr. 1989. Environ. Sci. Tcchnol. 23:852·857. ~i06 546 3252 EPA-ATHE~S.GA ~003 NC#2J<LS Schulz I NC#2 Ar 1260 · ~Lile... j, _l:J. IUPAC# Wt% Wt% jdifferenc (!) I 3.739 O! 3.739 ? (3) I 0.22~ 0 0.228 (4.10) I 0,1),M o! 0.044 (7, ') ... i C/.Cl:21 o; 0.021 (6) i ll.163 0 0.163 z,!/ -t,'I' -. (5, f) 0.604 OI 0.604 __ , (19) 039/'J o· 0.390 (12.13) I) (J02 ol 0.()02 ""•,'/22.'S (15. 11} 0.68U 01 0.680 (17) 0.44, o! 0.445 ('2◄, 2i) 0.012 o. 0.012 ,;, ;;? ':JI .2. "''" -(16, 32) 0.707 o· 0. 707 (3', 54) 0.005 oi 1Hlll5 (29) 0.001 0 0.001 (lf;) 0.407 01 0.407 J. (2.~ 0.117 I o· 0.117 :z 'I'S" (31) o.~5~ 0.05 0.804 2'1'1/-1, 7, ''tf (28, SO) lA6¢ 0.05 1.418 .. (l0,21,33,.C3) 1.041 0 1.1)41 ,Iii J zi'I'/ 22,.•-f,' I . -(22, !i1) 0,7511 I 0 0.791 .. ~y' Ir" ., (45) 0.129 0 0.12~ I/~ d~cS I '2,.bo (◄6) 0.072 ! .. -. 01 0.072 .,.,,, J t ~ &r (43. 52. 73) 2.2()7 0.56 1.647 ... 4<, A{b sJ.J-v 22.''1.S' (.f9) 3.333 O' 3.3JJ -tt I 1 ,Z,Z-'6/'t' .. 0.! 1 I ('7) ' O.G33 0.523 .. -0.063 (a. 75.,) 0.027 0.09 (35) 0.000 O' O.ClOO 2z. '3 s'/z.z '"''' I -(-44, 104) 0.754 O' 0.754 ... (37,,42,59) 0.742 0 0.742 .;:, (41,64,'1,72) j 0.684 I 0.544 ~ 0.14 , .... , <".> i 0.079 0 ' 0.079 r (40) 0 l'-? or 0.127 (57. 67.100, 1i 0.1!13 O· 0.193 I ! (58,63) 0.03<1 0 0.03* - (74. '4) I 0.33-4 01 0.334 (61, 70, 76) (1,878 0.09 0.788 ~ (66, 93, 95) 3.SO~ 3.04i 0.468 ,/',,,. -+ ,<~{t $ J.e v,·1tf-i'-._ f(h,,, , I I J.2. .,..,, !ri06 546 :1252 EPA-.-\THE~S .GA Z. J 3 1 t/ 'f 'jz Z. 1 J l 'f ' ' • l2''f'l'SS' 2z.';u 1 s,,' _ NC#2.XLS (55.91,'8) ' 0.427 I ·-i I (56,60) 0.647 -·· I ~!_!2,155) i 0.956 ! -•· -·r- (,0, 101} ..I l.404 I ('9) I 0.~48 l . (111, 119, ISO. 0.177 (13.109) i tl.119 (96.'7,152) 0.131 (11,17,J I 1,1 I! 0.271 (IS,U,) 0.0116 (1)6) i 0.527 (T7. 110) ! 1,1().4 I --. I (12) I 0.046 t (1Sl) 4.144 I (UA, 135) • l.ttlll : c101, uii,1,'i)t--;;;-4-;~ (1U6, 1~8.149~37. (114., lJ.a, l.U 0.258 I -~-_... (122, l3J, 142_1 0.082 I --·---I . (146,161) : l.ll4 (lOS, U2) J.325 (1~) 7.877 ... --. ..:- (141) ' 2.308 (179) 0.::?84 (13'1,176) 0.462 (13¥, 160, 163'. .5.662 : (15¥) 0.424 I (~12!)) 0.118 I (178) O.!>a5 I ! (175) I 0.170 •-· ·--· ---r ... (llt2., 1!11"7) I J.t<J{, : (tltl) ! 0000 ' (llD) l.9!il ' (16T) i 0.104 (115) 0.•'39 "'--'--· -(174,111) l .HS (177) 1.79.S (IS6. 171) : 1.630 ' t (20:Z) i 0.049 ! --· (173) i 0.059 ~.:.21M) I 0.311 (172..19:z) 0.647 .. .. _ ..... (180) 7.36! (193) 0.'88 I (191) 0.117 ---(199} ; 0.141 (170,DlK..j 4,151 i (19') i 0.991 I Page2 0 0.-427 -01 0.647 . . , .. 1.15: -0.194 s.ee -4.'76 0.11 i .. --0.438 0 0.177 0 0.119 0.23 ! -0.099 0.82 -0 549 0 0.086 2.23 -1.703 1.9 -0.7% o: 0.046 3.67: 0.474 2.56 1 -0.742 O! 0.045 6.4 -3.563 0.62 1 -0.362 0.46 · --0.378 1.49 --0.366 3.76 .. -2.435 10.8 -2.921 ·2.se· 0.24~ 1.79 -1.506 1.01 . -0,548 e.1e : -0.518 1.951 -1.526 1.11 1 . -0.992 ·-1.62· -0,635 0.23 -···--0.0C,O 3.97 -0.1~4 1.06. -1.060 ·-1.76 : 0.191 0.26 -0.156 1.34 -0.901 3.85 .0. 965 2.21 · -0.415 2.38 -0.7-'0 0.9 , -0.851 0.36 ' -0.301 0.98i -0.679 ···-0.75 -0.103 --7.12 : 0.241 0.66 -0.172 0.25 .. ().063 0.051 0,098 3.91 0,241 0.79! 0.201 12~J6 :94 08:52 ~i06 546 3252 EPA-.<THEXS,GA ~ UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY 960 COLLEGE: STATION ROAD ATHENS. GE:ORGIA 30605•2720 · 14]001 December 16, 1994 Sharon Rogers OFFICE Or RESEARCH .lNO DEVELOPMENT State of North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources P.O. Box 27687 Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Dear Sharon, Per our telephone conversation on Dec. 12, this is a requesl Lo obtain from you PCB contaminated soil/sediment from the Warren County PCB Landfill for our use in the isolation of PCB dechlorinating microorganisms. We are currently investigating biological and physicochemical factors that affect PCB dechlorination in contaminated sediments and would like to expand the number of PCB contaminated sites that we are investigating. Further, the Warren County Landfill site is of interest to us because of the age of lhe site and the nature of the contaminant (predominantly Aroclor 1260). At your convenience (but as soon as possible), we would appreciate re.ceiving 2 to 4 quart size containers of the PCB contaminated material for our use in laboratory studies. We ask that the sample c.ontainers (whatever the si1..e) be completely filled with the soil/sediment material to re.duce the exposure of the sample to air. Further, samples that are •wet" or moist are preferable, but we will gladly receive any contaminated sample. The material may be shipped to me at the following address: Dr. W. J. Jones US EPA Athens Environmental Research Lab 960 College Station Rd. Athens, GA 30605 I thank you in advance for the collection of the samples and l will certainly keep you informe:d of the progress of our research efforts. Sincerelyf.:o rs, /1 I . l . / / w:' Jack ones Ph.D. Rese.arch Microbiologist Athens Fnvironment.al Research Laboratory --···-· ·------------ OF>T,ONA.. FOAM ;,9 (7-90; FAX TRANSMITTAL u ~, P=g~s ► I State of North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources Division of Solid Waste Management James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary William L. Meyer, Director NA DEHNR MEMO December 20, 1994 TO: Henry Lancaster FROM: Sharron Rogers_,7 qiL SUBJECT: EPA Athens Laboratory request for additional sample from Warren County PCB Landfill contents for dechlorination experiments Without objection, please be advised that the Division intends to supply the requested sample to Dr. Jones and his colleagues at the US EPA Environmental Research Laboratory at Athens, GA. See attached request. Their work would be an extension of their earlier analyses that showed in situ anaerobic bacterial dechlorination of PCBs is occurring in the interior of the landfill. We will be collecting and shipping, by appropriate methods, the requested material as soon after the first of the year as a sampling event can be scheduled. xc: Bill Meyer 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 '.·. Proposed PCB Biodegradation Study at The Sheboygan River Confined Treatment Facility John Rogers, Jack Jones, and Eric Weber U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Athens, GA and Rebecca Adams TAI Athens, GA The primary objective of the proposed field demonstration study a1 the Sheboygan River Confined Treatment Facility (CTF) is to examine the effects of alternating aerobic and anaerobic conditions, with and without the addition of inorganic nutrients, on the rate and extent of PCB biotransfonnation under simulated field conditions. Collecting data under conditions that closely resemble a large-scale treatment of PCBs will provide valuable infonnation regarding the correlation oflaboratocy and field data and the development of scenarios for enhanced bioremediation. The selection of treatment designs for the Sheboygan River , CTF has been based, in part, on the outcome of laboratory bench- scale studies in the context of engineering feasibility. Two potential treatments, inoculation with acclimated organisms and augmentation with organic amendments, have not been demon- strated to enhance significantly the rate of dechlorination of PCBs in bench-scale laboratory studies. Addition of inorganic nutrients, however, is considered beneficial for enhancing micro- bial activity. Other strategies still under consideration are those designed to increase the physical-chemical availability of PCBs bound to sediments, including the addition of surfactants, and the application of aerobic/anaerobic cycling. Swfactants may in- crease the availability of "bound" PCBs to microorganisms, but identifying a surfactant that is nontoxic and not a preferred substrate for microbial growth is a challenging problem. Thus, surfactant treatment is not considered to be a viable option al this time. Aerobic/anaerobic cycling is currently the most promising treatment option and merits trial a1 the field scale. During the aerobic phase, the bioavailability of PCBs may be enhanced through the degradation of naturally occurring organic com- pounds as well as contaminants such as oil and grease, all of which are known to bind PCBs. Further, biphenyl and lower chlorinated PCB congeners, primarily mono-and di-chlorinated PCBs, are degraded preferentially u,,der aerobic conditions ( 1,2). Thus, an aerobic treatment phase contributes to more complete 51 biodegradation. t-Jlaerobic conditions favor the biotransfonna- tion of.the mClTe highly chlorinated PCB congeners, e.g., 6, 7, and 8 chlorines, _thrc:,u_gh red_ucthi~d~c;hlorination reactions (3,4), producing lower chlorinated products. amenable to aerobic at- Jaek. Taken together, the alternating aerobic/anaerobic scheme seems promising for more extensive bioremediation of PCBs (5). This scenario is supported by preliminary laboratory studies indicating that aerobic/anaerobic cycling reduces the concentra- tion of both higher and lowerchlorinatedPCBs. Furthennore, we have recent evidence of ortlw-dechlorination of lower chlori- nated congeners in lab-scale, aerobic/anaerobic cycling experi- ments, an observation not often cited. The aerobic/anaerobic field experiments will be conducted for a minimum of 1 year and perhaps for 2 years to provide sufficient time for potentially significant in situ bioremediation. Anaerobic conditions will be established by natural means; that is, no externally added source of oxygen will be provided to the CTF during this phase of the treatment Sediments will be aerated by pumping soluble oxidants, such as peroxides or oxygen-satu- rated water, into the CTF. Oxidant addition can be maje either directly through the existing distribution piping system or to the CTF outflow liquid in a recycle fashion. · The effectiveness of either strategy will depend on the nature of dispersion of the added oxidant and its consumption within the sediments. Tracer studies have.been proposed to test dispersion from the upflow nutrient distribution piping system. Results from that study are necessary to determine the adequacy of the existing distribution system for oxygen addition in the aerobic cycle. Oxidants under consideration include hydrogen peroxide and oxygen-saturated cold water. In the event the currently existing plumbing should be inadequate for the distribution of oxidant, flow and distribution of the oxidant could be augmented by sinking wells at points oflow flow and pumping or withdraw- ing interstitial fluids. Detennination of the optimum cycle times for the system to be operated under aerobic and anaerobic conditions will have two components: the time required for the transition from anaerobic to aerobic conditions and vice versa. and the time required within each regime for the desired extent of PCB transfonnation. Indi- cators of aerobic status may include direct measurement of oxygen levels in liquid outflows and interstitial sediment fluids or such indirect measures as chemical oxygen demand (COD) or total soluble carbon of sediment samples. Adequate aeration would be expected to lower the soluble organic content of sediments. Sampling procedures will be designed to detect flow pro~l~ms such as channeling/short-circuiting. References 1. Bedard, D.L. and M.L. Habewrl. 1990. Microb. Ecol. 20:87-102. 52 2. 3. 4. 5. Furukawa, K., N. Tomizuka, and Kamibayashi. 1979. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 38:301-310. Brown, J.F., R.E. Wagner, D.L. Bedard, MJ. Brennan, J.C. Carnahan, RJ. May, and TJ. Tofflemire. 1984. Northeast Environ. Sci. 3:167-179. Quensen, J.F., J.M. Tiedje, and S.A. Boyd. 1988. Sci- ence 242:752-754. Unterman, R. 1990. Anaerobic biodegradation of PCBs. In Biological Remediation of Contaminated Sediments, with Special Emphasis on the_GreatLakes, C.T. Jafvert and J.E. Rogers, eds. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Athens, Georgia. Publication no. EP N600/9- 9 lft)() 1. Decontamination of PCB-Contaminated Sediments Through the Use of Bioremediation Technologies Daniel A. Wubah University of Georgia Athens, GA and W. Jack Jones and John E. Rogers U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Athens, GA Pol ychlorinated bi phenyl (PCB) congeners are relatively inert, stable to oxidation and heat, and have high viscosities, high refractive indices, low vapor pressures, high hydrophobicities, and excellent dielectric characteristics. As a result of these properties, PCBs were used in a variety ofindustrial applications, including organic diluents, plasticizers, hydraulic fluids, heat exchange and transfer fluids, solvent extenders, and microscope immersion oils (1 ). Some of these properties also contributed to their accumulation in soils, various elements of the food chain, and sediments of streams, lakes and estuaries (2). During the past two decades, concern has increased with respect to the eco- toxicological and human implications of the accumulation of PCBs (3, 4). In 1971, PCBs were restricted to closed systems in the United States. Eight years later, a total ban on their manufac- ture and use was ordered by the Congress. Residual contamina- tion of PCBs continues to be a problem, however, particularly along the banks of the Great Lakes where PCBs were used. Pollution control agencies have launched a concerted effon to reduce the levels of accumulated PCBs in the environment because of their persistence, toxicity, and tendency to bioconcentrate. Polychlorinated biphenyls can be transformed into less harmful compounds by both chemical and physical · methods, e.g., ultraviolet radiation, microwave treatment, supercritical water processes, and incineration (5). However, microbial degradation appears to offer the most cost-efficient method of reducing levels of PCBs in contaminated sediments. Consequently, the coupling of anaerobic dechlorination to aero- bic metabolism has been suggested as a possible method to reduce the levels of accumulated PCBs in the environment. Results from bench-scale studies suggest that PCBs can be biodegraded by both aerobic and anaerobic microbial processes (4, 6). Aerobic bacteria usually degrade congeners with one to five chlorine atoms, but not the higher chlorine-substinned congeners. However, the rate and extent of degradation are influenced by the position of the chlorine atoms on the biphenyl ring (7, 8). For example, congeners with open 2,3-or 3,4- positions are degraded faster than congeners with chlorine atoms