NCD980602163_20010220_Warren County PCB Landfill_SERB C_Detoxification - Redevelopment, 1978 - 2001-OCR

Select a Flight
2 of 4
Opti?n 4
;ji.&jMj)
Ji4.iR
Option 5
Jw.iJiM) ,,~:f:a
Option 6 ,_
::~lM
http://dpsl.travelocity.com:80/airg ... SEQ=98269747188867802202001&LANG=EN
;,~=-=~=~· Flight: Southwest Airlines flight 1166 on a Boeing 737-300 Jet mti'l.¥4.J Departs: Tuesday Mar 06 .-,~h~~w,,~c···· From: Raleigh/Durham, NC (RDU) at 10:25am ~m~U . To: Baltimore Washington (BWI) at 11 :25am
Stops: None
Flight: Southwest Airlines flight 1604 on a Boeing 737-700 Jet
Departs:Tuesday,Mar06
From: Baltimore Washington (BWI) at 9:15pm
To: Raleigh/Durham, NC (RDU) at 10:15pm
Stops: None
. . . US Airways flight 3172 operated by US AIRWAYS
i!J!!H1111 D;:~;; i~:s~~;,Sif~~~6MONT AIRLINES on a Dehavilland Dash
;;;-=:r;;: From: Raleigh/Durham, NC (RDU) at 10:15am !?[Ulif(ifl To: Baltimore Washington (BWI) at 11 :35am
Stops: None
. . US Airways flight 3473 operated by US AIRWAYS
~Jl}Jf&~. Fhght. EXPRESS-PIEDMONT AIRLINES on a Dehavilland Dash %~~:::~ Departs:Tuesday,Mar06
::;;;;;;;;:;;:;;;;; From: Baltimore Washington (BWI) at 12:15pm
.. fofoM.✓..., To: Raleigh/Durham, NC (RDU) at 1:40pm
Stops: None
Flight: US Airways flight 1144 on a Fokker 100 Jet
:.,,,,,,:,,,,,,@,w<-:• Departs: Tuesday, Mar 06 l i¼¥W.6!] From: Raleigh/Durham, NC (RDU) at 7:40am
;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; To: Charlotte, NC (CL T) at 8:29am
Stops: None
Flight: US Airways flight 1561 on a Boeing 757 Jet
:,,,,. ««<W/.««· Departs: Tuesday, Mar 06
t.:3;::.:::.:::::.:::. From: Charlotte, NC (CL T) at 9:45am
i;;;;:;:;;;;;;;;;; To: Baltimore Washington (BWI) at 11:10am
Stops: None
Flight: US Airways flight 1757 on a Boeing 737-300 Jet
f.:F/Nh»w;;;.,; Departs: Tuesday, Mar 06 /~;;,t::.:;;;;;;; From: Baltimore Washington (BWI) at 6:55pm ';!Wd:WI( To: Charlotte, NC (CLT) at 8:18pm JlJL .J Stops: None
ill;;;;:;;:;;;;:::;, Flight: US Airways flight 1158 on a Fokker 100 Jet
ff.Wifilfilfil Departs:Tuesday,Mar06
Uiiirnii@~ From: Charlotte, NC (CLT) at 10:30pm
;.;;;::::.;:::.:::.:;; To: Raleigh/Durham, NC (RDU) at 11 :1 Spm
Stops: None
02/20/2001 2:37 PM
I Select a Flight
3 of 4
· Option 7 :)••> =¥~~-
Option 8 =-{~W-
http://dpsl.travelocity.com:80/airg ... SEQ=9826974718886780220200l&LANG=EN
:::::::::::=:•••:•:•:,,::::::::::•=::::,=, Flight: Oelta Air Lines flight 1653 on a Boeing 757 Jet
-Departs: Tuesday, Mar 06
'.':':· ·:. '.~ From: Raleigh/Durham, NC (~DU) at 6:00am
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,:,:,,,:,:,:,,,,,,, To. Atlanta, GA (ATL) at 7.25am
!i@'/!11:~~ Stops: None
Flight: Delta Air Lines flight 592 on a McDonnell Douglas MDB
Departs:Tuesday,Mar06
From: Atlanta, GA (ATL) at 8:30am
To: Baltimore Washington (BWI) at 10:15am
Stops: None
CllckHU) Flight: Delta Air Lines flight 997 on a Boeing 737-800 Jet
d . .A. Departs: Tuesday, Mar 06
2~ ( From: B?lti~ore_ Washington (BWI) at 5:55pm
' To: Cincinnati, OH (CVG) at 7:40pm
Stops: None
.... ,,,,,,......... Flight: Delt~ Air Lines flight 5881 operated by Comair Inc on
if~W'l~~mr== Regional Jet
>.·•••••~• ·. J Departs: Tuesday, Mar 06
~. From: Cincinnati, OH (CVG) at 8:40pm
'@,1l~ To: Raleigh/Durham, NC (RDU) at 9:58pm
Stops: None
Flight: Delta Air Lines flight 2143 on a Boeing 757 Jet
,,, ... ~···· · ·= .• Departs: Tuesday, Mar 06 y . -._ From: Raleigh/Durham, NC (RDU) at 11 :15am £·--~= · ;, ( To: Atlanta, GA (ATL) at 12:43pm
, Stops: None
zm·W:;:l!/$£ Flight: Delta Air Lines flight 1186 on a Boeing 757 Jet
··\(~;;.·'." Departs· Tuesday Mar 06 ,.,.,, From; Atla~ta, GA (AT~) at 1 :45pm
)~MIL~ · To: Baltimore Washington (BWI) at 3:30pm
·,,;,::·,u·•~,, .• ,. Stops: None
~:;:.. ... :.:~:..:..:..:.-:..:..:.:~:..:..:..:.: Flight: Delta Air Lines flight 281 on a Boeing 757 Jet
;;;;::' '':;:::; Departs: Tuesday, Mar 06
From: Baltimore Washington (BWI) at 8:40pm '-§~•••· ' To: Atlanta, GA (ATL) at 10:35pm ~m,~w.. Stops: None
02/20/2001 2:37 PM
I Select a Flight
Option 9
,, .• ,
http:/ /dps 1. travelocity.com: 80/airg ... SEQ=982697 4 718886780220200 l&LANG=EN
Flight: Southwest Airlines flight 2109 on a Boeing 737-300 Jet
Departs:Tuesday,Mar06
From: Raleigh/Durham, NC (RDU) at 2:30pm
:J@iMI@ ~fai&W,F}} Sto~~~ ~~~i:ore Washington (BWI) at 3:30pm
., ... ,•,•·······························
. New Flight
· S-o~rch
Flight: Southwest Airlines flight 1450 on a Boeing 737-300 Jet
Departs:Tuesday,Mar06
From: Baltimore Washington (BWI) at 6:55pm
To: Raleigh/Durham, NC (RDU) at 7:55pm
Stops: None
······································
Cancel
·.· (,;,f\'r, friitl! r.t~N•I
S:lb-re 1 © 2000 Travelocity.com LP. All ~ights reserved. Trave!ocity®, Travelocity.com and the Travelocity skyline
{'(,<t];flf!Cfetl logo are trademarks and/or service marks of Traveloc1ty.com LP.