at these positions. These sites are necessary for the attachment of a dioxygenase enzyme to effect the fission of the biphenyl ring. Several bacterial strains that can biodegrade PCBs aerobically have been isolated from enrichments of soils and sediments from contaminated sites. These strains vary in their abilities to degrade PCBs; some degrade only mono-, di-, and trichlorobiphenyls, and others degrade tetra-and pentachlorobiphenyls (7). Anaero- bic reductive dechlorination of PCBs was first proposed by Brown and coworkers (9). Later reports from laboratory studies provided unequivocal evidence that reductive dechlorination could occur in anaerobic sediments (10). Microorganisms that · are capable of anaerobic dechlorination often degrade the highly · chlorinated PCB congeners, J,ut not the less chlorinated conge- ners and the biphenyl nucleus (4). There is also a preferential removal of chlorine from the para and meta positions. The products of anaerobic dechlorination, therefore.are mainly ortho- substituted and have fewer chlorine atoms on the bi phenyl ring. Such congeners are less toxic and may serve as substrates for aerobic dechlorinating bacteria (10). The objective of this study is to determine the dechlorinating capacity of PCB-contaminated sediments from selected Great Lakes sites. The dechlorination of indigenous PCB congeners in sediment from the Saginaw River was determined under aerobic conditions. The initial chromatographic profile of Saginaw sedi- ment indicated a preponderance of congeners with one to four chlorine atoms, which suggests that the original Aroclor mixture had been transformed. An additional aerobic incubation for 6 months resulted in a further net loss in the concentration of total congeners reponed to be amenable to aerobic degradation. These congeners include4-chlorobiphenyl, 2;2 '4-trichlorobiphenyl (tri- CB ), 2,4',5-tri-CB, 2,4,4'-tri-CB, 3,4,4'-tri-CB, 2,3',5',6- tetrachlorobiphenyl (tet-CB), and 2,2'.3,4'-tet-CB. 95 Sediments collected from the Ashtabula River and the Sheboygan Harbor and bay area were incubated under anaerobic conditions. The Ashtabula sediment was spiked with 2,3,3',4,4'- pentachlorobiphenyl (pen ta-CB), 2,3,3' ,4,4 ',5-hexachlo- robiphenyl (hexa-CB), and 2,2',3,4,5,6,6'-heptachlorobiphenyl (hepta-CB). Each congener was added individually and in com- bination with the other two congeners. Reductive dechlorination was observed after lag periods of 5, 3, and 4 months for the penta- CB, hexa-CB, and hepta-CB, respectively. The Sheboygan sedi- ment was spiked with three concentrations of 2,2',3,3',4,5,6,6'- octachlorobiphenyl (octa-CB). After a lag phase of 5 months, a decre,ase in the higher chlorinated congeners, including the added octa-CB, and a concurrent increase in the lower chlorinated congeners were observed in all the samples amended with the octa-CB, but not in the unspiked and autoclaved sterile controls. These preliminary data suggest the presence of actively dechlo- rinating microorganisms in the sediments from these three Great Lakes sites. Further research will include studies to determine the factors that will enhance the dechlorinating activity of these microorganisms. References 1. Hutzinger, 0., S. Safe, and V. Zitko. 1974. The Chem- istry of PCBs. CRC Press, Cleveland, Ohio. 2. Safe, S., L. Safe and M. Mullin. 1987. Polychlorinated biphenyls: environmental occurrence and analysis. In PCBs: Mammalian and Environmental Toxicology. Springer-Verlag. Heidelberg. 96 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Kalmaz, E.V. and G.D. Kalmaz. 1979. Rev. Ecol. Model. 6:223. Abramowitz, D .A. 1990. Crit. Rev. Biotechnol. 10:241. Johnston, L.E.1985.Environ. Health Pers. 60:339-346. Unterman, R. 1990. Aerobic biodegradation of PCBs. In Biological Remediation of Contaminated Sediments, with Special Emphasis on the GreatLakes,Jafvert, C.T. and E. Rogers, eds. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Athens, Georgia. Publication No. EP N600/9- 9 lft)() l. Bedard, D. L. and M. L. Haber!. 1990. Microb. Ecol. 20:87. Furukawa, K., N. Tomizuka, and A. Kamibayashi. 1979. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 38:301. Brown, J .F ., R.E. Wagner, D.L. Bedard, M.J. Brennan, J.C. Carnahan, RJ. May, and TJ. Tofflemire. 1984. Northeast Environ. Sci. 3: 167. 10. Quensen, J.F., J.M. Tiedje and S.A. Boyd. 1988. Sci- ence 242: 752. &EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development Washington, DC 20460 Bioremediation of Hazardous Wastes JUN 2 2 1994 E P A/600/R-92/126 August 1992 l -----~ I , ... ,..,-:,• , .. <:, ,., ! i,.' ~.,Jf-h;...: ~ :_;~, 1.'i!-.... -........ _' ... ··:~ .. ·-~-------- : ;, EP AJ&X)/R-92/126 August 1992 Bioremediation of Hazardous Wastes by Biosystems Technology Development Program Office of Research and Development U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Ada, OK; Athens, GA; Cincinnati, OH; Gulf Breeze, FL; and Research Triangle Park, NC @ Printed on Recycled Paper a w Fruk J. Moadello, .._,D, Mana1er, Bioremodiatioe Rwarch ProJram Eaviroamea&&I Laboratory 08/26/94 Dear Sharon, GE Corporate Research •nd Development Buildui, Kl, Room 3C7 P.O. Box I, Scbomcwly, NY 12301-0008 l'boae: 511317-7470; Fax: 511387-7611 Dial Comm: 1•&33-7470 s.-iJ ID: MoadolloOPCmailOl .c:rd.,e.com Here is a copy of the report on the samples we analyzed from the landfill. If you have any questions, please contact Dr. Donna Bedard, as I will be out of the office until September 8. Best Wishes, £/ Frank J. Mondello ,· .. Donna L. Bedard, Ph.D. Group Leeder Bioremediation Research Program Environmental Laboratory August 23, 1994 To: Frank Mondello GE Corporate Research and Development Building K1, Room 3B12 P.O. Box 8, Schenectedy, NY 12301-0008 Phone: 518 387-5914; Fax: 518 387-7611 Dial Comm: 8•833-5914 From: Donna L. Bedard, Ralph May, and Lynn Smullen Subject: Assessment of PCBs in North Carolina soil sample Two PCB-contaminated soil samples were received from the Division of Solid Waste managemenUSuperfund Section at the North Carolina Department of Environmental health and Natural Resources in Raleigh, North Carolina. These samples were labelled "W1 -002-LC 7 /28/94 landfill contents." We have extracted the PCBs, performed congener-specific analysis by GC/MS, and done a preliminary interpretation of the results . The PCB concentration in the two samples was approximately 315 to 340 µg/g soil. The PCBs appear to be composed primarily of unaltered Aroclor 1260, a lesser amount of partially dechlorinated Aroclor 1254, and a small amount of partially evaporated Aroclor 1242. This interpretation is based on limited data and a semiquantitative comparison of the congener distributions in Aroclors 1242, 1254, and 1260 with those in the samples received. This interpretation should therefore be considered tentative. A more conclusive interpretation would require more information regarding the nature of the PCB contaminant and history of the sample, rigorous quantitation and a mother-daughter analysis of presumptive dechlorination substrates and products. The mono-, di-, and trichlorobiphenyls present are typical of Aroclor 1242, but their relative proportions are altered relative to Aroclor 1242. With the exception of 26-3-CB and 25-3-CB, the proportions of all mono-through trichlorobiphenyls eluting prior to 25-4-CB and 24-4-CB are decreased relative to the latter congeners. This is most likely due to evaporation. There is no evidence of increased proportions of ortho- enriched congeners such as 2-CB, 2-2-CB, 26-2-CB, or 2-4-CB. However, the propor- tions of 26-3-CB and 25-3-CB are increased relative to 25-4-CB and 24-4-CB. Most likely the elevated levels of 26-3-CB and 25-3-CB result from partial dechlorination of Aroclor 1254. The tetra-and pentachlorobiphenyls appear to be derived from a combination of partially dechlorinated Aroclors 1254 and 1260. Peaks 47 (25-34-CB), 61 (236-34-CB), 53 (245-25-CB), and 69/5 (245-34-CB) are all notably decreased relative to Aroclor 1254, and have probably been dechlorinated. Peaks 31 (25-25-CB}, 32 (24-25-CB), Page -2- which are typical of Process H or Process P dechlorination, are notably increased. The tetrachlorobiphenyl 25-26-CB (peak 25) is also present. The latter congener is not a significant component of any Aroclor and is also indicative of dechlorination. It is probably derived from 236-245-CB (peak 69/6). The hexa-, hepta-, and octachlorobiphenyls are typical of unaltered Aroclor 1260. The dechlorinations can be summarized as follows: 25-34 236-34 234-245 236-245 245-245 ➔ 25-3 ➔ 26-34 ➔ 26-3 ➔ 245-24 ➔ 24-25 ➔ 236-25 ➔ 25-26 ➔ 245-25 ➔ 25-25 Thus the dechlorination appears to result from a limited para dechlorination similar to Process P. l -• f 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. Ken Ferruccio Route 2 Box 163J Norlina, NC 27563 Dear Ken : NA DEHNR April 7, 1995 Henry Lancaster indicated that you had asked for additional information about the PCB Landfill content sample that we recently collected and sent to the EPA Athens Laboratory. I am pleased to share this information with you. This effort began during the design of the July 1994 sampling event to characterize the landfill environment. One of the questions that needed an answer was, what had happened biologically to the contents of the landfill during the 13 years since closure of the landfill? I learned that much research was being conducted nationally on a method to dechlorinate PCBs in river sediments using natural anaerobic bacteria (i.e., bacteria that live only in a no-oxygen environment). While talking with key scientists in this field, they expressed strong interest in our site. Both the EPA Environmental Research Laboratory at Athens, GA and GE's Corporate R&D Laboratory requested samples of the wet contents of the PCB Landfill. The plan to provide those samples was included in the Final Sampling Plan for the July 1994 event. The samples were taken, delivered, analyzed, and a report provided to the state and to Pauline Ewald. Both laboratories confirmed that significant dechlorination of PCBs was occurring as a result of natural bacterial action in our sealed wet, anaerobic landfill. The reason for the scientific interest stems mainly from the fact that the Warren County Landfill with its trapped water and oxygen-free atmosphere is very similar to an undisturbed river sediment. They were enthusiastic because the PCB Landfill gave them an opportunity to extend their work to another similar environment, and the PCB Landfill to them represented a more than 10-year-old sealed "bioreactor." To document our contacts regarding the original samples and continuing discussions, I have included a number of items with this letter for your review. 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/ l 0% post-consumer paper Page 2, K. Ferruccio, 4f7/95 I believe that the Working Group and the state can be proud that it has the opportunity to be involved in this valuable scientific research, and that we can continue to explore potential applicability of the information as a possible detoxification method for the landfill -one that could be potentially be completed in situ, that is, with the PCB materials contained within the existing protective liner systems preventing accidental or process-caused releases. ~yours, Sharr~ Assistant Director Enclosures CC: Henry Lancaster Bill Meyer • I June 27. 1994 Dr. John Rogers EPA Environmental Research Laboratory 960 College Station Road Athens, GA 30605-2720 Dear John: Thanks so much for the excellent insight into anaerobic dechlorination. The materials you sent me, together with the literature that Dan Abramowicz provided has certainly confirmed the need for our continued investigation. I waited to thank you in writing until our citizen's working group had a opportunity to approve our draft workplan, so that I could provide you with a copy. We are currently fleshing this out into a pre-mobilization plan for their final approval on July 19. Hopefully, very soon after that date we will be sampling the PCB Landfill. We do, very much, wish to take you up on your offer to analyze a sample. I will be in touch shortly to plan any necessary logistics. EPAs interest in this project from both a research and a practical remediation perspective is very important to us. Very truly yours, Sharron Rogers Enclosure xc Bill Meyer !r706 546 3252 EPA-ATHE~S, G:\ UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY HO COLLEGE STATION ROAD ATHENS. GEORGIA 30605·2720 September 12, 1994 OPlJ()NI\. F('JAM 11!1 (7 ~ OFFICE OF RESEAl!C:H AND DEVELOPMENT Sharon Rogers FAX TRANSMITTAL State of North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural P.O. Box 27687 Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Dear Sharon, Or,>1.'Av"-'ocy (,, 0£ ff Ai tf l"no~'-;;t:i6 -S"l./l-1{6 8 Fu• 91,-71.S--:J{; oS F .... *706-.)r./t--g2..sl- NS\ 7S40~~·,·317•73iiii SOSS.·.:: C!\fPA. l;;t::~\11(;:::i AJM NS ~AT:;:;· Please find attached a preliminary report of congener specific PCB analy~s for the North Carolina (Warren County) landfill samples that we received on August 2, 1994. Although the report contains data from only one of the two samples, the results are essentially the same for both soil samples. Be advised that these results are preliminary and arc for re~ch purposes to assess the extent of PCB transformation in samples originally contaminated primarily with Aroclor 1260. The data have not been subjected to ri~orous statistical analyses and additional standards should be analyzc,d prior lo final congener identification or quantitalion. Also note that the extraction procedure used in this investigation (12 hour solvent shake) is a modification of the EPA sonication procedure. Results from this modified extraction procedure have been comparable to the extraction efficiency of both the Soxhlet and sonication methods approved by EPA. I will be available to discuss these preliminary results at your convenience. Sinccrfy yo~, µ, . I . J I ' I . \/ W.Jack Jones Ph.D. Research Microbiologist Athens Environmental Research Laboratory cc: Dr. Robert Swank (Director of Research,.AERL-US EPA) Dr. John Rogers (AERL-US EPA) Mr. Cun Fehn (Region 4-US EPA) 09 :13 :94 12:23 ~706 546 3252 EPA-.~THE'.'\S, GA Table 1. Results of congener specific PCB analyses (weight % determination; mean of triplicates) of a landfill soil sample (sample #2) collected in July 1994 from the Warren County PCB landfill, North Carolina. Coniener specific PCB analyses of Aroclor 1260, as reported by Schultz et al. (1989), arc also presented for reference. The differences in the wei&ht ~ of congeners in the N.C. sample and that reported by Schultz are presented. · ~002 The weight ,E, values calculated for the PCB congeners from the N.C. sample were based on a standard PCB con1ener mix consisting of Aroclors 1232, 1248, and 1262 (2.5: 1.8: 1.8). Results indicate a decrease in the weight % of some higher chlorinated PCB congeners, compared to lhe PCB congener profile of Schultz et al. (1989) for Aroclor 1260, and an incre.ase in the weight % of some lower chlorinated PCB congeners. Some specific examples are as follows, and the decreases in the specific congeners listed below indicate a pan.em in which meta chlorines are removed if flanked by either ortho or para chlorines. This type of dechlorination pattern (pattern N) is similar to lhal observed by Quensen et al. (1990) and Bedard ct al. (1990), but other dechlorination scenarios must not be ruled out at thh time. Congener Decrease Congener Increase 22'455' (#101) 22'45' (#49) 22'34'5'6 (#149) 22'34'6 (#91) 22'46' (#51) 233'44'6 (#158) 24'6 (#32) 22'344'5' (#138) 22'44' (#47) 22'33'44'5 (#170) " Other dechlorination patterns are possible, as the preliminary results suggest significant decreases in congeners #179, I 153, #132, and #136. Refercoc.cs &dard, D.L., H. Van Dort, S.C. Bunnell. 1990. General Electric Company Research and Development Program for the De.ffl'llCtion of PCBs, Ninth Progress Report. General .cl.ectric Corporate Research and Development, Schenectady, New York. Quensen, 1.F., m, S.A Boyd, J.M. Tiedje. 1990. Appl. Environ. Microbial. 56:236().2369. Schulz, D.E., G. Petrick, J.C. Duinker. 1989. Environ. Sci. Tcchnol. 23:852-857. 09 113,94 12:24 !ri06 546 3252 EP.-\-.'t.THE~S.G.-\ ~003 NC#2J<LS Schulz I NC#2 , Ar 1260 • ~.c.,, c,.. j, D. WPAC# Wt% Wt% jdifforcnc .. (!) ! 3.739 01 3.739 ? (3) I 0.22R 0 0.228 (4.10) i O.<>-M o! 0.044 ···: o; . (7.!I) CJ.CJ:21 0.021 (6) i 0.J63 0 0.16J z,1/ ~,'I' -. (5,8) 0.604 OI 0.604 __ , (19) fl.39(1 0 0.390 (12, 13) (J/,02 ol 0.002 "rt1j 2 :i's (15.18) 0.68U 01 0.680 (17) 0.445 oi 0.445 ('2◄, 2T) 0.012 Q. 0.012 .;,~'~/ .21/'t -(16, 32) 0.707 0 0.707 (J', 54) 0.005 oi 0.005 (29) 0.001 0 0.001 (lli) 0.407 01 0.407 J. I (2.~ 0.117 I 0 0,117 .:z t/'S" Ql) O.R:5~ 0.05 0.804 2'1'1/-"l-'2,''if (28, 50) 1.468 0.05 1.418 .. (l0,21,.13,.~) l.U-41 0 1.041 ¥ )._ Z?'/'/ 22,.•'f,' 0 -(22, Sl) 0.791 I 0.7!J I -it ~tr' Ir ., .I (4SJ 0.129 0 0.12!il ,J~ ,1seS 1 1,,iP (◄Ci) 0.072 ! .. -01 0.072 • "' t ,,. J&r (43, !2. 73) 2.2fJ7 0.56 1.647 --- A{6 J 2z.'t1-S' ( .. ,, 3.333 O' 3.333 .ti' ¥1 s~ t, .Z~''l'I-' .. 0.! 1 I 1 ('67) 0.633 0.523 .. , ... 75,.) 0.027 0.09 -0.063 (35) 0.000 O: 0.000 22'3s'/22.'"''' -(-M, 10,f) 0.7l4 O' 0.754 ... (37,-42, 59) 0.742 0 0.742 'I:' cu,M,11,12) I 0.684 0.14 ! 0.544 ~ ····1 ~ I 0.079 0 : 0.079 f (40) I 0 I?.? or 0.127 (57.67, JOO, 1• O.l!H 0 0.193 . I ! (58,63) 0.03<1 0 0.03* - (74, 94) · I o.:n4 01 0.334 (61, 70, 7~ 0.878 0.09 0.788 ~ (66. 93, 95) 3.SOl!t 3.04 i 0.468 / J ' -(,-A.~tt $ Je.v ,'ttfi'-._ f~ .. I 09 113194 12:24 ,C-i06 546 3252 EPA-ATHE~S.GA · ~004 NC#2.XLS (55. '1, '6) I 0,427 i O: 0.427 - I I 1----4 (56.6()) ·I o.647 -·0 1 o.64, . . , .. ~:_!2,155) i -~-956 -~ 1.15 : -0.194 {PO. 101) I 1.404 I 5.98 -4.576 ~ · ·· i u.'.\4~ 1 0.11 : · · oN ---------------~ (112,119,150 U.177 0 0.177 {'13,109) i ().119 0 0.119 (16. 'J7, 152) 0.131 0.23 : -0.099 (11,17,Jll,JI! 0.271 0.82 -0.549 @ ~>-·-,.1--o.-01e-6--+-1 ---o=----0-.-086-.-f (136) i 0 . .527 2.23 . -1. 703 @ S!..'• 1_1...:;o)_ .... : __ 1._104 __ .,..1 1 ___ 1_.e..,.: __ -o_.796 (12) I 0.046 ; 0 : 0.046 -0.378 -0.366 -2.435@ -2.921@ (141) 0.248 zz. ':u' s ''' -(17,) u.:m 1.79 -1.506 ~ ""'(1_3_,,_1_1,.;...) ~ __ o_.46_2 ____ 1_._0_1 _. __ -o_._5_48~ '\ • C1:J¥.160,163'. ,.662 : e.1s: -o.s1s :(1=~=)=======0=.4=2=4=:1:==~-1-.9-5-+-,----1.526(], ) c~ 12!1) 0.118 I 1.1, 1 .• -o.992 (178) 0.93.S 1.62' .:0.635 ® (175) : 0.170 ! 0.23 -· ·:.o.060 _,/ ~---· ·-· ·--· --r ···-·-------l (11tl., 1>1'7) I :UJ~ ! 3.97 -0.1~4 1-'---'------•-·--•------l (121) ! 0000 1.06. -l.060 I--'-_;_---------------·-(llD) 1.951 I 1.76: 0.191 (167) 0.104 0.26 -0.156 (ll5'J . _ 0.439 ____ ...,,1,....34,,..,,.+ __ .(_!_.9<_l_,.jl (174, _ll_l)~...--2_.n_s _~ ___ 3_.8_5...:.... __ -0_. %---',5 (177) 1.795 2.21 -0.4 I 5 (1S6. l71) ' 1.630 i 2.38 -0.750 (202) i 0.049 : 0.9 -0.851 --· ---------.1,....---i-------' (173) i 0.059 0.36 : -0.301 ~!.21M) I 0.311 0.99 1 1 ~.679 (171. 192) 0.647 0.75 -0.103 .. ..... -- (180) 7.36! 7.12 : 0.241 (193) D.488 0.66 -0.172 (191) 0.117 0.25 -0,063 ·--------~~---~ (199) 0.l◄i 0.05 I 0.098 (170, DUl.') 4,m I 3.91 0,241 (190) ' i 0.991 1 0.79! 0.201 Page2 .. 12 :16 :94 08 :52 '5'i06 546 3252 EPA-.<THE~S.G.< ~ . 14)001 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY 960 COLLEGE STATION ROAD ATHENS. GEORGIA 30605-2720 Deceµ1ber 16, 1994 Sharon Rogers State of North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources P.O. Box 27687 Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Dear Sharon, OFFIC:E O~ RESEARCH .lNl:I DEVELOPMENT Per our telephone conversation on Dec. 12, this is a requesl Lo obtain from you PCB contaminated soil/sediment from the Warren County PCB Landfill for our use in the isolation of PCB dechlorinating microorganisms. We are currently investigating biological and physicochemical factors that affect PCB dechlorination in contaminated ~iments and would like to expand the number of PCB contaminated sites that we are investigating. Further, the Warren County Landfill site is of interest to us because of the age of lhe sile and the nature of the. contaminant (pre.dominantly Aroclor 1260). At your convenience (but as soon as possible), we would appreciate receiving 2 to 4 quart size containers of the PCB contaminated material for our use in laboratory studies. We ask that the sample c.ontainers (whatever the si.1..e) be completely fi11ed with the soil/sediment material to reduce the exposure of the sample to air. Further, samples that are •wet" or moist are preferable, but we will gladly receive any contaminated sample. The material may be shipped to me at the following address: Dr. W. J. Jones US EPA Alhens Environmental Research lab 960 College Station Rd. Athens, GA 30605 I thank you in advance for the collection of the samples and l wiJl certainly keep you informe.d of the progress of our research efforts. Sincerely:ffeo rs, /1 ~ t__ . I /I ,w:' Jack ~ones Ph .D. Research Microbiologist Athens Environment.al Research Laboratory ·--·-·· ·------------- OPT,ONA.. l"QAM ~~ (7•90; FAX T RA N S M ITT A L ~ ~, p~g~s ► I . f 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 NA DEHNR MEMO December 20, 1994 TO: Henry Lancaster FROM : Sharron Rogers.:1cz-lL SUBJECT: EPA Athens Laboratory request for additional sample from Warren County PCB Landfill contents for dechlorination experiments Without objection, please be advised that the Division intends to supply the requested sample to Dr. Jones and his colleagues at the US EPA Environmental Research Laboratory at Athens, GA. See attached request. Their work would be an extension of their earlier analyses that showed in situ anaerobic bacterial dechlorination of PCBs is occurring in the interior of the landfill. We will be collecting and shipping, by appropriate methods, the requested material as soon after the first of the year as a sampling event can be scheduled. xc : Bill Meyer 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 Proposed PCB Biodegradation Study at The Sheboygan River Confined Treatment Facility John Rogers, Jack Jones, and 'Eric Weber U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Athens, GA and Rebecca Adams TAI Athens, GA The primary objective of the proposed field demonstration study at the Sheboygan River Confined Treatment Facility (CTF) is to examine the effects of alternating aerobic and anaerobic conditions, with and without the addition of inorganic nutrients, on the rate and extent of PCB biotransfonnation under simulated field conditions. Collecting data under conditions that closely resemble a large-scale treatment of PCBs will provide valuable infonnation regarding the correlation oflaboratocy and field data and the development of scenarios for enhanced bioremediation. The selection of treatment designs for the Sheboygan River CTF has been based, in part, on the outcome of laboratory bench- scale studies in the context of engineering feasibility. Two potential treatments, inoculation with acclimated organisms and augmentation with organic amendments, have not been demon- strated to enhance significantly the rate of dechlorination of PCBs in bench-scale laboratory studies. Addition of inorganic nutrients, however, is considered beneficial for enhancing micro- bial activity. Other strategies still under consideration are those designed to increase the physical-chemical availability of PCBs bound to sediments, including the addition of surfactants, and the application of aerobic/anaerobic cycling. Surfactants may in- crease the availability of "bound" PCBs to microorganisms, but identifying a surfactant that is nontoxic and not a preferred substrate for microbial growth is a challenging problem. Thus, surfactant treatment is not considered to be a viable option at this time. Aerobic/anaerobic cycling is currently the most promising treatment option and merits trial at the field scale. During the aerobic phase, the bioavailability of PCBs may be enhanced through the degradation of naturally occwTing organic com- pounds as well as contaminants such as oil and grease, all of which are known to bind PCBs. Further, biphenyl and lower chlorinated PCB congeners, primarily mono-and di-chlorinated PCBs,aredegradedpreferentiallyu~1deraerobicconditions(l,2). Thus, an aerobic treatment phase contributes to more complete 51 biodegradation. tJ)aerobic conditions favor the biotransfonna- Ji_on_of the m{)re highly chlorinatecf PCB congeners, e.g., 6, 7, and 8 chlorines, _thr9u_gh red_uqi'>:'.~-=-d~~hlorination reactions (3,4), producing lower chlorinated products.amenable to aerobic at- Jaek. Taken together, the alternating aerobic/anaerobic scheme seems promising for more extensive bioremediation of PCBs (5). This scenario is supported by preliminary laboratory studies indicating that aerobic/anaerobic cycling reduces the concentra- tion of both higher and lower chlorinated PCBs. Furthennore, we have recent evidence of or/ho-dechlorination of lower chlori- nated congeners in lab-scale, aerobic/anaerobic cycling experi- ments, an observation not often cited. The aerobic/anaerobic field experiments will be conducted for a minimum of 1 year and perhaps for 2 years to provide sufficient time for potentially significant in situ bioremediation. Anaerobic conditions will be established by natural means; that is, no externally added source of oxygen will be provided to the CTF during this phase of the treatment Sediments will be aerated by pumping soluble oxidants, such as peroxides or oxygen-satu- rated water, into the CTF. Oxidant addition can be maje either directly through the existing distribution piping system or to the CIF outflow liquid in a recycle fashion. · The effectiveness of either strategy will depend on the nature of dispersion of the added oxidant and its conswnption within the sediments. Tracer studies have.been proposed to test dispersion from the upflow nutrient distribution piping system. Results from that study are necessary to determine the adequacy of the existing distribution system for oxygen addition in the aerobic cycle. Oxidants under consideration include hydrngen peroxide and oxygen-saturated cold water. In the event the currently existing plumbing should be inadequate for the distribution of oxidant, flow and distribution of the oxidant could be augmented by sinking wells at points oflow flow and pumping or withdraw- ing interstitial fluids. Detennination of the optimum cycle times for the system to be operated under aerobic and anaerobic conditions will have two components: the time required for the transition from anaerobic to aerobic conditions and vice versa. and the time required within each regime for the desired extent of PCB transformation. Indi- cators of aerobic status may include direct measurement of oxygen levels in liquid outflows and interstitial sediment fluids or such indirect measures as chemical oxygen demand (COD) or total soluble carbon of sediment samples. Adequate aeration would be expected to lower the soluble organic content of sediments. Sampling procedures will be designed to detect flow pro~l~ms such as channeling/short-circuiting. References 1. Bedard, D.L. and M.L. Habewrl. 1990. Microb. Ecol. 20:87-102. 52 2. 3. 4. 5. Furukawa, K., N. Tomizuka, and Kamibayashi. 1979. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 38:301-310. Brown, J.F., R.E. Wagner, D.L. Bedard, MJ. Brennan, J.C. Carnahan, RJ. May, and TJ. Tofflemire. 1984. Northeast Environ. Sci. 3: 167-179. Quensen, J.F., J.M. Tiedje, and S.A. Boyd. 1988. Sci- ence 242:752-754. Unterman, R. 1990. Anaerobic biodegradation of PCBs. In Biological Remediation of Contaminated Sediments, with Special Emphasis on the_Great Lakes, C.T. Jafvert and J.E. Rogers, eds. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Athens, Georgia Publication no. EP N600/9- 9 lft)() l. Decontamination of PCB-Contaminated Sediments Through the Use of Bioremediation Technologies Daniel A. Wubah University of Georgia Athens, GA and W. Jack Jones and John E. Rogers U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Athens, GA Polychlorinated bi phenyl (PCB) congeners are relatively inert, stable to oxidation and heat, and have high viscosities, high refractive indices, low vapor pressures, high hydrophobicities, and excellent dielectric characteristics. As a result of these properties. PCBs were used in a variety of industrial applications, including organic diluents, plasticizers, hydraulic fluids, heat exchange and transfer fluids, solvent extenders, and microscope immersion oils (1 ). Some of these properties also contributed to their accumulation in soils. various elements of the food chain, and sediments of streams, lakes and estuaries (2). During the past two decades, concern has increased with respect to the eco- toxicological and human implications of the accumulation of PCBs (3, 4). In 1971, PCBs were restricted to closed systems in the United States. Eight years later, a total ban on their manufac- ture and use was ordered by the Congress. Residual contamina- tion of PCBs continues to be a problem, however, particularly along the banks of the Great Lakes where PCBs were used. Pollution control agencies have launched a concerted effort to reduce the levels of accumulated PCBs in the environment because of their persistence, toxicity, and tendency to bioconcentrate. Polychlorinated biphenyls can be transformed into less harmful compounds by both chemical and physical methods, e.g., ultraviolet radiation, microwave treatment, supercritical water processes, and incineration (5). However, microbial degradation appears to offer the most cost-efficient method of reducing levels of PCBs in contaminated sediments. Consequently, the coupling of anaerobic dechlorination to aero- bic metabolism has been suggested as a possible method to reduce the levels of accumulated PCBs in the environment. Results from bench-scale studies suggest that PCBs can be biodegraded by both aerobic and anaerobic microbial processes (4, 6). Aerobic bacteria usually degrade congeners with one to five chlorine atoms, but not the higher chlorine-substituted congeners. However, the rate and extent of degradation are influenced by the position of the chlorine atoms on the bi phenyl ring (7, 8). For example, congeners with open 2,3-or 3,4- positions are degraded faster than congeners with chlorine atoms at these positions. These sites are necessary for the attachment of a dioxygenase enzyme to effect the fission of the biphenyl ring. Several bacterial strains that can biodegrade PCBs aerobically have been isolated from enrichments of soils and sediments from contaminated sites. These strains vary in their abilities to degrade PCBs; some degrade only mono-. di-, and trichlorobiphenyls, and others degrade tetra-and pentachlorobiphenyls (7). Anaero- bic reductive dechlorination of PCBs was first proposed by Brown and coworkers (9). Later reports from laboratory studies provided unequivocal evidence that reductive dechlorination could occur in anaerobic sediments (10). Microorganisms that are capable of anaerobic dechlorination often degrade the highly · chlorinated PCB congeners, put not the less chlorinated conge- ners and the biphenyl nucleus (4). There is also a preferential removal of chlorine from the para and meta positions. The products of anaerobic dechlorination, therefore, are mainly ortho- substituted and have fewer chlorine atoms on the biphenyl ring. Such congeners are less toxic and may serve as substrates for aerobic dechlorinating bacteria (10). 95 The objective of this study is to determine the dechlorinating capacity of PCB-contaminated sediments from selected Great Lakes sites. The dechlorination of indigenous PCB congeners in sediment from the Saginaw River was determined under aerobic conditions. The initial chromatographic profile of Saginaw sedi- ment indicated a preponderance of congeners with one to four chlorine atoms, which suggests that the original Aroclor mixture had been transformed. An additional aerobic incubation for 6 months resulted in a further net loss in the concentration of total congeners reported to be amenable to aerobic degradation. These congeners include4-chlorobiphenyl, 2;2 '4-trichlorobiphenyl (tri- CB), 2,4',5-tri-CB, 2,4,4'-tri-CB, 3,4,4'-tri-CB, 2,3',5',6- tetrachlorobiphenyl (tet-CB), and 2,2'.3,4'-tet-CB. Sediments collected from the Ashtabula River and the Sheboygan Harbor and bay area were incubated under anaerobic conditions. The Ashtabula sediment was spiked with 2,3,3',4,4'- pentachlorobiphenyl (pen ta-CB), 2,3 ,3' ,4,4',5-hexachlo- robiphenyl (hexa-CB). and 2,2',3,4,5,6,6'-heptachlorobiphenyl (hepta-CB). Each congener was added individually and in com- bination with the other two congeners. Reductive dechlorination was observed after lag periods of 5, 3, and 4 months forthe penta- CB, hexa-CB, and hepta-CB, respectively. The Sheboygan sedi- ment was spiked with three concentrations of 2,2',3,3',4,5,6,6'- octachlorobiphenyl (octa-CB). After a lag phase of 5 months, a deer~ in the higher chlorinated congeners, including the added octa-CB, and a concurrent increase in the lower chlorinated congeners were observed in all the samples amended with the octa-CB, but not in the unspiked and autoclaved sterile controls. These preliminary data suggest the presence of actively dechlo- rinating microorganisms in the sediments from these three Great Lakes sites. Further research will include studies to determine the factors that will enhance the dechlorinating activity of these microorganisms. References 1. Hutzinger, 0., S. Safe, and V. Zitko. 1974. The Chem- istry of PCBs. CRC Press. Cleveland. Ohio. 2. Safe, S .. L. Safe and M. Mullin. 1987 . Polychlorinated biphenyls: environment.al occurrence and analysis. In PCBs: Mammalian and Environmental Toxicology. Springer-Verlag. Heidelberg. 96 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Kalmaz, E.V. and G.D. Kalmaz. 1979. Rev. Ecol. Model. 6:223. Abramowitz, D .A. 1990. Crit. Rev. Biotechnol. 10:241. Johnston. L.E. 1985. Environ. Health Pers. 60:339-346. Unterman, R. 1990. Aerobic biodegradation of PCBs. In Biological Remediation of Contaminated Sediments, with Special Emphasis on the GreatLakes,Jafvert, C.T. and E. Rogers, eds. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Athens, Georgia Publication No. EP N600/9- 9l,,001. Bedard. D. L. and M. L. Haber!. 1990. Microb. Ecol. 20:87. Furukawa, K., N. Tomizuka, and A. Kamibayashi. 1979. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 38:301. Brown, J.F., R.E. Wagner, D.L. Bedard, M.J. Brennan, J.C. Carnahan, RJ. May. and TJ. Tofflemire. 1984. Northeast Environ. Sci. 3:167. 10. Quensen, J.F., J.M. Tiedje and S.A. Boyd. 1988. Sci- ence 242: 752. 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 .RA DEHNR MEMO December 20, 1994 TO: Henry Lancaster FROM: Sharron Rogers.fqiL -- SUBJECT: EPA Athens Laboratory request for additional sample from Warren County PCB Landfill contents for dechlorination experiments Without objection, please be advised that the Division intends to supply the requested sample to Dr. Jones and his colleagues at the US EPA Environmental Research Laboratory at Athens, GA. See attached request. Their work would be an extension of their earlier analyses that showed in situ anaerobic bacterial dechlorination of PCBs is occurring in the interior of the landfill. We will be collecting and shipping, by appropriate methods, the requested material as soon after the first of the year as a sampling event can be scheduled. xc: Bill Meyer P.O. Box 27 687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27 6 11-7 687 Telephone 919-733-4996 FAX 919-715-3605 An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ l 0% post-consumer paper 12/16/94 OS :52 '6'706 546 3252 EPA-ATHENS.GA ~ UNITED STATES ENYIRONMEN1AL PR01ECTION AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY 960 COLLEGE STATION ROAD ATHENS, GEORGIA 30605-2720 14!001 December 16, 1994 OFFICE Or ' RESEARCH ANP DEVELOPMENT Sharon Rogers State of North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources P.O. Box 27687 Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Dear Sharon, Per our telephone conversation on Dec. 12, this is a re.quesl Lo obtain from you PCB contaminated soil/sediment from the Warren County PCB Landfill for our use in the isolation of PCI3 dechlorinating microorganisms. We are currently investigating biological and physicochemical factors that affect PCB dechlorination in contaminated sediments and would like to expand the number of PCB contaminated sites that we are investigating. Further, the Warren County landfill site is of interest to us because of the age of the site and the nature of the contaminant (pre.dominantly Aroclor 1260). At your convenience (but as soon as possible), we would appreciate receiving 2 to 4 quart size containers of the PCB contaminated material for our use in laboratory studies. We ask that the sample containers (whatever the size) be completely filled with the soil/sediment material to re.duce the exposure of the sample to air. Further, samples tl1at are "wet" or moist are preferable, but we will gladly receive any contaminated sample. The material may be shipped to me at the following address: Dr. W. J. Jones US EPA Athens Environmental Research Lab 960 College Station Rd. Athens, GA 30605 I thank you in advance for the collection of the samples and l will certainly keep you informed of the progress of our research efforts. Sincerelyfo rs, l) )Id L__. .' / I V/ Jack ones Ph.D. Research Microbiologist Athens Environmental Research Laboratory --·-······· ··------------ OPTIONAL f QRM 99 (7-90) FAX T RA N S M ITT A L II ul pages ► / NSN 7540-01-317-7361:! GF-~io:RAL SERVICES ADMINISTnATIO~ 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 TO: Dr. Jack Jones FROM: Sharron Rogers Jl?!·;l\ -s:wwws -a a a DEHNR December 12, 1994 SUBJECT: Copy of GE's report on sample of contents of Warren County PCB Landfill A copy of the report from GE of their congener determination of the contents of the Warren County PCB Landfill is attached, along with a copy of my business card. Thank you for your continuing interest and support in our management of this facility. We look forward to getting the details of your request from your post-doctoral student who is studying bacterial dechlorination pathways in PCB-contaminated soils. 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/ l 0% post-consumer paper '1~, 571?- Jflo '?'--- ~ ~f. ~ 5ZS-L ~p.,~f ~J -~ ~ 3~-f/d:/ . r-h> ~ ~ r-~4- 57> ~. - Lf'f 3 //;n,,_ ,/;:r-.J? <?eds---- ~c-. /WI. ~ ~ ~ . ~~ ~£cl) - ~~~~dr ~ . ~-~~ . . ~~t~~ t 09 /J.3/94 12:23 fi'706 546 3252 EPA-ATHENS.GA UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY 960 COLLEGE ST A TION ROAD ATHENS, GEORGIA 30605·2'720 141001 September 12~ 1994 OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT Sharon Rogers State of North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural P.O. Box 27687 Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Dear Sharon, l)i>T10NAI FOAM ~ (7 !il!lj FAX TRANSMITTAL c~pl.lAg~rlC~ G D£ If Ai ti ~non.~6 -.S-l/-o'-s'/6 8 F.u # '11 ~ -7 Is--36 0 S' f;,,x #70 6 -.)c/6-5 2. s-2. NSN 7540~0-i•217•73GS 5099-101 GENERAL t;t:rlVlvl::S AUMIN:STRATIC1 Please find attached a preliminary report of congener specific PCB analyses for the North Carolina (Warren County) landfill samples that we received on August 2, 1994. Although the report contains data from only one of the two samples, the results are essentially the same for both soil samples. Be advised that these results are preliminary and are for research purposes to assess the extent of PCB transformation in samples originally contaminated primarily with Aroclor 1260. The data have not be.en subjected to rigorous statistical analyses and additional standards should be analyzed prior lo final congener identification or quantitalion. Also note that the extraction procedure used in this investigation (12 hour solvent shake) is a modification of the EPA sonication procedure. Results from this modified extraction proc~ure have been comparable to the extraction efficiency of both the Soxhlet and sonication methods approved by EPA. I will be available to discuss these preliminary results at your convenience. Sincer,.f y yours, P;~ I : LI W.J'ack Jones Ph.D. Research Microbiologist Athens Environmental Research Laboratory cc: Dr. Robert Swank (Director of Research, AERL-US EPA) Dr. John Rogers (AERL-US EPA) Mr. Curt Fehn (Region 4-US EPA) 09 ,)3/94 12:23 '5'706 5-16 3252 EPA-ATHENS.GA Table 1. Results of congener specific PCB analyses (weight % determination; mean of triplicates) of a landfill soil sample (sample #2) collecled in July 1994 from the Warren County PCB landfill, North Carolina. Congener spe.cific PCB analysc.s of Aroclor 1260~ as reported by Schultz et al. (1989), are also presented for reference. The differences in the weight % of congeners in the N.C. sample and that reported by Schultz are presented. The weight % values c.alculated for the PCB congeners from the N.C. sample were based on a standard PCB congener mix consisting of Aroclors 1232, 1248, and 1262 (2.5: 1.8: 1.8). Results indicate a decrease in the weight % of some higher chlorinated PCB congenersJ compared to lhe PCB congener profile of Schultz et al. (1989) for Aroclor 1260, and an increase in the weight % of some lower chlorinated PCB congeners. Some specific eu.mples arc as follows, and the decreases in the specific congeners listed below indicate a pattern in which meta chlorines are removed if flanked by either onho or para chlorines. This type of dechlorination pattern (pattern N) is similar to lhal observed hy Quensen er al. (1990) and Bedard et al. (1990), but other dechlorination scenarios must not be ruled out at this time. Congener Deere.as~ Congener Incre.ase 221455' (#101) 22'45' (#49) 22'34'5'6 (#149) 22'34'6 (#91) 22'461 (#51) 233'44'6 (#158) 24'6 (#32) 22'344'5' (#138) 22'44' (#47) 22'33'44'5 (#170) " Other dechlorination patterns are possible, as the preliminary results suggest significant decreases in congeners #179, # 153, #132, and #136. References Bedard, D.L., H. Van Dort, S.C. Bunnell. 1990. General Electric Company Research and Development Program for the Destruction of PCBs, Ninth Progress Report. General . .Electric Corporate Research and Development, Schenectady, New York. Quensen, J.F., ID, S.A Boyd, J.M. Tiedje. 1990. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 56:2360r2369. Schulz, D.E .. G. Petrick, J.C. Duinker. 1989. Environ. Sci. Technol. 23:852-857. ~002 09 ;13194 12:24 '5'706 546 3252 EPA-ATHENS.GA ~003 NC#2J<LS Schulz .. ·- NC#2 Ar1260 .. llJPAC # Wt% Wt% difference -- .. (1) 3.739 0 3.739 -· (3) 0.22R 0 0.228 -- (4.10) O.O•M 0 0.044 -· ... ·- (7, !>) 0.011 0 0.021 -· - (6) 0.163 0 0.163 -.... (S, 8) 0.604 0 0.604 -·· (19) 0.390 0 0.390 -.. - (12, 13) ()(J1)2 0 0.002 ... ·- (15, 18) 0.68U 0 o.68n •..... ·- (17) 0.445 0 0.445 (2◄, 21) 0.012 0 0.012 (16, 32) 0.707 0 0.707 ()4,54) o.oo~ 0 ll.1105 (l9) 0.001 0 0.001 ...... (l6) 0.407 0 0.407 ·•· (25) 0.117 0 0.117 :Z "IS" ~1) 0.R5'1 0.05 0.804 2'11'/-2--"J,'¥6 (28, 50) l.468 0.05 1.418 - (lO,lt,ll,.