4 of 4 02/20/20012:37 PM
The State ofNorth Carolina took an important step in fulfilling the promise to the people of Warren County
to detoxify the Warren County PCB Landfill.
A contract was signed between the Department of Environment and Natural Resour sand the IT
Corporation for ~the detoxification of the Warren County PCB Landfill. he IT Corporation was
awarded the contract based on a low bid of$13.5 million for the entire cleanup. hase I will include site
preparation, installing ofutilities, construction offacilities, equipment mobilization, performance testing,
and the treatment of a limited amount of material. At the completion of this phase, the IT Corporation will
have completed the demonstration testing of the Base Catalyzed Decomposition which is required to obtain
the necessary permits to treat the entire landfill contents. At the successful completion of Phase I and with
the availability of additional funding, the company will be awarded Phase II of the project which will
complete the landfill detoxification and allow the site to be redeveloped.
The contract is a significant achievement of the DENR Division of Waste Management and the Warren
County community who have been working together since 1994 to select and test an appropriate and
community-acceptable treatment technology and to design and implement the detoxification project. This
process was supported by the General Assembly through the appropriating of $10 million for the project to
date. Additional funding of$7.5 million is needed to proceed with Phase II. Both state and federal sources
are being examined to secure the additional funding.
Additional benefits of the project to the community will occur through the hiring of workers and the
purchase of supplies and services for the project. It has been projected that approximately 20 workers will
be hired for the project and that $xkdjsl M will be (finish latere) ..
IT Corporatation is a bland of The IT Group. The IT Group is
--
V
WARREN COUNTY PCB
CITIZENS ADVISORY BOARD
DETOXIFICATION-REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
February 8, 2001
AGENDA
I. Welcome
II. Roll Call/Introductions
III. Reading and Approval of Minutes
IV. Report of Committees
V. Unfinished Business
VI. New Business
VII. Other Business
VIII. Adjourn
-I
Citizens Advisory Board
Detoxification-Redevelopment Project
draft January 18, 2001 Meeting Minutes
The meeting of the Warren County Citizens Advisory Board was called to order at 3:00 p.m.
Thursday, January 18, 2001. The meeting was held at the Coley Springs Baptist Church and was
called to order by Co-Chair Dollie Burwell. Present were Mike Kelly, Emily Brown, Pat Backus,
Patrick Barnes, Cathy Alston-Kearney, Gloria Kearney, Robin Green.
MINUTES ADOPTED AND APPROVED
Approval of the November 21, 2000 meeting was tabled until the next meeting
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Cathy Alston-Kearney updated the Citizens Advisory Board that Brian Holtzclaw has returned from
Washington DC and that she has not spoken with him at this time. Brian is the new environmental
justice coordinator who was assigned to fix the problems with the environmental justice grant.
Pat Backus spoke briefly about the two proposals and the messages she left for Brian Holtzclaw and
Rosalind Brown, Brian's supervisor, about the redevelopment of the landfill. Dollie Burwell
suggested that the Advisory Board meet with Brfuii Holtzclaw.
Cathy Alston Alston-Kearney said that the Warren Family Institute received $3000 towards the
HAZWOPER training program from the Warren County Commissioners. Thirty two people have
signed up to attend.
Pat Backus spoke briefly about the announcement of the public bid opening December 22, 2000. She
said the bid was certified with IT Corporation as the apparent low bidder and that the state has
requested MBE (Minority Business Enterprises) forms from the IT Corporation. Pat said that she
has been putting the pressure on the local subcontractors. After the MBE forms are in, she will issue
a letter of award to the IT Corporation. Pat said that the IT Corporation would have 30 days to
execute all of their bonds and sign a contract.
Mike Kelly said that the General Assembly is coming to town Wednesday January 24, 2001.
Pat Backus spoke briefly aboJ,,t Phase I and Phase II and where the project is now. She said that
Phase II will start in January~ 200~.
Dollie Burwell said that the Advisory Board needs to develop a plan and strategy. She said that the
Advisory Board needs to look to other resources for funding.
Mike Kelly said that he will get in touch with Jim McClesky to set up a meeting with Congressional
Representatives sometime next month. He said that a letter needs to go to Governor Easley and
DENR Secretary Ross.