~) 1.041 0 1,()41 211/'/ 22.'"ft' -('22, Sl) 0.791 0 0.791 (45) 0.12? 0 0.1W ..__ (46) 0.072 0 0.072 ··•-•·• ·• 1.6-fi. (43, 52, 73) '2.'207 0.56 ( .. ') 3.333 0 3.333 .. (47) 0.633 0.11 0.523 ... -0.06J° (4~ 75,) 0.027 0.09 .. ··- (JS) 0.000 0 0.000 .... .., (+I, 11H) 0.7:i4 0 0.754 (37,◄l, 59) 0.742 0 0,742 ··- (41,64.,71,72) 0.684 0.14 0.544 .... ~. (~) ll.07!J 0 0.079 .... ... - (40) 0 ,,.., 0 0.127 .. ··•- (57, 6'!, 100, 11 0.1~~ 0 0.193 0.034 0 0.034 (58,63) --- (74, 94) 0.'.B4 0 0.334 --(61, 70, 7ti) 0.878 0.09 0.788 ·•--(66, 93, 95) 3.508 3.041 0.468 -(,--.~{cs J.ev,·1r-h'IIY\, f(h,. n .• _/~~ l'JLr. 1/ii,(1,,r n1 09 /13/94 12:24 '5'706 546 3252 EPA-ATHENS.GA l, J 3 It/ r/z 2 I J "j I f' , - zi•'l'l'SS' .zz. '33' S '' ' _ NC#2.XLS (55, 91, !)8) I 0.427 (56, 60) 0.647 -··· (84, 92, 155) 0.9S6 . __ ,.._ ->- (90,101) 1.404 -'--·· ·- (99) 0.~4ll (112,119,150 0.177 ('BJ, 109) 0.119 (86, 97, 152) 0.131 (lil,87,111,W 0.271 ---·· (85,11,) 0.0&6 ----(136") 0.527 (17,110) 1.104 ..;...,. (82) 0.046 (151) 4.144 (124,135) 1.lll8 -------·· (107,108,147) 0.045 -····--(1_116. l _J~. l~\I 4.837 (J 14., lJ.4, 1.0. 0.2,~ ·---(ll2, 131, 142. 0.082 -·---.. (146, J61) 1.124 (!OS, 132) J.32!1 (153) 7.fn7 •·•,,-......... ·-· (141) 2.808 (17!1) U.284 (137,176) 0.462 (138, 160, 163 .S.662 (1511) 0.424 (1~ 12!)) 0.118 (178) 0.98S (175) U.170 ····-· ·--· ·-·· cun, 1"7) :u<J6 ··--• (12H) 0.000 (1113) 1.951 (167) 0.104 (J8SJ 0.4.39 -·· .. (174,181) 2.885 (177) 1.795 (156. 171) 1.6JO (211:Z) 0.049 -: ..... (173) 0.059 (200,204) 0.311 (171,192) 0.647 --••·-..... (180) ?.361 (193) 0.488 (191) 0.1&7 (199) 0.148 (170, DlJC) 4.1,1 (190) 0.991 Page2 0 0.427 -·· .. 0 0.647 · 1.1s .. -0.194 5.98 -4,.576 .. 0.11 0.438 0 0,177 0 0.119 0.23 -0.099 0.82 -0 549 0 0,086 2.23 -1.703 1.9 --0.796 0 0.046 3.67 0.474 2.56 -0.742 0 0.045 8.4 -3.563 0.62 -0.362 0.46 1 -0.378 1.491 --0.366 --··· ·•· 3.76 -2.435 10.8 -2.921 ·2.56 0.248 1.79 -1.506 1.01 --0.548 6.18 --0.518 1.95 -1.526 ··--1.11 --0.992 ·• 1.62 -0,635 0.23 -·•··--0.060 3.97 -0,154 1.06 -1.060 ·--1.76 0.191 0.26 --0.156 1.34 -0.901 . 3.85 -0,965 2.21 -0.415 2.38 -0,150 0.9 --0.851 0.36 -0.301 0.99 -0.679 ···-0.75 -0,103 7.12 0.241 0.66 ..(J,I'72 0.25 -0,063 0.05 0,098 3.91 0.241 0.79 0.201 Frank J. Mondello, Ph.D. Manager, Bioremediation Research Program Environmental Laboratory 08/26/94 Dear Sharon, GE Corporate Research and Development Building Kl, Room 3C7 P.O. Box 8, Schenectady, NY 12301-0008 Phone: 518 387-7470; Fax: 518 387-7611 Dial Comm: 8*833-7470 E-mail ID: Mondello@PCmailOl .crd.ge.com Here is a copy of the report on the samples we analyzed from the landfill. If you have any questions, please contact Dr. Donna Bedard, as I will be out of the office until September 8. Best Wishes, ~ Frank J. Mondello Donna L. Bedard, Ph.D. Group Leader Bioremediation Research Program Environmental Laboratory August 23, 1994 To: Frank Mondello GE Corporate Research and Development Building K1, Room 3B12 P.O. Box 8, Schenectady, NY 12301-0008 Phone: 518 387-5914; Fax: 518 387-7611 Dial Comm: 8 • 833-5914 From: Donna L. Bedard, Ralph May, and Lynn Smullen Subject: Assessment of PCBs in North Carolina soil sample Two PCB-contaminated soil samples were received from the Division of Solid Waste managemenUSuperfund Section at the North Carolina Department of Environmental health and Natural Resources in Raleigh, North Carolina. These samples were labelled "W1-002-LC 7/28/94 landfill contents." We have extracted the PCBs, performed congener-specific analysis by GC/MS, and done a preliminary interpretation of the results. The PCB concentration in the two samples was approximately 315 to 340 µg/g soil. The PCBs appear to be composed primarily of unaltered Aroclor 1260, a lesser amount of partially dechlorinated Aroclor 1254, and a small amount of partially evaporated Aroclor 1242. This interpretation is based on limited data and a semiquantitative comparison of the congener distributions in Aroclors 1242, 1254, and 1260 with those in the samples received. This interpretation should therefore be considered tentative. A more conclusive interpretation would require more information regarding the nature of the PCB contaminant and history of the sample, rigorous quantitation and a mother-daughter analysis of presumptive dechlorination substrates and products. The mono-, di-, and trichlorobiphenyls present are typical of Aroclor 1242, but their relative proportions are altered relative to Aroclor 1242. With the exception of 26-3-CB and 25-3-CB, the proportions of all mono-through trichlorobiphenyls eluting prior to 25-4-CB and 24-4-CB are decreased relative to the latter congeners. This is most likely due to evaporation. There is no evidence of increased proportions of ortho- enriched congeners such as 2-CB, 2-2-CB, 26-2-CB, or 2-4-CB. However, the propor- tions of 26-3-CB and 25-3-CB are increased relative to 25-4-CB and 24-4-CB. Most likely the elevated levels of 26-3-CB and 25-3-CB result from partial dechlorination of Aroclor 1254. The tetra-and pentachlorobiphenyls appear to be derived from a combination of partially dechlorinated Aroclors 1254 and 1260. Peaks 47 (25-34-CB), 61 (236-34-CB), 53 (245-25-CB), and 69/5 (245-34-CB) are all notably decreased relative to Aroclor 1254, and have probably been dechlorinated. Peaks 31 (25-25-CB), 32 (24-25-CB), , ' Page -2- which are typical of Process H or Process P dechlorination, are notably increased. The tetrachlorobiphenyl 25-26-CB (peak 25) is also present. The latter congener is not a significant component of any Aroclor and is also indicative of dechlorination. It is probably derived from 236-245-CB (peak 69/6). The hexa-, hepta-, and octachlorobiphenyls are typical of unaltered Aroclor 1260. The dechlorinations can be summarized as follows: 25-34 236-34 234-245 236-245 245-245 ➔ 25-3 ➔ 26-34 ➔ 26-3 ➔ 245-24 ➔ 24-25 ➔ 236-25 ➔ 25-26 ➔ 245-25 ➔ 25-25 Thus the dechlorination appears to result from a limited para dechlorination similar to Process P. 8/14/94 Bill, Attached are copies of EPA-ORD/Athens and GE Corp R&Ds reports on PCB congener Dechlorination in the Warren County PCB Landfill. Both are written in R&D-ese and they need some explaining --even for us to understand. Clearly both groups will provide substantial additional documentation to support these brief preliminary reports. I would ask your suggestions for a process to interpret these findings? John Neal? Ken Rudo? A local university environmental chem. prof? or should we do it ourselves? or a combination of several. A second request for suggestions is how and when do we release the data. o:3/22/ 1994 14: 05 FF'.l]M tK DEHt,~R-D I lJ LRB SERI) I CE~; TCI 97153605 F'. 01 1 ,,. SOiid Was1c M.anai;erncrit Division . . . ~lcigh, North Carolina 2761 1 Site Number _______________ Fie!d Sample Numbcr __ W,:;....;:.,_L_-_____ <9--=S---"'::a....--::eJ.'""'--'Wc..=:.....~---- Narnc of Site UJA-1<..2.e:..J Go,.Jr,, PC'?, l.DF1.. Site Location A ~To~ NC... -~-~~--.......a=----------- Collected By {;. {\J t<..H.o t,.. 60~ Date Collected 2 B :St., 1..Y 9 4 Time IG 30 ~ .°$T€Pttc>-.:>~ Agency: Hazardous Waste >< Solid Waste _· _Superf-w1d TCLP Compounds ---- Sample Type Inorganic Compounds Results (m&/1) Environmental Concentrate Comments Arsenic -Barium ---L Ground water (1) _ Soi.id (5) ~A~L LtM£e WELL Cadt:eiuru ---Chromium _ Surface water (2) --_ Liquid (6) Lead --Mercury Soil (3) _ Sludse (7) ::seL.1, wl E'Ga --Selenium -----Silver --_ Other (4) _ Other (8) r-:::. -00.3. c;uJ ------Organic Chemistry Inorganic Chemistry -- Par-ameter Results(mg/1) Parameter Results(mg/1) (mg/kg) Organic Compounds Results(mg/1) _P&T:GC/MS Arsenic ben:z.cnc ----__ Acid:B/N E:xt. · Barium c:ar.bon tetrachloride ----.MTBE Cadmium -" '. ' ----...x. PC.$ -:-e,,. 00t?/ Chloride I #o, ► ---Post-If" Fax Note 7671 [)Qt8 Chromiwr. pages ----JJ ... ul.. I ---~ Copper To <;.J,_ av--,"'"' R, "'tY-1 From nJ......,. ---Fluoride Co./DODt. _/ Co. -----Iron Phone• ---Phono II Lead ----Fax• -__ Manganese Fax 11 -----__ Mercury --Nitrate -.1.;.1.-.... , ..... ,...,.,,.~11,, ....... --Selenium __ 2,4-dinitrotolucnc --Silver __ heptachlor --Radiochemistry Sulfates hcx.achlorobcn2:enc ----Zinc hexachlorobutadienc -----Parameter Results {PCi/1) _pH hcxachloroclhane __ Gross Alpha Conductivity = methyl ethyl ketone --Gross Beta TDS nitrobenzcne ----= pcntachlorophcnol TOC ----_ pyridine Microbiology --__ tctrachloroethylenc --__ trichloroethylenc Parameter Results (Col/lOOml) --__ 2,4,5-trichlorophcnol 2, 4,6•trichlorophenol ----= vinyl chloride ----cndrin -- Da,c Received Z-,2. 9-f'1!1o/lJtr,.cponcd ~ / ~ ~ __ lindanc _ mcthoxychlor -__ 10.xaphcnc Date Extractcr.l~-ol-9'E1'.P~Dalc Rep nedf-;!. ~ -"1y 2,~-D ;;, = 2,4,5-TP (Silvcx) Dale Analy-,cd ~-4-~· Lab Number 942821 --l)l IS 3191 (Rcvi~d 'l/'1l) -.. ----------------, NCDEHN'R Solid Walle Mana1ement Div. SilfPLE ANALYSIS REQUEST NCDEHNR Laboratory s...vicea Diviaion P.O. Box 27617, 401 Oberlin lload P.O. Box 2'047, 306 N. WwninJton St. &al~Jh. North Carolina 27611-7687 &aleiJh, North Carolina 27611-8047 Site Number ______ 1;µ:r+-.__ ______ SampleID Number/Name ___ A_?{-----=C5;-~........_~__,..,L ___ 6 ___ ~_· __ -.... 2=--- ~ CollectedBy _ ___.cho-........_;:v'~ ......... --------ID#__,/c""""o<, ____ _ NameofSite 4L..t//ry 4,eu,,,F ftpt',"f,f,f' Aaency: ~az.ardous Waste Sample Type En•ironmcntaJ Concentrate ~round Water (1 ) _ Surface Water (2) Soil (3) Other (4) _ Solid (5) _ liquid (6) Sludge (7) Other (8) Organic Chemistry Results (m&/1) ParaJneter .JL"'~&T:GC/MS .. LL>~cid:B/N Ext. _JL),4-D <O,DOI ,4,5-TP(Silvex) < Q ~ 00 I chlordane <6. dPf?.:Z, beptachlor < e,. t:,4g/ hexachlorobcnzene < e,. o o "/ hexachlorobutadiene SEE AUACHE _J,/" ~drin <cl. o o 4 / ...Lf _ lindane < e:,, e," ";z.., :JI' _;nethoxychlor < d. t?t#/ ..J.L JO~•phene <~~ &>#~ ..JL. fc}$ < 0. D t?t1/ !;42428 Solid Waste __ Superfund Comments Inorganic Chemistry Parameter Results(m&/l)(m&/ka) antimony arsenic barium beryllium cadmium chloride chromium ~alt copper fluoride iron lead manganese _____ _ mercury nickel nitrate eelenium silver sulfates thallium vanadium me _pH _ conductivity _____ _ TDS flash point ------ Date Repo Lab Number ---------I ------------ DHS 3191 (R9Viaed 1/9◄) TCLP Compounds Inorsanic Campounds arsenic barium cadmium chromium lead _ mercury eelenium lilver Oraanic Compounds benzene carbon tetrachloride chlordane chlorobenzene chloroform o-cresol m~resol ~I ere.sol Results(11111J) Results(man) ------ 1,4-dichlorobcnz.ene _____ _ 1,2-dichloroethane 1.1-dichloroethylene _____ _ 2,4-dichloroethylene _____ _ heptachlor -hexachlorobenz.en'e hexachlorobutadiene · bexachloroethane _ methylethylketone nitrobcnz.ene _ pentachlorophenol _ pyridine _ tetrachloroethylene _ trichloroetbylene ------ _ 2,4,5-trichlorophenol _____ _ _ 2,4,6-trichlorophenol _____ _ _ vinyl chloride mdrin lindane methoxychlor toxapbene 2,4-D 2,4,5-TP (Silvex) NC-DE~NR 'Dhuloa; of Solid Waste Maoqement ·~ CJ Superfund Sectlon p/11azan1ou1 Waste Section , C Solid Waste Sec:tion .. Organics Lab: V lnorganics Lab: -- CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD Project Name: 4'41/1/V ~ &6'.1r R. Site ID# (NCD#) _______ _ Sampled by: ___ $e _____ ~-~--:s ____ _ Sampler ID ____ ....._ __ ,;2.. ______ _ Location: i,../,4f£Jw l"" t) . Address: /2/ nzff4 &?, Telephone:_<fLi.> ___ 7Y_'./_: -~~n--11..,.1:::------ Date Sampled: ____ *"""0""""~"""7 __ ?~~--- Time Sampled: Sample Types: Soil ____ _ Water_.....,.,_/ __ · Waste_· ____ Other _____ _ Remarks: ·-------------------------------- Field Sample /,(5o/ 5' Numbers Received by: l</4£.=·/2&.-nu..-.;;1: (Signature) Relinquished by: (Signature) Received by: (Signature) Relinquished by: (Signature) y ........ /4y Date: Date: Date: __ _ Date: --- Time: ff-27 "~ Time: 107 Time: Time: ·----- Time:. ____ _ -------------·----------------------- Received by: Date: __ _ Time: ____ _ (Signature) Results Reported: ( (A:\COCR.FRM) I --·-_-·-·· _;_..;;. .. :_:~:_- ST.A'.l'E IABORA:rORY OF PUBLIC HEALTH PO BOX 28047 -306 1'. WJLJIINGTON ST .. RALEIGH. NC 27611 ORGAN.re CHEMTC'AL ANALYSIS .PORGEABLE CO.IIPODlYDS IABNO q L/;;}_l.J,JR° FIELD NO J'/575 I COIIPOmvD -· TYPE ( , ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) 'ONlTS OOYH/q p,g/l p,g/kg p,g/lpg/q p,g/1 p,g/kg N/lN!kg cm.o1t011Q:'T1L\1'1: Joopl, IA- vmn. c:m.oamz 10 BROMOIO:l'1IAKZ ::J.O cm.o1t01:nL\KS 1n .. 10 TmCBLOJU>n.zJ01LOt11ZT11A1'11 .AaTOn 50 1.1-1>1c:m.oaoz:nn::zn: '5 IODOIG:TBAlfZ lO ia:nrn.zm: c:m.oamz "5 CAJUIO" Dlstnnl>Z \ DAffS-U-l>ICBLOllOETBJ::m: -J; .ACJCn..0~ ;;r:o 1.l•Dlcm.01lOE'nlAJIZ !5 :1-BOTAlf OlfZ .X) czs.1,.:..01CH1.0ROE'l"BZ:ll!: ,, ,v c:m.o1t0l'ORK , -e_, T JrH 1.1.l•TJUcm.oROl:T'JIAJIZ \/ ·~ CAJUSO" ~amz ,o K2'l%ZIIZ ,, 1.2-DICBLOROETBA!IZ TJUCIL01t01:Til£1fS U•Dlc:m.ollOPllOP.AKE ,v BllOIIODICBLOllOIIIJ!:TBAJa ID ·,v fMDLf e-~u:.G-~,-.)0 P~EMT IN I.A8 &.,u,l~. J -Z■tia&ted Tal.ue I JC -Actual -ralu• i• lmowa to be le•• t.h&n -ralu• giTeD. L -Actual -ralue i• lmowa to be greater t.h&n T11lu• gi"nlll. . . '0' -Xateri.al waa analyzed for but cot detec:i:ed. 'l'h• Zlmaber i• th••~ ?>etec:tioA Lia:i.t. D. -:mot &A&lysed. 1/ -Tactat.i-.. idantific:atiOA. !1 -OD JIJWC IJ.•t ot ~ority Pollutaiu:a. U • C:OMPoUP'I> R1:UA81-Y Z>ET"fQ'",qa,e CNLV AT HIG-14 CoNC£NTf!ATICN~ • C • f'~•B'-E LR& CONT~Ml~Al"lc~. Dl!:BlUl 3065-0 (10/93) . ( ) I p,g/l p,g/kg I I I I I I I I I I I I I PCR,GCOK.OR · I .... · ··,·•-·•-....... ____ _ -----· ------............. --·--...:..----- S'r.A7E LABORATORY OF PCBLIC BEALTE PO BOX 28047 -306 N. WJLIIINGTON ST .. RALEIGH. NC 27611 ORGANIC CHEMICAL ANALYSIS .PDRGEABLE COKPODNDS I LAB NO 1~;4 I I I I I ~. :rJEIJ> NO COMPODM> TYPE ( ' ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) t1NITS ~Niki llt/llltfkg llt/l'PC/kg pg/1 pg/kg pg/1 pg/kg pt/1 pg/kg DDSJlOIIOIO:T2LVR: ~ri,-.J, t,c_ 4-aa:nrn.-3-PZlff.&lfOKE 5i' I '~In cm-LS-Dlcm.0a0Pll0PZ2WZ 6 1'0i.m:Jm 'ntA!m-LS-Dlcm.0ROn01'SffE ,v 1.l.2.2-Tl:TJUCBLOllOE'l'11AJn JO 1.1.2-TJUcm.01tOETBAl'IZ 5 2-IICAIIOlfZ !5n n:ntACBLOROC'BER .5 DlllROlloc:m.oROKJ:T1L\JfZ IQ z:nrn.zKZ l)l:JIR0Mml: .!5 CH1.0R011!:1C%ZKZ ~ 1.1. l.2•Tr:TJI.ACBL01l01:THA!n ID rnrn. lll:l'r%%!ff: 5 ::cn.