-#
draft January 18, 2001 Meeting Minutes
page 2
Dollie Burwell suggested that Patrick Barnes, Pat Backus, Mike Kelly, and herself speak with Frank
Ballance in his Raleigh office.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 4:30 pm. The next meeting was schedule for February 8, 2001 at 3:00
pm
[' Select a Flight http://dpsl.travelocity.com:80/airg ... SEQ=98269747188867802202001&LANG=EN
I 1 Of 4
Select a Flight
All times shown are local to each city. Click Buy Now to purchase your tickets. If you're not ready to purchase your
click Hold/Save, if that option is offered.
Modify Your Search
lil[■iit
:;,:j,■i~!-J
i~1ij~ ~~~~ i~Wi~-
About this displa
a e1g ur am, to a t,more as mgton Tuesd
(BWI)
Option 1
;J~iM~,)
;~i-
Option 2
=1■~)
:;~i-
Option 3
;Jfoj:~j
ffi.MWJ#}
Flight: Southwest Airlines flight 730 on a Boeing 737-300 Jet '%~~ Departs: Tue~day, Mar 06
\~~;1~* From: Raleigh/Durham, NC (RDU) at 6:30am
'§tB.~-To: Baltimore Washington (BWI) at 7:25am
Stops: None
Flight: Southwest Airlines flight 1450 on a Boeing 737-300 Jet ,ii~~ Departs: Tuesday, Mar 06
i~U!"""-'~ From: Baltimore Washington (BWI) at 6:55pm
Wi-~.. To: Raleigh/Durham, NC (RDU) at 7:55pm
Stops: None
Flight: Southwest Airlines flight 315 on a Boeing 737-700 Jet
Departs:Tuesday,Mar06
•0,Jl\ From: Raleigh/Durham, NC (RDU) at 8:30am
~. To: Baltimore Washington (BWI) at 9:30am
Stops: None
Flight: Southwest Airlines flight 1635 on a Boeing 737-300 Jet
Departs:Tuesday,Mar06
.,,s\· From: Baltimore Washington (BWI) at 4:05pm
~--To: Raleigh/Durham, NC (RDU) at 5:05pm
Stops: None
. . US Airways flight 3108 operated by US AIRWAYS
Fhght. EXPRESS-PIEDMONT AIRLINES on a Dehavilland Dash
\L":,:.:;,,.:.;:.,.,, Departs: Tuesday, Mar 06
.::;~~::.::.::::::.~ From: Raleigh/Durham NC (RDU) at 6:25am .:.:.!-!•!•'.6!.:0:,:,:,-//.❖!❖! • .' To: Baltimore Washington (BWI) at 7:45am
Stops: None
Flight" US Airways flight 3159 operated by US AIRWAYS
' EXPRESS-PIEDMONT AIRLINES on a Dehavilland Dash rn ;;;;:-::::;;;;;~ Departs: Tuesday, Mar 06
:;;;;;;:::::;;;:-; From: Baltimore Washington (BWI) at 9:15pm .,.,.,.,w✓.-✓..,w,,,. To: Raleigh/Durham, NC (RDU) at 10:40pm
Stops: None
02/20/2001 2:37 PM
Get ALL of Your Training Done on Days
••• BAD WEATHER IS GUARANTEED!
NO MORE:
➔ Lost Billable Production Work
➔ Losing Your Best Crew for the WHOLE Day
➔ Wasted Time and Money on Bad Weather Days
➔ Required Training at the Expense of Your Schedule
➔ Mileage, Food, & Lodging Expenses For Each Employee
Paul P. McCain, PE, Authorized OSHA Instructor ** ENGLISH & SPANISH**
President
McCain Special Project Semces, Inc.
(Formerly Civil Engineering Faculty Member & Extension Specialist at NC State Univ.)
P.O. Box 10451
Raleigh, NC 27605-0451
HOW TO GET STARTED: Telephone: [phone] FAX: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
This NEW RESOURCE is a partnenhip team of expert professionals from several Univenities,
and from the public and private sector that COME TO YOU
... with as little as 1 day's notice!
Partial List of Offerings for Training and Consulting Senrices:
Production Topics:
Project Management
Cost Control
Project Scheduling
Cost Estimating
Constructability
Purchasing Mgmt.
Construction Law
Value Engineering
CAD Systems
Internet Applications
Safety Topics:
OSHA IO Hour -Construction
OSHA IO Hour -General Industry
Trenching Competent Person
Permit Req'd Confined Space Entry
Safety Plan Development
Fall Protection
Electrical Safety
Safety for On-Site Inspectors
Certified Forklift Operator
How to Survive an OSHA Visit
Design Topics:
Stormwater Design
Basic Structural Design
Golf Course Design
Site Development
Site Permit Process
Landscape Design Theory
Engineering a Perfect Park
Flood Studies
Dam Design
Infrastructure Design
Call AS MUCH IN ADVANCE as possible ... fint come, fint senred!
A Team of Specialists is Available to Help with Your Design, Construction, or Maintenance
Projects, Providing High Quality Senrices at Very Competitive Rates!
• the'/'; grouP.
JV E W S RELEASE
Release Date: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Investor Contact: Richard R. Conte [phone]
Media Contact: William L. Mulvey [phone]
DRAFT#9
The lT Group, Inc.
271)0 MossiJe Boulevard
Monroeville, P~ 1514-6-2792
Tel. -/.12.372. 7701
Fax. -/.12.373. 7135
THE IT GROUP ANNOUNCES $41 MILLION IN COMMERCIAL PROJECT AW ARDS
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania -January XX, 2001 -The IT Group, Inc., (NYSE: ITX) (the Company)
announced today that IT Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary of The IT Group, is the apparent low
bidder for two South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) projects with projected revenues of
approximately $13. 5 million. IT Corporation is also the apparent low bidder for the remediation of the
Warren County PCB (Polychlorinated Biphenyl) Landfill . That contract, also with projected revenues of
$13 .5 million, will be with the North Carolina Department of Environment & Natural Resources.
Additionally, the Company received two new contracts with New York City with projected revenues of
approximately $7 million for the remediation of former, underground storage tank sites. Finally, a
commercial client extended IT's contract to provide turnkey environmental remediation services at
petroleum marketing locations through 2001. This extension has projected revenues of approximately
$?million.
The SFWMD projects, part of the Everglades Construction Program, are intended to improve the conveyance
of water through farmland, as well as to improve the flow of water through the existing canal system. The
remediation of the Warren County PCB Landfill will include excavation, thermal treatment and base
catalyzed decomposition of the PCB materials found at this highly sensitive site.
Anthony J. DeLuca, chief executive officer and president of The IT Group, said, "These contacts fmiher
validate our strategy to maintain our core strengths in environmental engineering and remedial construction,
while diversifying into the clean civil construction market."
The IT Group, Inc. is a leading provider of consulting, engineering and construction, infrastructure, water, facility and
environmental management services. Additional information about The IT Group can be found on the Internet at
www.theitgroup.com. The IT Group's common stock and depositary shares are traded on the New York Stock
Exchange under the symbols ITX and ITXpr, respectively.
Statements regarding the intentions, beliefs, expectations or predictions of The IT Group and its management, including, but not
limited to, those statements denoted by the words "anticipate," "believe," "expect," "should," and similar expressions (including
"corifidence'J are forward-looking statements that reflect the current views of The IT Group and its management about future
events and are subject to certain risks, uncertainties and assumptions. Actual results could differ materially from those projected
in such forward-looking statements as a result of a number of factors, including, but not limited to, competition and pricing
pressures, bidding opportunities and success, project results, funding of backlog and industry-wide factors.
Draft
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
APR 2 0 1983
DATE: APR181933
SUBJECT: Draft Final Report on Ambient Monitoring for PCB' s at the Warren County
(North Carolina) Landfill
FROM: Barry E. Martin, Chief cd'~ ~
Field Monitoring Section, EMTB, /£Mn, EMSL/RTP (MD-76)
TO: Doyle Brittain
EP.A, Region IV College Stat.ion Road
Athens, GA
Enclosed is a copy of the Draft Final Report on Ambient Monitoring
for PCB' s at the Warren County Worth carolina) Landfill submitted to
me by Battelle Columbus Laboratories, Columbus, Ohio. Please review
and provide your comnents to me so we can finalize this task with
Battelle.
If I can be of further assistance, please call me at FTS: 629-3076.
Enclosure
cc: T. Hartlage (MD-76)
, Form 1320-6 (Rev. 3-761
]
]
]
]
]
)
I
DRAFT FINAL REPORT
ON
AMBIENT MONITORING FOR PCBs AT THE
WARREN COUNTY (NORTH CAROLINA) LANDFILL
by
D.L. Sgontz, W.E. Bresler, L.A. Winker and J.E. Howes, Jr.
Battelle Columbus Laboratories
Columbus, Ohio 43201
I
Contract No. 68-02-3745
Work Assignment No. 10
Project Officer
Barry E. Martin
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 2m1
April 8, 1983
..
"'
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
Approximately 40 ,000 cubic ya rds of PCB-contam inated dirt exc~v ated from
along roads the central piedmont area of North Carolina has been disposed of
in an approved haz~r ·dous waite landfill in Warren County (NC). Local
residents and the Warren County Health Department have expressed concern
about the possibility of airborne PCB emissions from the landfill being
transported to neighboring areas, thus threatening the public welfare.
In answer to this concern, a study was performed to monitor airborne PCB
emissions from the landfil l and ambient air levels on and surrounding the
site. The specific objectives of the study were:
o to determine if PCBs ~re being emitted from vent pipes on the
landfill.
o to determine if PCBs are present in the ambient air downwind of
the vent pipes. /
o to determine if PCBs are present in the ambient air in the
vicinity of the nearest residence, approximately one-half mile
away.
o to quantify the actual concentration of PCBs, if any, being
emitted from the vent pipes.
o to quantify the actual concentrations of PCBs, if any, being
transported off the landfill.
The study was performed at the request of the North Carolina Division of
Health Services and was conducted according to a plan developed by EPA,
Region IV and EPA/EMSL personnel. Battelle-Columbus Laboratories personnel,
assisted by Jim Gray of EPA Region IV, performed the field sampling program.
----------~-:---""'."'."'."':-:--:===-=====-----------------------------
J
]
1
]
1
]
)
1
I
l
]
l •
Scut hwest Researc h Ins titute performed the PCB analysis of ~: e po: ur ethane
foam sampling cartridges. The following sections describe the landfill site,
the sampling and analytical procedures that were used, and present the
results of the study.
[
r .
[
I
(
l
I
I
I
r
SECTION 2
SITE DESCRIPTION
=-···-· ---------------
\
The landfill 1s located in Warren Cou nty , N~rth c~rol i na o~ an
approximat e ly 20 acre tract of land owned by the State of Nort h Carolina.
The l andfil l prop er covers an area of approximately 75m x 145m. In the
construction, plastic pipes were installed to vent gasesiand aqueous leachate
from landfill. The locations of the vents on the landfill are shown in
Figure 1. The main vent is 4 in. in diameter, extends approximately 1.2m (4
ft.) above the ground, and is located in approximately the center of the
landfi l l. Two leachate vents are located near the northeast corner of the
landfill. Two small vents have been added after construction to relieve gas
pressure under the plastic cover on the landfill. One of the vents is
located approximately du~ west of the main vent and the other is located near
the leachate vents.