%.'fZS JO STT1tZ:f'E 5 SROIIOFORII IQ ffMS.1.4-DICBLORO-:a-llt11'UZ %0 1.2..S-TJUCBLOROPKOPNfZ X)Q 1,4-DICBLOR0111:11%ZNZ JO l.2•DICBLOROIIE!C%1Cl'fZ J/ 1.2,Dl:JIR01110-3-CBLOROPJlOPAlfZ :)()() vmn. AC!:TATZ ~ \ I i MDL. t e -BA'l:.6~1> PR~~ tt.l LAB B~A N)I::~. J • Zatia&ted Tal.ue ~ • ktual Yalu• i• l=owu to b• l••• than Yalu• gi"l'Cl. L -Actual Tal.ue i• l=owu to b• greater than Yalu• CJiTUl. . 1J • llaterial waa wl.yzad for J:lat 11.0t dataeted. 'rh• zumber i• th. M1n:fmm Datec:tiozi Liait. m. -•ot wl.yzad. 1/ -~•zitati"Pe idezit.ific:at.iozi. 2/ -Oil mux: Li•t of J'rlorlt:]" ~llutanta. ii -CcMPDllN b REL.I~ a.y DETECT'RSLE oNLY RT H '6-M coNc.f~TIO~. C -i='~5t8'.E u:10 c.o,-rr,:u,,u,1A-noN. DEBNR S068-0 (10/93) PCIRGCO!ll.O'P ... BASE/NEUTRAL AND ACID EXTRACT ABLES <D1PWND N-nitrosodimethvl.-.nine bis(2-chloroethvl)ether 2-chloroohenol ohenol 1.3-<lichlorobenzene 1 4-dichlorobenzene .1 2-di ch 1 orobenzene bis(2-chlorohnnroov1 )ether hexachloroethane N-n i troso-d i -n-oroov 1.-.ni ne nitrobenzene i l:llnhorone 2-n i trooheno 1 2.4-dimethvlohenol bis(2-chloroethoxv)methane 2.4-dichloroohenol 1.2.4-trichlorobenzene naohthalene hexachlorobutadiene 4-ch 1 oro~reso 1 1hexachlorocvcltv\Ontadiene Z.4.6-trichloroohenol 2-chloronanhthalene iacen;1nhthvlene dimethvl ohthalate 2.6-dinitrotoluene ,acenanhthene 2.4-dinitroohenol 2.4-dinitrotoluene 4-nitroohenol fluorene 4-chloroohenvlohenvlether diethvl Dhthalate 4.6-dinitro-o-cresol diohenvl.-.nine azobenzene 4-braroohenvlohenvlether hexachlorobenzene oentachloroohenol ohenanthrene anthracene dibutvl ohthalate fl uor an thene STATE LABORATORY OF PUBLIC HEALTH DIVISION OF HEALTH SERVICES. N.C. DEPARTl1ENT OF IU1AH RESOURCES P.O. BOX 28047 -306 N. WIL"INGTON, ST.. RALEIGH. N.C. 27611 ORGANIC OiEMICAL ANALYSIS LAB NO "16 '7_:I./ ,1-P' FIELD# /</r7, TYPE ( J ) ( ) ( ) ( ) UNITS 'uo/1~ uo/1 uo/ka ua/1 uo/ka ua/1 ua/ka /n/ :,:c,. 1/4- -- 'V ~ao~so /0/330 SO/Jl,.~0 10/~o I .J, _'io/J~rro /()/330 , ~ 5()/J&,S'(J /t'J/~3{} , ,, "\, I m1)L J -Estimated value. H-z.O/SOI L. K -Actual value is known to be less than value given. ( ) ua/1 ul'l/ka L -Actual value is known to be greater than value given. U -~terial was analyzed for but not detected. The n\llt>er NA -Not analyzed. is the P'1nirrun Detection Limit. m'JJL ---1/ -Tentative identification. ~/ -On NROC List of Priority Pollutants. N.C. Vi..v-<Ai..on on He.ai..th SVl.vi..c.u VHS 3068-0 (4/86 LaboJt.a:to~y) . - { ) ua/1 ua/ko ,• ( STATE LABORATORY Of PUBLIC HEAL TH DIVISION Of HEALTH SERVICES, N.C. DEPARTMENT OF HUl"AH RESOURCES P.O. BOX 28047 -306 N. WILMINGTON, ST., RALEIGH, N.C. 27611 ORGANIC CHEMICAL ANALYSIS BASE/NEUTRAL ANO AC ID LAB NO 'l'-1 dl '12.J? EXTRACTABLES FIELD I /1../,7, (l)NP()JNO TYPE < I > ( ) ( . ) ( ) UNITS ,~110/l ~ uo/1 \JQ/kq \Jg/1 uo/ko uo/1 uo/ko nvrene IM/~:jn LA- benzidine ~.n/1/Q0 -- butvl benzvl ohtha 1 ate :10/.!J~O benz(alanthracene j chrvsene J, 3 3-dichlorobenzidine S()) 'I J,._ Ii /1 bis(2-ethvlhexvllohthalate !/tJ/ ~-~O di-n-octvl ohthalate I0/.1.~o benzo(blfluoranthene .s-o /11.no benzo(k)fluoranthene benzo(alovrene indeno( 1.2.3-cd)ovrene dibenzo(a h)anthracene benzo(o.h i)f)flrvlene \ '., ,, aniline L<n/11,_~ J.A---' benzoic acid benzvl alcohol 4-ch loroani 1i ne ' , dibenzofuran 1/~/~l'J 2~thvlnaohthalene 2-ft?thvlnhPnnl , ~thvlohenol ~i, 2-ni troani line S-o/Jl.<"o 3--nitroani line 4-nitroani line / 2.4 5-trichloroohenol ,:., "\ I/ I n-ru J:'K.. l!otn Pou IJ Jl <;. .. YE llJE'IJTJ J:lt'r-,u1AJJ HFx A ~IJIJ/'JJt!.. /:¥11 r)/t!J/4) :?.1 Oi > _"l>;L>(!TvL ;-"'' tP JI, ~ ..o~ ..i:::: 'f\1O I I!. /tl Ifl I{' -,--2. j ,u~Ou) . - Dr#e72... IA JJ I~-, n, r,,:;;71 r, "m l1J u. "-])~ //Kl-., FAJ J mnt.. J -Estimated value. Ha.OI Soll. K -Actual value is known to be less than value given. L -Actual value is known to be greater than value given. ( ) uo/1 uo/ko U -Katerial was analyzed for but not detected. The nlffber NA -Not analyzed . is the Mininun Detection Limit. (')'Jl)t.., 1/ -Tent.ltive identification. fl -On NROC List of Priority Pollutants. N. C. O.iv-<..6.ion o 6 H e.a.Lth SVtv.ic.e.-6 VHS 3068-0 (4/86 LaboJt.a.to~y) - ( ) uo/1 uo/ko State of North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources Division of Epidemiology James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary -:-uly 18 _. 1994 MEMORANDUM TO: Sharon Rogers, M.S. Warren County Project Manager Division of Solid Waste Management r~-~ .... _ --• ma DEHNR FROM: c. Gregory Smith, M.D., M.P.H. //?o~ Medical Epidemiologist ~ Environmental Epidemiology Section SUBJECT: Alvin Green's Lymphoma In follow-up to your recent request related to a concern expressed by one or more members of the public in Warren County that Alvin Green's lymphoma was (or may have been) caused by exposure to PCBs associated with the PCB landfill in Warren County, I contacted Dr. John Falletta, the attending pediatric hematologi st/oncologist at Duke University Medical Center, who has evaluated and treated Alvin and is familiar with the history of his illness. Medical confidentiality prevents me from disclosing specific details related to Mr. Green 1 s childhood malignancy. Dr. Falletta did say that he is not aware of any evidence which would causally link his lymphoma with exposure to PCBs. In reviewing Mr. Green's medical record, Dr. Falletta found no statement by other physicians alluding to an association, and he said that he felt that it was very unlikely that medi cal staff working with him at Duke suggested such an association. I am enclosing copies of correspondence dated May 19, 1993 to Dr. James Green which summarizes the toxic effects of PCBs. At this time, I am not aware of any animal model or human studies causally associating lymphoma in general, or the specific histopathology seen in Alvin Green's case, to PCB exposure. Finally, given the time period between the date the PCB landfill was completed in 1983 and the detection of Mr. Green's childhood l ymphoma in 1984, even if there was a plausible exposure pathway to PCBs from the landfill (which there is not), I seriously doubt that an adequate latency period between exposure and disease could have existed. If you would like to discuss this issue in more detail, please contact me at 733-3410. CGS~td cc: Dr. Ronald H. Levine Dr. John Falletta Mr. Bill Meyer Mr. Dennis Retzlaff P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611 -7687 An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ l 0% post-consumer paper ·, State of North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources Division of Epidemiology James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary The Honorable James Green 176 Beckford Drive Henderson, North Carolina 27536 Dear►Green: May 19, 1993 r~-~A ~ ---~~ a a a DEHNR On May 14, 1993, Ms. Kay Ruocchio forwarded to our office a request from you related to PCBs. Enclosed is information which I hope you will find helpful for your presentation. If you have any questions or need additional information, please call me at ( 919) 733-3410. CGS:lp Enclosures Sincerely, ~~ C. Gregory Smith, M.D., M.P.H. Medical Epidemiologist Environmental Epidemiology Section P.O'-Box 27687 , Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone 91 9-7 33-3421 An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recyc!ed/ 10% post-consumer p aper • State of North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources Division of Epidemiology James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary May 19, 1993 .RA DEHNR MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: John I. Freeman, D.V.M., M.P.H., Chief . Environmental Epidemiology Section C. Gregory_Sdmith 1 , M.D., M.P.H. .~ Medical Epi emio ogist Environmental Epidemiology Section Representative Green's Request for Health-Related Information on PCBs I have assembled copies of several scientific references which discuss the toxicology of PCBs and have taken the liberty to highlight sections which relate to Representative Green's request. With respect to definition, PCBs are polychlorinated biphenyls, a group of 209 stable, fat soluble organic chemicals which contain from 12 to 68 percent chlorine. PCBs are not known to occur naturally; they.are man-made chemicals which were used extensively as insulators in transformer and capacitor fluids until their manufacture was discontinued in 1977. PCBs are essentially ubiquitous in nature today, distributed throughout the air, water, soil, and food chain of the biosphere. Virtually all humans carry some body burden. Fish, dairy products, poultry, and eggs are major dietary sources of exposure to PCBs in the United States. In response to the question related to symptoms and clinical findings associated with exposure to PCBs, one would not be able to identify any specific symptoms or adverse health effects associated with exposure to background or low concentrations of PCBs. Animal experiments have clearly demonstrated that some PCB mixtures produce adverse health effects which include liver damage, skin irritations, reproductive and developmental effects, and cancer. Workers exposed to relatively high concentrations of PCB mixtures may develop acne-like lesions and rashes (chloracne). Chronic occupational exposure also may result in eye and mucous membrane irritation and liver injury (chemical hepatitis). With respect to carcinogenicity, there are sufficient animal model data demonstrating that PCBs are carcinogenic, causing the production of liver tumors in rats and mice. A recent re-evaluation of the animal data indicates that positive evidence of carcinogenicity is restricted to 60% chlorinated PCB P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone 919-733-3421 An Equal Opportunrty Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper • Dr. John Freeman Page 2 May 19, 1993 J formulations. are classified evaluating the that exposures chemicals such At this time, using a weight of evidence classification, PCBs as B2 , probable human carcinogens. To date, human data carcinogenicity of PCBs are inadequate.' One major problem is to PCBs were confounded by contamination with other highly toxic as dibenzofurans and dibenzodiox.ins. In the attached copy of the August 1988 issue of Health and Environment Digest, Dr. Renate Kimbrough, an internationally-recognized expert on PCBs discusses their effects on human health. A few of her more important points are: (1) "Thus far, no conclusive adverse effects have been demonstrated in people who carry body burdens of PCBs from environmental exposure to trace amounts of PCBs.11 (2) "Even workers with exposures two orders of magnitude greater than environmental exposures seem to show no convincing chronic health effects.11 (3) 11 There i s reason to believe that chloracne and other health effects probably associated with PCBs are really caused by chlorinated dibenzofurans." (4) "Attempts to conclusively demonstrate health effects in populations that eat fish from (PCB) polluted waterways have gr:merally failed." (5) "Several occupational studies have presented no conclusive scientific evi dence that PCBs have caused cancer in humans." (6) "Despite positive laboratory animal data, and except for chloracne, exposure to PCB has led to no convincing clinically demonstrable, chronic health effects in humans." I am not aware of any new information or studies which would alter her statements made in 1988. CGS:lp Enclosures cc: Dr. Ronald Levine Dr. Peter Morris Mr . Bill Meyer Dr. Ken Rudo Dr. Luanne Williams Ms. Kay Ruocchio T.LP. ID NO.: NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS MATERIALS & TEST UNIT SOILS LABO RA TORY REPORT ON SAMPLES OF: SOIL FOR QUALITY PROJECT: MISC. COUNTY: OWNER: M &TFonn503 DATESAMPLED: 07/28/94 RECEIVED: WARREN 08/01/94 REPORTED: 08/04/94 SAMPLED FROM: PCB LANDFILL SUBMITTED BY: SHARRON ROGERS TEST RES UL TS 08/12/94 · PROJ. SAMPLE NO. WL-002-LC LAB. SAMPLE NO. 587075 Retained #4 Sieve % 2 Passing #10 Sieve % 95 Passing #40 Sieve % 71 Passing #200 Sieve % 28 BY: - 1990 STD. SPECIFICATIONS MINUS #10 FRACTION SOIL MORTAR-100 % Coarse Sand Ret -#60 % Fine Sand Ret -#270 % Silt 0.05 -0.005 mm % Clay < 0.005 mm % Passing #40 Sieve % Passing #200 Sieve % L.L. ' P.L AASHTO Classification Texture Station Hole No. Depth (Ft) to ORGANIC cc: SHARRON ROGERS SOILS FILE 44 30 9 17 - - 25 8 A-2-4(0) . 1.8 ' . ' July 5, 1994 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: RE: Sharon Rogers e David J. Lown ar;_ Approximate Thickness of Waste at the Gas Vent PCB Landfill, Warren County The thickness of the PCB contaminated waste at the landfill may vary from 22.5 to 25.5 feet thick. During the sampling of the waste through the gas vent, I recommend the following: 1) sample runs be reduced to a maximum of six inches per run at a depth of 24 feet below the top of the concrete slab at the gas vent; and 2) sampling be stopped when any of the components of the liner at the base of the landfill are identified. The components of the liner that should be identifiable include, in descending order, the fabric filter, nine inches of sand, compacted clay. The compacted clay is five feet thick and overlies one foot of fill and the 30 mil PVC liner. Figure 1 shows the details of the bottom liner. The estimated original thickness of the landfill is based on the drawings that you provided. Figure 2 is copied from the drawing labeled "Cross-sections." Table 1 shows the measured thicknesses of the landfill at the gas-vent slab. Changes in the thickness of the waste is based on survey data found in Randy McElveen's files on the landfill. The slab may have settled two to three feet. The data was collected by the Solid Waste and the Hazardous Waste Sections for the elevation of the monitoring wells and the concrete slab at the gas vent. This data is shown in Table 2. The concrete slab at the gas vent and the four monitoring wells were surveyed after completion of the landfill. This data is shown on the as-built drawing "Misc. Details." The concrete slab and the monitoring wells were resurveyed in 1991 and 1992. The accuracy of this data is questionable. On the as-built drawing, the monitoring well elevations are only given to the nearest foot and what was surveyed at the well (top of casing, top of concrete slab) is not indicated. The Hazardous Waste and Solid Waste Section survey data differ by as much as 0.22 feet. ' ' , ' ,, . Memo July 5, 1994 Page 2 According to the cross-section the base of the waste (top of the liner) should be at a depth of 30.5 feet below the concrete slab. If there has been 3 feet of settlement and compaction, the base of the waste is at a depth of 27. 