'f· I I. -1.·
1"" I
j
l
I
l
Nl /2 mi. ~ from l andfi 11
House
J I
N
B A
0 o.
Vent Identification
A-Main Vent
B-Small Vent C-Upper Leachate Vent 0-Lower Leachate Vent
E-Small Vent
\ 0 Leachate
Q OE
D Q
C
Figure 1. Vent locations on Warren County {NC) Landfill
..
.. Pond
J I l ]
l
l
l
]
I
•
. I
=--
SECTION 3
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
FIELD MONITORING
The field monitori ng program was co nducted ov er the period Janu ary 26 -
February 1, 1983. Sampling was performed to determine PCB emissions from the
5 landfill vents and ambient air PCB levels on and in the vicinity of the
landfill. The monitoring schedule was as follows:
January 26 -vents and ambient air (daytime)
Janu ary 27 -vents only
January 28 -vents only
January 29 -ambient air only (daytime)
January 30 -no sampling due to weather conditions
January 31 and
February 1 -ambient air onfty (night time)
All PCB monitoring was performed with DuPont P-4000A battery-operated
pumps equipped with sampling cartridges consisting of a 2Cmn i.d. x 10cm long
borosilicate glass tubes into which was fitted a 22nm dia. x 7.6cm long plug
of polyurethane foam plug. The PUF sampling cartridges were connected to the
pumps with a short section of Tygon tubing as shown in Figure 2. Sampling
was performed according to the procedure described in Appendix A.
The vents which were sampled are identified in Figure 1. Sampling was
performed by placing the PUF cartridges into the vent pipes and sealing the
vent openings with a plastic bag or tape to restrict gas flow. Nominally,
sampling was performed for 8 hours at a flow rate of 1.2 -1.4 L/min.
Ambient air sampling was performed with an array of samplers located as
shown in Figures 3 and 4. Figure 3 shows the sampler placement for the
ambient air monitoring conducted on January 26 from approximately 1000 to
T ••
r
l
]
I
I
l
J
J
l
l
1
1
1
l • ..
I I
. \
SAMJIILING CARTRIDGE
LED INDICATOR LIGHTS
(TIMING, FLOW, IATTERY)
FLOW RANGE VALVE
~------1.FLOW RATE ADJUSTMENT
TIMING SWITCHES
DRIVE IELT
OFF-ON SWITCH
Figure 2. DuPont P-4000A pump and sampling cartridge.
J
J
I l
)
□ 3
, ,
A I 0 N
8
0 0
0
7
0 2A Q 2B
I
4A 4B 4C
SA SB SC
6A 68
Figure 3. Ambient air sampling locations on January 26, 1983.
6C
©
. MRI
Weather
Station
l
l
l
]
]
]
l
J
J
J
J
J □ 3
J
J
J
J
J
1 •
-l •
•
I • -1 -
~
J I 0 N
0 0 0
SA
4A
6A
2A
6B SB 04B 0 7
2B
4C
SC
6C
Figure 4. Ambient air sampling locations on January 29, 1983 .
8
©
MRI
Weather
Station
..
-. _]
·]
_]
_]
I
:_]
]
ri p
p
~.l
1700 hrs. EST. Two samplers were located upwind of the main vent; one on-
site approximately midway between the vent and the north fencelirie .(Locati on
7) an d the other off-site {Location 8). Two samplers were located near the
main vent {Locations 2A and 28); one on each side at a distance of 1 meter:.
An array of 12 samplers were located downwind of the main vent in
approximately a 90° quadrant. Samplers were placed at three locations {4A,
48, and 4C) approximately midway between the main vent and the south fence
line. Along the south fence line, samplers were placed at three locations
(SA, 58 and SC). At each location, sampling was performed at 4 ft. and 15 ft.
abov,e grou nd 1eve1 , The sa.11~'1 in g locati on:; (6A , oB, and oC) were off-si t e
approximately 200 meters f r om the mai n vent , · One sampler was ~l aced nea r t he
residence which is approximately 1/2 mi. west of the l~ndfill. With exception
_of the downwind fence line points, ambient air sampling at all other
locations was performed at 4 feet above ground level. The sampling pumps were
operated at a nominal flow rate of 3.8 L/min.
\ Sampler pla~ement f or the ambien t air mo nitoring conducted on January 29
is shown in Figure 4. Samplers were deployed in the same general pattern as
used on January 26, however a change in wind direction required a shift in
the specific sampling points as shown. Sampling on January 29 was performed
from approximately 0900 -1700 hrs. EST.
Night time ~ampling was pdrformed on January 31 -February 1 using the
same sampling pattern and sampling locations as on January 29. Sampling was
started at approximately 2100 hrs., January 31, and was to be terminated at
approximately 0500 hrs., February 1. However, most of the DuPont pumps
failed after 2-3 hours of operation due to the low ambient temperature
(__,30°F) and the high relative humidity (..,95%). Consequently, very few va.lid
samples were obtained.
PCB ANALYSIS
Analysis for PCBs in the PUF cartridges was performed according to the
procedure given in .Appendix B. The steps in the analysis procedure included;
1) Soxhlet extraction of the foam plugs with 5% ether in hexane; 2)
concentration of the extract to 1 ml and 3) determination of PCBs in the
]
i
]
i
]
]
~]
]
·1
J
I
'
-1
l
l
l
J
J
J
1 i
l
extr~ct by electron capture-gas chromatography using EPA Method 608(!).
Ide ntificati on and quant if icatior1 c,t Ar oclor 1242 dnd 1260 in the samples was
performed by the technique described by Webb and McCall(2).
METEOROLOGICAL MEASUREMENTS
Continuous measurements of wind speed and wind direction were performed
during the field monitoring period with a MRI portable weather station. The
ambient temperature sensor on the untt·'tfid notfurrction, thus continuous
ambient temperature data were not obtained. The weather station was located
east of the landfill i n an unobstructed area. Ground level elevation at the
weather station location was approximately the same as the center of the
landfi 11.
Ambient temperature, relative humidity, and barometric pressure readings
were taken approximately hourly during sampling periods.
' • I
PC B MONI TOR ING DATA
SECTION 4
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The resul ts of the PCB mon itoring at the Warren County landfill ar ~
presented in Tables 1 through 6. Tables 1 through 3 give the concentrations
of Aroclor 1242 and 1260 {in nanograms/standard cubic meter*) measured in the
vent emissions on January 26, 27, and 28, respectively. The results show
that the main vent . is the predomi n·ate source of PCB emi s s 1 on from the site.
Du ring the study period, the average con centrations of Aroclor 12 42 and 1260
. observed in the main vent emissions were 123 and 2 µg/scm, respectively. The
PCB emission rates from the main vent based on these average concentrations
and the average flow rate ·(measured by EPA) are: 12 ng/sec of Aroclor 1242
and 0.19 ng/sec of Aroclor 1260. PCB emissions from other vents on the site
were significantly lower than f~om the main vent.
The ambient air monitoring results obtained during the study are. shown
in Tables 4,5, and 6. On January 26, vent _and ambient air monitoring were
performed concurrently. Thus, the ambient air monitoring data for this date
{Table 4) are probably not representative since the flow from the vents was
restricted during the sampling period.
The daytime ambient air monitoring data for January 29 is shown in Table
5. PCBs were not detected at any sampling location downwind of the main
vent. Aroclor 1260, at a concentration near the minimum detection limit was
found in one of the upwind samples (Location A-7).
* Standard conditions -2s0c, 76Cmn Hg
m•~~ ,._. . ...., a-., ..._, I-' 1--J '--' .._, .._, .__, ..._ ....., ._. .._ ...., ....., .._. ~ .....,. c.-..t TABLE 1. VENT MONITORING RESULTS -WARREN COUNTY (NC) LANDFILL(a) Sampling Date January 26. 1983 Sampling Location Sameltng Period, Hr EST Sampling Avg Sampling Total Sample guant1tf2 PCBs In PUF I ng Code and Description StarE [na Time. mlns. Rate. sec/min Volume. scm Aroclor -42 Aroclor 1260 V-A Hain Vent 1010 1700 410 140B 0.58 82.100 V-B Small Vent west of Hain Vent 1010 1701 411 1237 0.51 35 -V-C Upper Leachate Vent 1005 1701 416 1424 0.59 1270 V-D Lower Leachate Vent 1005 1701 (b) (b) (b) ND V-E·Small Vent near Leachate Vents 1010 1701 411 1460 0.60 400 a) ND -PCBs were not detected In sample. Hlnlmunt detectable levels of Arochlor 1242 and Arochlor 1260 In the cartridges are estimated to be 10 ng and 15 ng. respectively. b) Sample pump malfunctioned durfng sampling period. 1200 ND 360 ND 780 PCB Cone. In Alr1 ng/scm Aroclor 1242 Aroclor 1260 141.552 2.069 69 <29 2.153 610 667 1300 ,,. fl '' I
-,. f .. . ·• ' •••. ., •-~ • • ....... ·•~~ ----~. ----. : n: .. ~ TABLE 2. VENT l~ONITORING RESULTS -Wl\llREN COUIITY (NC) LANDFILd•) Sampling Date January 27, 1983 Sampling Location Samet ln!J Period, llr csr Sarnpl Ing Avg Sampling Total Sample guantltf. PCOs In PUF1 n9 Code and Description Star[ £nil Time, mlns. Rate, sec/min Volume, scm Aroclor -2~2 ~roclor 1260 V-A Hain Vent 0900 1700 480 1359 0.65 76700 V-8 Small Vent West or Hain Vent 0900 1700 400 '1159 0.65 NO V-C Upper Leachate Vent 0900 1700 480 1410 0.68 1920 V-0 Lower Leachate Vent 0900 1700 480 1330 0.64 NO V-E·Small Vent near Leachate Vents 0900 1700 480 1259 0.60 NO a) NO -PCBs were not detected In sample. Minimum detectable levels or Arochlor 1242 and Arochlor 1260 In the cartridges are estimated to be 10 ng and 15 ng, respectively. 1380 NO 320 51 ND PCB Cone. In l\lr1 ng/scrn Aroclor 12~2 ~roclor 12~0 118,000 2123 <15 <23 2824 471 <16 80 ,,. <17 <25 p