5 feet below the slab. Because of the possible inaccuracies of the data, I recommend that the sampling interval be reduced beginning at 24 feet below the slab. Regardless of when the sampling interval is reduced, it is important to always be looking for the liner components. cc: Bill Meyer Attachments I . I __ :_; . --.,·-t-·---- 1 i ri·qu.v e_ /. ____ j ___ . ____ _..., U PP£. te. L[M--HATE COLL EC Tio N C.LAY t3 R. I DG I N C:r ft A T £ R. I A L l t:Ac..14AT~ C.oLL€L T 10N 5USG R.ADc 1---. LA ND PIL L -J 5 ,,_ ,,,_d 9'' --FA8R1c.. FI LTclt C. I °'-'j 5 ' . ~-··•· --~----~-~---- F,·11 I' 5o.."'d 9'1 '5a..p -rol :+t!. -JO M IL PV(_ B o T Totil LINE.I?_ <1 A J . /vi {":>C... ----;----, J ' I // I__./ e.. I A. ' l-s , ++. 1-· ·1 -+-s I W 1 > ,~- Wi-l -~ (~ l I '9 -'-~"le---+---\ ~----· r ---___ , . s:: --~ . -+- .J v \jl l ~ 0 ---~ : (\) . iu ~ j ·Q\l) , .. ... ! :· :·' -i I 1i_ 0 ___ __J 0 ('j 0 t[} .. ~ \,) ~ .'J . i i i f j ! ·-:-1---- I ,•·----· \[) i I :J->e2 5().) SH[l:15. FiLU:R 5 SQUARE -Ji,,Nalionaf"Brand ,12-:-ie1 50 SHFE:.TS FYE-EASE9 5 SQUARE 42-3Hi 100 SHCETS EYE-EASi:'11> 5 SOUAHE 42-389 200 SHEETS EYE-EASE9 5 SQUARE 42-392 100 RECYCLED WHITE 5 SQUARE 42-'.i99 200 RECYCI ED WHITE 5 SQUARE \\.t,Je;ri,' SA -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------,---u\ () ~ """' l' -c) C r-----fl'i r-0 C) 7) ' " OJ l) E ~ \ ----I n, -<j ?l h ?'-> G --\ IJ\ J'i ~ (t ?-0 ::::r----\ r-1/\ --0 \' -t ~ (\ ---r----~ <: (J 7"---~ {1\ ;s. I -() ~ ""i-n:i .> "-t-~~ .D.__ -I ~------.. ~ 5""" " () C) -, C. r \b '1 ----,;,,;;:--~ -. ;S-()'-? k) n, +r-WU Ut lh -........1 U1 "h. <:. V\ r --<': r ~ f'l U1 " 0 I) ~ ~ ,JI ---J + r-----------j\../ r 0) \)\ (\ ----------~ ® ---J:::... t -. 0 ~ (/1 ' ' j Ta_l;(e 2~ i 711 11'-f ! -~------------------____ _, ___________ .. J ______ ___J l__ ------i' --, DAT£ (j) 1//30/82 b,. II /3o /'Z 2 -10/ J7 I°' I 4 /0/17/11 s;2..1;12 ~ Ji/30/~2. s; 2 ct /"z. * -, L-ltu...1.A.•U?. ( ~ SLAB,, ELEV I 2 1,33 3 5 i.f, 26 £ I c v°'--+·1 o\1\5 -:; 0 u. 'I c.,e, 4.::, : (D . 11/sojBZ- ® ID/17 /i( (fJ 5 / 2 er /iz t \.I\. c' { € V ~ t io •'-~ r ve vi..-/-"5 l ~JD' I ~ uJ£l l t t.LE.V. 342. 12.,2-' JIJ,3t /0,0 ' I ,., 2 ,2- {<c IN\ * lt)£LL 2.. ~ ~ i WEL L 3' WELL t../ EL[;:V ELE1/ El€.✓, - 32.2. '3z...o 32,2.1 3 '-/, 2 I 'l 7, 'I 2. '10,2..5 23. "i I 3/,ot;J 32-s, zs 32.'2 ,o/C, 2 ¥, 13 2 g, 15 3/, 21 I I ' <£' v~y\+ S i~~ l-: ::1 ' e ey12 11 ~\:) -<' ', 2 I 2 i 3, i../ I '< _,, /2. ·~ \ ,--, .7& 1---' , -0,2.'2--()' (Ca -d, I 0 2 ,o7 5. '2..5 l Vl CU,, -0u.i t+ J,o,,u);J \\ M: 5L , Def-,,.,; ls ,11 c: ;. l vC! 1tt I -j": ,. " f "P --:_~ .• -,,, -~ ,,,. .._JvM f I ,ft.D. M-,.r, llicf1■1 l1iericle ..__,...... -.Vir re: Lai wry 08126194 Dear Sharon, OE Corporate Resurch Mid Development ....., Jtl, aoa. 3C7 P.O. am I, I b lady, MY l230UJOOI llaom: 511 317-7470; Pu: 511317-7611 1>i11 ec.-: l-a»-7470 a-ii D>: M1 P11Dc1<01Calil01.-... .- Here is a copy of the report on the samples we analyu.d from the landfill. If you have any questions, please contact Dr. Donna Bedard, as I will be out of the office until September 8. Best Wishes, ~ Frank 1. Mondello Dome L .. dard, Ph.D. Group Leeder ■oranediation Rnearch Program Em,ironmental Laboratory August 23, 1994 To: Frank Mondello GE Corporate Research Mid Development 8ulldlng Kl, Room 3112 P.O. Box I, loheneotady, NY 12301-0008 Phone: 118 387-15114; Fax: 118 387-7811 Dial Comm: I• 833-15114 From: Donna L. Bedard, Ralph May, and Lynn Smullen Subject: Assessment of PCBs in North Carolina soil sample Two PCB-contaminated soil samples were received from the Division of Solid Waste management/Superfund Section at the North Carolina Department of environmental health and Natural Resources in Raleigh, North Carolina. These samples were labelled 'W1-002-LC 7128/94 landfill contents." We have extracted the PCBs, performed congener-specific analysis by GC/MS, and done a preliminary interpretation of the results. The PCB concentration in the two samples was approximately 315 to 340 µgig soil. The PCBs appear to be composed primarily of unaltered Aroclor 1260, a lesser amount of partially dechlorinated Aroclor 1254, and a small amount of partially evaporated Aroclor 1242. This interpretation is based on limited data and a semiquantitative comparison of the congener distributions in Aroclors 1242, 1254, and 1260 with those in the samples received. This interpretation should therefore be considered tentative. A more conclusive interpretation would require more information regarding the nature of the PCB contaminant and history of the sample, rigorous quantitation and a mother-daughter analysis of presumptive dechlorination substrates and products. The mono-, di-, and trichlorobiphenyls present are typical of Aroclor 1242, but their relative proportions are altered relative to Aroclor 1242. With the exception of 26-3-CB and 25-3-CB, the proportions of all mono-through trichlorobiphenyls eluting prior to 25-4-CB and 24-4-CB are decreased relative to the latter congeners. This is _-most likely due to evaporation. There is no evidence of increased proportions of ortho- enriched congeners such as 2-CB, 2-2-CB, 26-2-CB, or 2-4-CB. However, the propor- tions of 26-3-CB and 25-3-CB are increased relative to 25-4-CB and 24-4-CB. Most likely the elevated levels of 26-3-CB and 25-3-CB result from partial dechlorination of Aroclor 1254. The tetra-and pentachlorobiphenyls appear to be derived from a combination of partially dechlorinated Aroclors 1254 and 1260. Peaks 47 (25-34-CB), 61 (236-34-CB), 53 (245-25-CB), and 69/5 (245-34-CB) are all notably decreased relative to Aroclor 1254, and have probably been dechlorinated. Peaks 31 (25-25-CB), 32 (24-25-CB), I • . Page -2- which are typical of Process H or Process P dechlorination, are notably increased. The tetrachlorobiphenyl 25-26-CB (peak 25) is also present. The latter congener is not a significant component of any Aroclor and is also indicative of dechlorination. It is probably derived from 236-245-CB (peak 69/6). The hexa-, hepta-, and octachlorobiphenyls are typical of unaltered Aroclor 1260. The dechlorinations can be summarized as follows: 25-34 236-34 234-245 236-245 245-245 ➔ 25-3 ➔ 26-34 ➔ 26-3 ➔ 245-24 ➔ 24-25 ➔ 236-25 ➔ 25-26 ➔ 245-25 ➔ 25-25 Thus the dechlorination appears to result fr~m a limited pars dechlorination similar to Process P. 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 June 29, 1994 TO: Mehdi Haeri MEMO FROM: Sharron Rogers ~✓- RA DEHNR SUBJECT: Analysis of soil sample(s) from Warren County PCB Landfill Please consider this memo as confirmation of our intent to request your assistance in analyzing a sample of the soil contents of the Warren County PCB Landfill. I really appreciate your assistance in defining the appropriate tests for the Workplan (a copy of which is enclosed). I'm just now confirming this with you because our citizen's oversight committee recently approved the effort. I will be contacting you again in the near future to finalize logistics of sample size, chain-of-custody, and hand off of sample and data. Our current plan is to conduct the sampling sometime in the week of July 25. We look forward to continuing with this work and to your continued excellent assistance. 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/ l O't post-consumer poper ., •' ,, 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 June 29, 1994 TO: Dr. Ray Tucker FROM : Sharron Rogers :ft~- MEMO NA DEHNR SUBJECT: Analysis of soil sample(s) from Warren County PCB Landfill Please consider this memo as confirmation of our intent to request your assistance in analyzing a sample of the soil contents of the Warren County PCB Landfill. I really appreciate your assistance in defining the appropriate tests for the Workplan (a copy of which is enclosed ). I'm just now confirming this with you because our citizen's oversight committee recently approved the effort. I will be contacting you again in the near future to finalize logistics of sample size, chain-of-custody, and hand off of sample and data. Our current plan is to conduct the sampling sometime in the week of July 25. We look forward to continuing with this work and to your continued excellent assistance. 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 &EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development Washington, DC 20460 Bioremediation of Hazardous Wastes E P A/600/R-92/126 August 1992 Jl:N' 'J ?. 1qc4 -· • .1 1 f-J •.• 1vV EPN600/R-92/126 August 1992 Bioremediation of Hazardous Wastes by Biosystems Technology Development Program Office of Research and Development U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Ada, OK; Athens, GA; Cincinnati, OH; Gulf Breeze, FL; and Research Triangle Park, NC @ Printed on Recycled Paper -• Frank J. MoadeDo, P'a.D. Mana1er, Bioremediatioo a-n:b ProJnm Euviroamealal Laboralory 08/26/94 Dear Sharon, GE Corporate Research •nd Devslopment Buildin, Kl, Room 3C7 P.O. Box I, Scbeooctady, NY 12301--0008 Jllaoae: SIi 317-7470; Fax: SIi 317-7611 Dial Comm: 1•133-7470 B--mail ID: MoodelloOPCmailOt .erd.,e.com Here is a copy of the report on the samples we analyzed from the landfill. If you have any questions, please contact Dr. Donna Bedard, as I will be out of the office until September 8. Best Wishes, ~ Frank J. Mondello Donna L. Bedard, Ph.D. Group Leader Bioremedietion Research Program Environmental Laboratory August 23, 1994 To: Frank Mondello GE Corporate Research and Development Building K1, Room 3B12 P.O. Box 8 , Schenectady, NY 12301-0008 Phone: 518 387-5914; Fax: 518 387-7611 Dial Comm: &•833-5914 From: Donna L. Bedard, Ralph May, and Lynn Smullen Subject: Assessment of PCBs in North Carolina soil sample Two PCB-contaminated soil samples were received from the Division of Solid Waste managemenUSuperfund Section at the North Carolina Department of Environmental health and Natural Resources in Raleigh, North Carolina. These samples were labelled "W1-002-LC 7/28/94 landfill contents." We have extracted the PCBs, performed congener-specific analysis by GC/MS, and done a preliminary interpretation of the results. The PCB concentration in the two samples was approximately 315 to 340 µgig soil. The PCBs appear to be composed primarily of unaltered Aroclor 1260, a lesser amount of partially dechlorinated Aroclor 1254, and a small amount of partially evaporated Aroclor 1242. This interpretation is based on limited data and a semiquant itative comparison of the congener distributions in Aroclors 1242, 1254, and 1260 with those in the samples received. This interpretation should therefore be considered tentative. A more conclusive interpretation would require more information regarding the nature of the PCB contaminant and history of the sample, rigorous quantitation and a mother-daughter analysis of presumptive dechlorination substrates and products . The mono-, di-, and trichlorobiphenyls present are typical of Aroclor 1242, but their relative proportions are altered relative to Aroclor 1242. With the exception of 26-3-CB and 25-3-CB, the proportions of all mono-through trichlorobiphenyls eluting prior to 25-4-CB and 24-4-CB are decreased relative to the latter congeners. This is most likely due to evaporation. There is no evidence of increased proportions of ortho- enriched congeners such as 2-CB, 2-2-CB, 26-2-CB, or 2-4-CB. However, the propor- tions of 26-3-CB and 25-3-CB are increased relative to 25-4-CB and 24-4-CB. Most likely the elevated levels of 26-3-CB and 25-3-CB result from partial dechlorination of Aroclor 1254. The tetra-and pentachlorobiphenyls appear to be derived from a combination of partially dechlorinated Aroclors 1254 and 1260. Peaks 47 (25-34-CB), 61 (236-34-CB), 53 (245-25-CB), and 69/5 (245-34-CB) are all notably decreased relative to Aroclor 1254, and have probably been dechlorinated. Peaks 31 (25-25-CB}, 32 (24-25-CB}, Page -2- which are typical of Process H or Process P dechlorination, are notably increased. The tetrachlorobiphenyl 25-26-CB (peak 25) is also present. The latter congener is not a significant component of any Aroclor and is also indicative of dechlorination. It is probably derived from 236-245-CB (peak 69/6). The hexa-, hepta-, and octachlorobiphenyls are typical of unaltered Aroclor 1260. The dechlorinations can be summarized as follows: 25-34 236-34 234-245 236-245 245-245 ➔ 25-3 ➔ 26-34 ➔ 26-3 ➔ 245-24 ➔ 24-25 ➔ 236-25 ➔ 25-26 ➔ 245-25 ➔ 25-25 Thus the dechlorination appears to result from a limited para dechlorination similar to Process P. "'! 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 NA DEHNR MEMO To: Ken Rudo From: Sharron Rogers Date: May 31, 1994 Subject: Request for review of PCB breakdown products in soils Ken, per our conversation, I request that you provide us with a review of the current knowledge of PCB breakdown products and rates in soils. As I mentioned we are particularly interested in Arochlor 1260 and Arochlor 1262 breakdown under landfill conditions. Time period is at least 10 years. Thanks for your assistance. I look forward to talking with you about this on Friday. P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Teleph~ 919-715-3605 An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper -.,:,. .:.1:f ::t T r.:., J 7.,4 •GAONOMIC DMSIOff, N.C~DtPAflTMENT OF AGRtCUL TUAI !LU£ AtDGt ROAD CtNTUI. RALEIGH. N.C. PHONt: (t1f) 133-HSS Tabl 5 ............. I FIELD tt;FORMATION . ....... , .. .._c • .,.. AN&.CtL ... ,.., i.u•c•oo .oo. I _,. I "'' ' "° cun -, ·-I . .,o, I .,., . i, I 1 .'toi.Y~ r.1 r_c1.. SUGGESTED 1RUTMEN1 FOR FIRST CROP (OR YE.I.Fil•• t•~ 1C II DO:IWN .... I • .. ,o, .. ., I ... c:., ' .. I I I FIELD INFORll.1-TtON ........ r ., -"' c•:,, 1au1,.:Lac I flA1. LH"' ca:,, ·~ , -~ ' .. , . ., CL&U -I ... I . ·•"'• I .... I I SUGGUTED TA£ATMEHT FOR FIRST CFIOP IOFi YUFii •• •-.,.. """•1 Olt:W.11 I .... I N I ..... ",0 I~ "" I ,. ; I ; i i I FIELD tNFOP.I.U.110N Ph IP ac I~: .. I~: .,_, I • I ... ,u ..,,,. i UC ..... .. ' l ~ • I ~ I '" l I ttt'tl ' I i 1 ·•,;;u r,.,_,. :•oo ••Ult'&.all ... ,_ ,., .. c.,. -~ __ .., •• •-1 m K-, .. -I -I ... I .• .,.,, I ... v I I i SUGGESTED TRUTMENT FOR FIRST CROP IOR YU.Fil•• I """" • .,., ""°"" .... I " •,a. .. 0 I ... I to, ! ,. ' • I ... SU I I ea::11 ' FIELD INFORM"110N ! •·.;;... r·· .,,,,sc•oo : ...... ., ...... ,..,_,..,t!t!IO 60ll __ , ... l at -~ .. .. Cl..