-.JllliMIII : '.,~ii~i:'' : l'··,i~.!·. :•1 · ..... ,, ..... -....ii '· ~ ,LI \ 1, : • 1, < I ......., ...... ..., ....., ..... ...... ..... ...., ..... ..... ~ TADLE J. VENT MONITORING RESULTS -WARREN COUNTY (NC) LANOFILL(a) Sampling Date January 28, l9AJ .... Sampling Location Samellng Period, Hr EST Sampl Ing Avg Sampling Total Sample gu,int I tt. PCOs In PUF I ng Code and Description Start End Time, ,nlns. Rate, sec/min Volume, scm Aroclor242 Aroclor 1260 -V-A-1 Hain Vent(b) 0900 1700 480 1254 0.60 69300 V-A-2 Hain Vent(b) 0900 1700 480 1347 0.65 68700 -V-B Small Vent West of Hain Vent 0900 1700 480 1326 0.64 42 V-C Upper leachate Vent 0900 1700 480 1388 0.67 510 V-D Lower Leachate Vent 0900 1700 480 1324 0.64 61 V-E Small Vent Near Leachate Vent 0900 1700 480 1279 0.61 18 a) NO -PCBs were not detected tn sample. Hlnt111U111 detectable levels of.Arochlor 1242 and Arochlor 1260 In the cartridges are estimated to be 10 ng and 15 ng, respectively. b) Co-located samplers. 1130 1150 ND 206 54 18 ~ '--"I ........ ~ ,..__, I• PCB Cone. In Alr1 ng/scm Aroclor 1242 Aroclor 1260 115,500 1883 ,,. 105,692 1769 66 <23 761 307 95 84 p JO JO
...•. f, Jl,1 .,! ..... . ~ffl-;;mia·"'c,:'.'.",.. ..... .-.ma ............................... _._..._.._. ............... --· ....... .._ ....... .._. ---····-·-·----·,t' .t,··:rt:li,,~,. '1 ,lrl . ., ~·•, .. ; · · , , ·· t/\\:" .·/:. ~tJ.,((:{:{(:~?\::. -i: · TABLE 4 AKIIENT AIR KINITORING RESULTS• WARREN COUNTY (NC) LANDFILL(•) SAMPLING DATE• JIINUARY 26. 1903 I.·•••·•••--•·•••·•••••••..----......... , -• .... ••-~••••• •••••••·•••I._.,.-•-•-•••••••• .. 11 •••• •• •• • •·• • • • • •·•••--•. • • • • • •. ••~•-• • • • · Sampling Local Ion Code ind Description •"-•·-·--···--··· ·---------------------------------------=-----=-=-:..:.:....:.::.=.::: Sa11111llng Height, ■ Sam~I h19 Period, llrCST tut End S,1111111 ln9 Time, ■ins llv•J. Sa .. ,1 l119 hte, scc:/■tn Total S~le Vol11111e, sc■ Quantity_ PCOs tn PUF, n9 A·roclor 1242"-Aroclo·r-lli'ii) APCB. _co.n~1 •. tn.M.r., .!'9/_sc11o ~ _ roclor 242 llroclor 1£60 Beside Hain Vent 2A 1 • west of inatn vent( 1 2R-1 1 • e1st of 111l11 vent(' 20-2 I • 1:ut of .. 111 vent c On-Site ~!!."~!!.<! 4A 49N from 11111n vent t 230•( 1 40-1 49~ fr11ta Nin vent f 100•,' 4B-Z 49■ from .. tn vent t 18D" c 4C 49■ fr0111 Min vent I 140" fencellne Oownwln4 SA 9&11 from Nin vent t 230° SA 91111 frlllll 1111tn vent t 230" 50 98ai from 1111ln vent P 100• SB 9Anl from a11ln vent t 180" SC 90.a fr0111 aialn vent t 140• SC 90. fr0111 Nin vent t 140° Off-Site Downwind 6A 200. frllll 11111n vent t 230° 6B 200ni from Nin vent t 100• 6C 200nl fr0111 mtn vent t 140" A-3 House west of 1•ndft11 A-7 49■ upwind of utn vent t 360" A-8 Offslte, upwind of utn vent t360° 4 1005 4 1005 4 100!'. 4 1005 4 1010 4 1010 4 1005 4 1007 15 1000 4 1008 15 1000 4 1010 15 1000 4 1014 4 ioo8 4 1020 4 1025 4 IOOC' 4 1015 1700 415 3'.109 1700 415 3799 1700 415 3865 1710 425 3844 1711 421 3811 1:1 (b) (bl (b) (b -1700 413 3744 1702 ~22 3822 1706 418 3811 1708 428 3883 1710 420 3824 1713 433 3826 1702 408 3844 (b) (b) (b) 1708 408 3904 1730 425 3845 1700 420 3894 1702 407 3894 1.62 NO 20 1.60 NO NO 1.60 NO NO 1.63 ND NO 1.60 ND ND 1:1 ND NO HO NO 1.55 ND 110 1.61 ND 80 1.59 ND NO 1.66 ND ND 1.61 ND ND 1.66 NO NO 1.57 ND ND (b) NA NA 1.59 NO ND 1.63 NO NO 1.64 NO NO 1.58 ND NO ·6 <6 <6 <6 <6 c6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 . <6 <6 <6 <6 12 clO clO <10 <10 71 50 clO clO clO <10 <10 --<10 <10 <10 <10 ••-•---~·••••r••·u•-·--•--------•.u••••••••-•·••-•·•·-•••••••••••• .. ••••--•••••·••·•--•••··--------,------------------------(•) ND -PCBs were not detected 1n sauple. Nini-detectable levels of Aroclor 1242 and Aroclor 1260 1n the PUF cartridges •re estimated to be IOng •r.d 15 ng, respectively. NA -PUF cartr1d91 was not •n•lyzed for PCBs. (b) Sao,ple pump 111,)lfuncttoned during Uq>ltng period. (c) Co-located s•q,lers. /