&n -1--:1"· r,,,_ I ..,., .. SUGGESTtD TRUTMENT FOR FIRST CROP (OR YlAR1 •• ._. .. _ C"■l•-._...,j ... , I N ..... ... 0 ... , ~ I J• I . I ... HI I IC .. I I FIELD INFORMATION : ... .:; ... __ cat,,. ! &.,,,_.0 L .. I flO, •• .,.,_ -_., I ... I ac ...... .. eun I --I ... I .. .,,,_ I ..,., I • ' SUGGESTED TREATMENT FOR FIRST CROP IOR YEAR!•• c•t-1c.n o.•;..,. ... 1 I N ",o, a,o I ... I C. I ,. I • I ... NI I ..,,. I ' I • TEH RE SUL TS (ll.C. tnls ... -m 1101 CDfllpD .. llitKIIJ lo_.,.,. llblal ... cl by oth•• ffl~lhodl.) ...-C1111 .,.._ • ..._,., es..-... a ..... ..,,.. ,.,ttc llt-'•MtJ,..ti.oflll.-..rCIC .. :; .................. , lt.0■11..,..al.O,.Nl Ac•&nl!'", ~...:,,. .. ....... .,,nft"'fn.,., ....,_.,. ........ ~., .... .,,,. ooo=•o-,■.1< ................. ......, ~.1.--. . .... ...._.. ...... '110c,,i' _______ , __ .,. ... _ P4■~.,.._.INlta c.t■Cc..,•~•• .. , ............ ~ .. '"'• ................. .....a.t: ... 14,f'.J"' ..... c1:-.c.'-'1""·c.. ..... , ,eo~• c.,.c. ....... -. .. cae ., ........ s. ...... L andfill Contents -Standard Soil Test 1ES1 A£SUL 15 • I.~ . r• •• c. ... ..... -I .... .,.. .. --.. :., ... ...... htt 111 . . ..,, -" e11 . t,iU!. ..... SUGG[SlED TRUTMENT FOR SECOND CF.DP IOFi YEAR! .. ~•:.• ; .. v---LIIOl I N I ,,o, I ..0 I .. I c,, a,. • ... TEST AESUL TS • ... P4 •• I ~ .. .. ..... ..... . ... -.. I WM .,:,,,11 ...... SUGGlSTED TRUTMENT FOR SECOND CROP tOFi YURI .. t■~ 1: ft G,lllc.M .... • I •,o, I ... 0 .. I c. .. • -' I I TUT RE SUL TS • ... .... "" I c.-, .... -.... .... .. -we1" ....... SUGGE!TED TRUTM[NT FOR SECOND CAOP IOFi YURI•• CII:>" ": II c.•:,ww , ... " I ,,o, I ... 0 I .. I to, p • -.. TUT RESULTS• ... .... .. Ce-,. ...... -.... --■M ..,,,. ""I' .... SUGGESlED TRUTMENT FOR SECOND CROP IOFi YEAR •• ••~TC MGODWM UMl N r-r,"t I a,o I"' I to, -p • -. TEST RE SUL TS • .. ... ... c. ... .... -.... -I ... .... NOltl -.• SUGGESTtD TREATMENT FOR SECOND CROP IOFi YEAR •• c.•:,, '!: II G•OWW I.WI • I •,o, I ",0 I "'I c:., .. • -•• TRE.a,f.~ENT, lbs 'a Ull~H •~lfi.tl lMl:, ..... , ••k1Nt911k 11,t-.-. ....... ,.~ ... l,,oZMC .................. , ....... 11r ......... .__ ··-•,o.,......,.... . ., ..... ,~ .. 11. c ... c • ....-....... ...-S THI u,,tl II l!Wlllcmeblt. 5ft •~Isl malfflal. READ SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL ANO 8ACK OF A~Dnc:tT ~nD e110Tuee ,.,~T"" -: ' Ill or:11 : ... i Ill ■:"I I I ... r I .,;;: I : ... ' ; t I I HI I ...... I I .. i I IU I 11:'1 i .... VI Table 5. Continued YOUR SOIL TH1 Slt"°"1 £1:" ~•~ rl t~"' rt:,c,'1,.;11 '"°" I'll W. IHJIII l"f! •~••d t:tllmt"1 le, Pit ..... rtpttM"l'ltd bJ II ,,,..,, II f.ve 1oil Hmpltl. 0,,.r p!ifllftl · ..,11,,;11 •r,clc1tt' wi1h ,,._ rtpc'1 .,;n contain ~.at110+-,tnt ir.tc,"fflat;cfl that .,;" tit hel;lful In """"""":-.; tht •~~Site! trulffltfl!. FltLO _..,OSIMATION .... ~°'' Et:iji f>~m:,,• n.. rr,,o11 numbr. ii t11t •tr nimbi· cl ~e.tHr; 1::,lt IHI •Hu!!f a'ld I0'1 .. ,,.,... .,;ii,;,., !!It ta!>:>ratc,,,•. Fltltr t:, !'Iii """'-"'' Ill ai,y CO,,H::,c'l:!t--itt o• !:'IC¥ tills ~ 1"'t ~ Se::n::'t 1,t·::::t,• 'Tt,;s It~~' ...,;ct, ,ou au;;•~ tc. r>t 11-,?lt. S1-nplt-:,,,IT',bt,t .,;r. .. .., bt "IC"t ,, .... !',,ff cf',p~,. P:cic· .. C!:C Th~ Is,.. ~ lndo:al.:! on ,o111 ~-r.,at,:• t"lte: a1 h&•inp prt:tdlrc !"I c~ tor •·hit~. y:.; H~t~ I~ l"'lt and lt~iiiJar l!H!'nefll •~t!;o-,,.: f•tc·•-n L ""'• ',;-··'•e&"io'l; 'Thtlt t'lrtt b1xt11 th:,• :!It "'CY.II. y11r 1-C •llt ol .,.,. ro,, 1.;,plitcl os. !!It i.:t:,r;at;r.n 1',ffl TEST AtSUL TS lJ,t fa• t•O::, t!:r:;• L-:v!t• Jt!' tMMI, mrdltD fac,"'•f ··••:: 1; Cle·•~,.~-5pif It< C:Ptt:tioe ff'"' !Jor, rruac .. f:,e if ... ,.i2cd ~ Tlli bl:,c:. "'6:a!tt lllt Ull Vo lllflcl o' 1:,;! troor. .. ~ net, se~ wat judptil tc...,,. . bHn 11-..,. Tl\t •t:&:n1t a-,,c,;.r'I: o: 1cic1rt,. lnclattd bJ p<i. t.'>a: tan bf is.·a:ed In ,,..,.,.. (MIN) solll II IHt 1!11'1 can bt toltr1ted In c,,ganic (ORG) loill and If l!lmt•-ha! fl,ferr.,ecliale In r,,;.,e,al.organic (M-0) ao;ia. T!>tte!c,,1. IN ,:,11 clan "'"' ••It! -. alcltra!l!I w.i.i.n:t on !ht al'IIOU'II cf. ~"" IUgilftlld. Ht.A.-.;. t'4J"'< t.~an,,, 1!'100 em'l: TNt II • meuurt o' 1r,a1 I-',.,'°" cl o•ganit -Ill ttlt IOI .-hich II cltcor.,;med to 1cm, a,,n;,oi,nclt called fv.T.ic •~ l111vic a:;c,s. I: re;,,1111111 t11t ponion GI 0tp1.,;c rr.iie: t!".a: Is •c!iemitllly r-■et,,,t•. Humic: ffle:te· Is ir. eel hcr.••Cll> !Of dfterrnl!ling hertlic:icle l'lcl l'fflf •IIH. .. V,;V (Wt;p~ pe• Vcl.Jf"lt. p'Cffl'J: l'lafll fVOII O'O..· in I YCIJrnt ~.,,.-cl Joi; ,."11►, ~It fnpacl for ,.. ir,;: ..,p;~111. T"t•t!o•t. •~ labc•tlO')-Wl)fl. if d~ on Hlt-~lf~ ,-:,l;r.,t """"''I o! lei!. lllllf. !rem • p,1c1,cat ,:1-,c,;,,'-r.. ca· be de"' tc ct--2~ ttws r:,eas.:•t. ~·ru Pf. tu!lic cent,.,.,.,.,. w. ij ;s • go;,d lncl,::a:o, c! N 1,,1.,,, o' :tit 1:>ii. Ve;· aancl)· scilf "''r ••~•. mc,,t "'·•"' 1.50. ••'-1!111 cta1· loa-ns nu, 1.00 •"'" c:rp1,;;c1 8f ""'" ., o.,o v·cm•. G!ff">'IO..r1t Mf:!.a ,...a,· "f'O", •~"' Ifft "'8r. DPD8'1ic ao'!I. '-,,:1:0,-. c:,.....,_-.1cn wo .. -te be Wilt: •-Net! -i;i'ls , p ·c,n•. Revis.: ttl''.)J R~p c11'!~t , ttc · rta:ipn J•c•.ra <:1;,a;i!H••ra.! ~· C:.y 8'1C! lit l•c,,, :"4 !O,, ... , •• ~-:r t"'II ~;.,. lt>t or;r,lt p~,:.:-o• I iD'" ••M•~ a ~• c,I ntpll;,t ~,t-p.l "'•<~-clttt..,.;,,e l!I ca;,a:'ly i:, hole! ar< ••ct-•"'Pt ;,:,,Mfr c•,1-pec1 t:tmtllll tllltcl u,;o..s. Tt>:H lo....e in p,u,111 11....,!,14! ••• ~•< O' wll 'ta:: • !'". 1:;es It. IC'ffl ntlf.Tt' 11~,1 H.-wtvf'. cl e;..a · ~:•.i•.:t a•t ~at ~.al U!I t•tllt s,•:,!,it!elf •U~:: It 10;1 1:;cli'.t. Thtrt~. thif -•-lltlr!ltl tl,t 10-T1 c,;,.:ijJ to hole! ~lie Cl!l<-nt auch II cai:•"'-· ""~""'-'"'· 1'111 pe:1n;..-,r, It -~ It hyC,.~~•. I\,.,,;...,.,,, lrC'l 1'111 n:1ng1ne1t. The lll"dl'c! r-.111:,rt II 1t11n1d :-,,,;'lf:;:a·li.,-,!f (")tll.lslt• 10C..c.r.,it Ct'll:-.ln ~ c,l ac,11, 'TIit CEC of o.,r sc'II flll! •in;t fro,,., I ~~ ol •C' er mc,,1 in Cit)',..: o•p1.,;c I)!! IC a bi,· o''2 Cl ltn Ill 11l'"11t 11.,:1,· SD~ lo ~.;;., CEC It clu'•lblt t.t:a.-v rur . .,.~ cl ltr:ol;i1, , •• lrif-.s It 1,n r..,tr l'>C t,,;ihe• •flt"'• q.,a,:~;,, ta· 'bl ..,.,"1:a,nt( t!lUI llSVh"e I>, a~:i,,llt l:io;>'1· t,•:,i,;~ :t,f ,•~ Hlf~ Tht CE C ii net. I t,t: . ~, :..t tr.r. ••;:· vary t,:,m t'-nt t:, !;.,,. at !ht ?"f t'°-l"ft! l!C H ~Irie !?f:I•~ ii •~ o-111:o,,,;,:,ses. : !Pa . .,, •• "'••.ra·c-•· c· •cc,· Thia Tl':Jt .. 11'11 f,:-:,o,, o! ,.,. CEC l'ltl ,t tee.~~ !,y n.r.•,e'II u1oc:n1. p11nc;;:1nr care;~.,. . .,.,,;,,t1i11ffl and p:.:ntiu'T: ~:::u-n. r.-.an;a-..11. ,; .. : ,-.c: coc,;,e· ••• alfc:, i'I,:,~ b;:: art :,,IM-t. I!-, uc•, rner. ~.-.:~:n !ht,· rt to! lm!t CO"llf<l;IP'ICt i,-. cai-....ia•;.,; tti't ~alut. Ball ~;:,m l't !'lc:lt ~ --~ IHC: ,.1:h Ir. IC~ to pr:,:,.,c: 111;11'11 salts. I .. ' 'Ttia t,;;t,f•. ,,_ bnt .. ~.,..~ .. l'lt ~! 1111 p!aft! ""-';.'ii lup;,IJ 1-C !!It lt!t a:~i:, P-IWII to hlr.ftll w!!h pla"'1 0'0"111. ! k · t'-ti:l~t:i::j·,,~•! fll't It lht 11.11-. 11~;... :,onocn cl ,,~Ee~~,:!!>)· ■c,cl~y lttl~. ITICII', hJdrcgtn a-.:: tllrn''V"I lllt 1,-.I: or ,,,us:.:,■ II lht IIIM If t!la: -:: In ~C lY Is Ult~ to Clltllllll !he anQIIII o! imt cl. . . . pH • •Mom • Pl tn•it••r!IC)· p!4 II • mealU'I. In eltec: a" lndta. c:' ft,f a;i:ve ~ In a ac,;11: ar. lnstan, in~-Sor P"(•·•:.itt ra191 lrclTI 1"0Und 3 IO abwt I on I 1:n o! 0 IC 1•. II II con1t1"11)' c~.a.,r:•n; with ad:::i;:.,.,. ol ~• and ft"liliJtt. ttlt _.,.,.. Inc! a,ll;ral P,l::tffl. NU!fitnl uplll,f by pla'1I! as .,.r It tt,e dt;rat t:,l IOIII dl,,..age f!om lci:1~1· ara. Ir. penr.al, 11la:t11 IC pH. . lbt !KiDlin:kl P' tlt ltS' >:I' ,M f'I rtlllel! ti tt,e .. ~., c,f plant nulrit'III lc,unci or Olhtl ltnilny musu,11. Then thl1 can bi rt!llld to crcp p,'OdJC1.o!I In I Qlll'lli°.lnl Wlf a•t 8!,fip!,ed I" lnclt• .alut °""" a,. e"?'HIK It lpt'Ctlll t:,l CEC c,, ;,, quan!illt-... frr.,s II df'l,•,t~ · TIit to,1 n~'l!;,,,ts wt,;c►. t-.ave t>Pr.. 1u:p,,td r :-cit• valut Cl'I. in ge,.,.ra:. bt c:>"'ISicl~,ec loll· r. :! o-ltn. ,,,.c, . .,.,, • 2f-5:' a'lc! t,;g•, I! ;•ta!tt 1111, 5:' F·I lf'X:•:i1lCrnS t:c:•••· Tl!.!. ~• rt!lt::tt r.,e .,.,: c: F' t:.,.,,,~ if! N s:,;: \'a\1t1 ten !'Ian ,o~ are DI c:,ncern In p,.c1;:1~ r.it l'ffc! t:,r lt•ti;;ztr ~ V••,,.• G·H!t• ~ .. ~ ,&! wiP. bl inckl1td ., 1&6<. 1• 1".-i :ro;1u;.;:n b:lt•)· TIiis ~,:.11. ti1.t that tor P. • •· '-.:!f• "'~""""'', ;-, cor::,11: t: F !!If indt, may t,~c ~M. \'a!Uff O,tat•• I'll•,,~ Ot"'t'l"1 a•t t' r'::it ct,r<t-,, Ill ()l:i~ !!If 11:t c,I P."'IIU~ tr::l-:t• l,tt:!tC: blll ft-. tel81 Q,,l••~l ~t,ll!H 1D !"It tEC 1,ic es va•ue1 . tr·•, •!:1';ium-•.; pt CEC t Ct•c.iu~. It 111 Hff~t-1· r·,.,, ,..,.,..,.,, w.. bt:a.-u ca:~;,,,,. is !hi ;.•,-:-.11 r-.;••C:•"' ol limtSIC'lt 1r. •.,ell II used Ill c:"'."o· a:=::.:;. ft .,.,n 111c1co,,.. bt I:•· ,,..~-gt-In "ICS1 -~·;, le CIJM I t!tlrc~ncy. Sinct cat:,r., is L~Ullt, ~·•ttn! in lt•pt qJ■r.:~_ ... ,. h :::c.;;,;ts a ll•ge• rtrtt"e'.tpt C" ':'>t CEC ~,I-. ~•-.a:-+.~'"11 Ind :,::&!!: • ..,, Ce-.uq,,.r,:r,.. rit ta':',r. dfll"l'linalrO'I It tnto::.a ;•. cr:St-r IC t!lll!>l:r" !'It CEt If •en It , ... ,,:a,;t'"l,.,,p Wl•·ttn ca::;.,,,., l"IC lht tlhe! • -~·,t•.: u:'c"'IS. L~•-•1 11.,.-,c•i111j·0i t' r,cr.,· Tnt ~;-,tsli,!,t :..,· it hf'"Hnc! u I i,t•tt•,:a~ c• :!If CEC. TIit . .-.:.~.: o' r-.a;.,.,iirn tc:1-i:: ~ s:" tt-11 ,, .. ,; .. tc l'"-t 1"'0~ o' calti\...,.,. p::an ,.,,,., 1"11 !!It acid •·a::="' c! !"If CEC ;,,t:.'tn:ts ,.,. 1::.11: i;;,■.,My l'' -.,;~s':r-, "ftMC:. Tnt•,•:,r,. :--., :,cur::re nttC! t:• ~~ .. .r-::..:1 :."" o' ffll;...,,:J.T' f-. !-:-:"'-r.\l!t~il~ or i'. ~. :,-,0·.::t• is !latt:1 (". r.,;, ,,:i· .... ., .... .,, •. t.••-f n,~,...,;;a,,o• t,;1t,1· -:---.o1 ;-:!t• ts uttcl In c:"'.• -:::,c• •·1!'-r" to ,.,.a:.;111 r,1 ,.,,:, '°' '-"' 1::-:i:a~•e~. t,f't tt'11i~ c·os,t. ~--. nu~.~•• 1ft ~-r:.,..., aet ,.,.. W.a,opa"t!t a.-a :a~iij1• hdt•H t:-.... lirt; l:'1:l lt:cnl! c•c;,s '-:l: :-e•,al ln!c,....,iclrl -.;1-c!:.,; ,.,., a'lcl ,,,.!',:,:It o' a::-ca1;:, .. "'"f tit ;..:: .. ,:,«;,,!'If "Nole" 1h11 •~c:..-:,a°"ft ycur rtpo,t. z·-• an· "Kit•'· 'NI rr.:s., " uttc: 1e "·atuatt :t· t-0.., !ht s:rc:,:,;,r. o• M~ ,.,-..:;e-r. l'! to•ic. T·.t It ,t'I •·'"<" 1-1c1;:1tt 1ul!i::if"l:y c· t:•ic~y 1•1 nc· e•u·•tir. lo• 1:iont t-o;,s. 1r.1: ~11 r.v.!I ara c,:, ... ,,.,et L'II l-l!c•..,11;on 1n !hi ·1~:,111· t!lat l:c:l-.pl")' )':,,,I n,pcrl. CU·I rC;;:,aer '"lier)· This lnl!t> " uttcl to t•'l"A:t Cu t•c-n tht s:a•.C:;,t,in: r! bei-lG IL..,.c•"' or ~•it la.t Zr.. :t,e lt~tl! wt,;ct, lncl,::itt 1Jlfc ... ncy 0t t:•t~, ••• n:,t ctea·•cut 1o, -t':,:,S. IJnli:"'"' tt .. rs l"t dt:t,.,,int!! Ult W:,,,na;~ Ir. t'II -..01ft" t!--1'. a~,y '°"' 11:,orl &·I 1$1"!&1t Svllu: Jndtri• 'f>,;s It 1 11latlvt !"\tu .. ~, cl l"lt to-,:, ct '"""' .,,,~ IC pla-m. Tht •1: ""f bt Cioni on I limi:td n.,,:,t)t, o1 H,n;,111. .. =,..,..,, 1•. i"l'lt,pre:at;o,, cl Iha 11:,:;... l~otntf 0t•-t,1!ty rt:;.,;,11 fflCtl fr,lorrr,IIU 1!,t\JI t!lt ICd f-.1"1 ii IVl'.!a:,lt to L't GJiclt:i'ltt l"ld l~gpttliDnl l'f ~reel i.. -l'f tht "N:,:n• a="".1)1'¥"0 l'",.t lt;,o,L ~q rec· ::-it S•~ b;!tr•· -n..~· ,.,,ho • to-'c°"': •.r l;"='tA? ~·"',tr, !ht I!'!! 11-n~lf ii fro,n p·tt"\',:)-JSt tyC!:>~m 1-elclr o-Gl .... a•1a1 ...... ,. c!•"'••Qt !rem Hit ii sut;,t:ttc!. A gt,•••• hlf:;"t:al,C~ .. ;: bf incl,dfcl .,;:-, vttn"toJff lfPl"II, 01~-t· v.ullionl ITWlt bt 1,·atua:.i! on an tnc;lllc!;.ra! bas'I. NO.t.l f!-'trl!t N.,.'I. "'Ctt.•••;: !l'trlro!Me. 11(;'1 o• p·c,,.·i"S rt.,,:..-t1 ,.-;:: pe'. t:'\ I 1tlt. Thi ltll va!11t. ""~''"" ~• t.ib1: cit:~ i"'Olt'n'J. II I q;11r,t;:r., ... vat;.re battc! on • vol.nt fllhlr 1'1111. "'"'{"1 r.! aoll. Tht f'..r.'1!11• •~"I: bl IQak·altnt • ~'1t Pl' ,,.,.w;o,, (pcm: f. 1"t vo~ _ _,,,. lr.'t~ c! the ICIII WII 1 .0:• D t,,,'. ' OU-ltlll ■·t ID bt cc.....,_,td to If'!! lf'f.U~f O' IPtC~;:t:'O"\I l;awd l"' t:lual P?ffl, Ct"\\'fr, l!lt "'9'<!-r.' ,-alJI :r, Pr"'· b)· Imel~ b)· 1"11 W.V l" tt,e ao;! Ir\ q,,llli:I'\. °""",N jA~ ~, ,;,pc:-n?: Ttlll'"' ..r. t-tlcl:,rt. !:>t p.'1:.,·"'td. le, co,ia•ilon wllfl ,·1';111 t:.1Hc! l'n ,.,;;!'\I. o!>tt•vt tha ume s,,:1.,.;:, ll0lttl tor I'll Mrltt ~-·-· ~, :S:d.-.... ,,,.c·,o: :,r,'1: Tl\!! ltf!•::!it dOfle O""r r.-. p·:,:,lf-,,. 1'.J&I•~•-! t · l~.c•! rt:a:tt' ID rtltl•ctl. Tt\t ,·1'.1t is ;,, lht 11-.. lt"T:'1! Jltt' Ir !ht CEC No mi"'"'"'"' va,.,., t•t o' tr:-1¥.:trr. In fl"1 fV!r.!lo,, ~ t,;go, ........ ti•• Cl;IM t!>t c,:,r.,t, l!!.r.wrt or"" loll 1e ~•n•. c!:-wr. 1-.:! ,,.,,,. tt,;:Jf')· _..,:! p!ant ..;,:..,, ti! t11tiuf:",. "•D"'lii.""' a-.: :,,:au;.r.i. SUGGESttDTAUt1.mn •. "iht 1'11e,rt.a:~., Jt,..r 1.-:;:.:.,:-":-. yo,r ul'lpltt l"'ll' l!lt 10:• ltt: , .. ~~I .,., .• u,tc! I: atv.101, Ille IJ;.lflltd ra:tt, c: 1:-.a a..C ft,;.'.:tr. "!°!,tH ratft l::,:>') It '"' t·n! 1-t••. •"'<~ t'\t u-:'H we•t ll•tn t'ld 1>,e;.rie It!'! t,t cc,,;;.,td !c,o C!-9' .,e., or • Pf"":.r::e«: 1i:;o,11iona. ~ Aa!tt •~11•:: ltt ,►,.,.. 1:1'11 Sit• ac,■ l:r le•~• l•fl! or tr-p:i....._,; pe, ,o:: 1:;. II. fc,r 1fflll 1,11i A ,att c! O'W' a"ld O'lf htf. w-. per •e-• .,;a •~-:,.ar 11 1 .!-T to-lt-;t 1•111 ,~~ 11 070M to, ,,,..,..,,n. fEF.TtUZf:C.· P!l"I ••~:,:,n: llttdl 1r1 cc,,,,:Ol,•t' er, •~ i'lc'ri:l::at t-11it !:• f'otlcl c-o:,s Of ~""" pro.-.-n i,, la•Df 1·u!. "i!\f' tt.•fl (If. P,O, ■nd l<:01 1-..1 Cllt Qt"'''''1 M putC'ILt!cl in ffli,ld ftri;i:1111 art p,iflle:: r.i ra~,;H Lldi a, 0-30, 20-£0, eo-,o:,, .i~. A ml,tc! "-,;?:zt• ,~.a! ~ nearly fill !ht N•P1O,l<:0 llliC fL'QGUIHI. t:ra;gi,: n;rtrit"' -•ia's l'" ,.,, ct,"Tll>"II:¢'" ci l!tt !•t ti" bt used. ·,. TIit O!'IM V·••· cu. z~ .. e 1ec ._...,1 ,,, p,inled n Ofll ftl.-m:it, tr • fll:'!C'& ranoe in''""' D! lbs.'I ol 1ht ac:ua! tltmtnt t.l:,•• clt!a,:,c: ln!cim111011 conct-•ni<,g Heh Crt'P or thl 1~:::l1ion c,I aadl 1ftmtr;t can o-••'1)· bt found in !ht N:ilt lnclitllld 1,: 11'11 ·sn N:-te· block. Ill o•u11hoL11a cuftlM. amen 1.-1 areas anti pes1;b1t cit,,, ,n.,,:::,,, tt-t N. ~A and tc,O lug;,tSl;or,, l~I! t! Pt'~"1c!S ti ll:', Pf' 100!1 IQ. II. Fer •••~-~ r,., tht 1(,0 b'O:~ .,__ lwO po.r.,t!! 1<10 pa, 10:>0 Ml I! . S:i;;t1:t~ t-ta= It~:,!■~ 1-:..r.,c! ttit homt .,;r 1;,~•• 11 a 1'!\r-1!:>f• o• ;,:,,J"CI cl a par:;cu:tr e"l:lt o' mi•td ltr:i.:t• N" ~OCD •~ t:. Joo 111,ilt. ~01!:>1. 10-,c,.,c-oreq.r,.P1•100~••~ t:.Tht"Noi•· lncl.'!'.ltc! ~ !'It II p:r. •.;r· co-u--: 'IIO'I cltlliltd iol!o<rr.a:~. SOIL TE!11NG ~ lo SEZ!\'ICE P~O\'IDED 8V Ncl1h Caiollnl Dep1. ol Agrlcullln -+