. . • ··m ;;~-fflm.-· ll . .., !'r -· ., . 11· '!•~ !1.!f1 . ' '~111.-.I :•11, . li:~ A'fflr1.!:~~1 . . .,, . : _ -.: ~: 1• ./(·/:ct . . '• ... , ., .. ; /: }:i:,t, "f.fi-f,'-f,..; _: . ' ·. r.;p~:• . .. .:;,,,•;::?t'.;,· .. ,. ....... .., ,... ....... . ' ., ,.,..,,.. .... . ..,. .... , ------------........... / TABLE. 5 AIIIIENT AIR lllNITORING RESULTS -WARREN COIICTY (NC) LANOFILL(a) SAMPLING DATE -JANUARY 29, 1983 ·--··-·--····--... ..... ____ ,_, .. _ . .,._.._.....,. . ... ___ . ___ ., -----·--·----·--· ·------·---·-,.-... ,. ... , ... _ Sampling Location Saq>llng Sa,llng Period1 HrEST Sa,.illng Avg. Sa11111llng Total S111111le ~uantitl PCBs In PUF1 n~ PCB Cone. in Alr1 ng[scm Code and Description Height,■ tart End Time, ■ins Rite, scc/■in Voliae, sea roclor 1242 Aroclor 260 Aroclor 1242 Aroclor 1260 Beside Main Vent 2A Im-north of ■aln ventf J 4 0905 171? 488 3725 1.82 ND ND <6 <10 2B-1 1• south of 1111n vent~ i 0905 1715 490 3B30 1.88 NO ND <6 <10 28-2 1■ south of ■aln vent 0905 1714 489 3818 1.87 ND NO <6 <10 On-Site Downwind 4A 4lal fro■ 1111in vent I 3JO•l J l 090S 1712 487 3685 1.79 NO NO <6 <10 4B-1 3311 fro■ ■aln vent I 210• ~ 0905 1710 485 3735 1.81 NO NO <6 <10 4B-2 33■ fr011 ■aln vent I 210• 0905 1707 482 3753 1.81 NO ND <6 <10 4C 40■ fro■ ■1ln veni I 225• 4 0905 17D5 480 3722 1.79 ND NO <6 <10 Fencellne Downwind SA 85m frOIII inaln vent I 3JO• 4 0905 1715 490-3770 1.85 NO ND <6 <10 SA 85• from 11aln vent I 310• 15 0905 1717 492 3853 1.90 NO ND <6 <10 SB 66■ from 11111n vent t 210• 4 0905 170B 4B3 3773 1.82 ND ND <6 <10 SB 66m from 11aln vent I 210• 15 0905 1711 486 3870 1.88 NO NO <6 <10 SC BOAi from inaln vent I 225• 4 0905 1705 480 3792 1.82 ND ND <6 <10 SC 80111 fr11111 Nin vent I 225• 15 0905 1707 4B2 3778 1.82 NO NO <6 <10 Off-Site Downwind 6A 134■ from Nin vent I 200• 4 0905 1705 480 3752 1.80 NO NO <6 <10 6B 132■ from Nin vent I 210• 4 0905 1709 484 3823 I.BS ND NO <6 <JO· 6C 152■ fro■ ma1n vent I 24D• 4 090° 1713 488 3839 1.B7 ND NO <6 <10 A-3 House west of landflll 4 0930 1705 455 3366 1.53 NO NO <6 <10 A-7 On-site, 32m upwind of 11111n 4 0905 170B 483 3790 I.Bl NO 20 NO 11 . vent i 100° A-8 Offslte, 74m upwind of matn 4 0905 (b) vent I 100° (b) (b) (b) NA NA ~-~~•ft••-~~~••-~•-~-·---•-~-•-•-••••·••·•••••~•••••-••••-•--••••-••r•--••--------------------------<•> ND -PCBs were not detected 1n sa~le. Nini-detectable levels of Aroclor 1242 and Aroclor 1260 tn the PUF c1rtridges ire estimated to be JOng and 15ng, respectively. NA -PUF cartridge was not 1nalyzed for PCBs. (b) Simple puq> 111Hunctloned during uapllng period. (c) Co-located samplers, ....... .., ..... ,1,.. ••• ,,
---..... .__ ~ ...... ~ '--...... .... ...... ...., ..._ ~. ..._. -4 ~ ~. \.,,,,,4. i....,dt '....a. L...... .. TABLE 6 , PCO H<»IITOIIING RESULTS -WARR[N COUNTY (NC) LANDFILL(•) SAl1PLING DATE -JANUARY 31 -FEBRUARY 1, 1983 •t• t••--···---·-·-••t t-llt .....
... 1'1111••1 Ill t• Pl
t •·t11, •
........ , t I• 0 •t. I 114• .. #•t• .. ,...ttt·•rtt .. e••-•• .......... ~ • ._ ..... _.,_ ........... _. _______ II
-.-... ,., t
i
• •••t1t·ttl 1 0t 1-.-Santpl Ing Loc1tlon S1q>llng Santllnf Period1 HrEST S••tllng Avg. S1q>ling Code and Description Height,• hr End Thne, ■1"5 Rite, scc/•in Beside Hain Vent 2A 111 north or Nin vent 4 0117 (2/1) 0530 (2/1) 253 3896 On-Site Downwind 4A 43m fr1111 Nin vent f 310• 4 7100 ( 1/31) 0530 (2/1) 510 3998 48 llm fro■ Nin vent f 210• 4 :mo p11! osJO 1211 I 250 3882 4C 40m fro■ Nin vent f 225• 4 0120 VI 0530 2/1 250 3944 ... ------~-.. ,. .. ·---.. ···---------·--~---~ .. --_,...__ __________ ..... _ (a) ND -PCBs were not detected in s1q>le. Mini-detectable levels of Aroclor 1242 ind Aroclor 1260 in the PUF cartridges ire esti111ted to be !Ong ind 15ng, respectively. NA -PUF cartridge WIS not •n•lyzed for PCBs. (b) Low flow indicated during s1■plin9 period; suip'e vollJ<III! question1ble. Tot1l S11111>le iuantitt PCBs in PUF1 nf PCB Cone. in Air, n~m Voh-, sai roclor 1242 Aroclor 260 Aroclor 1242 Aroclor ·m 0.99 NO ND <10 <IS 2 04(b) ND ND <5 <8 • (bl 0.97(b ND ND •10 <15 0.99 ND ND •10 •15 ,.
J
l
l
I
I
I
l
t
I
I
I
J
f
J
The limited data obtained during nighttime sampling on January_ 31 -
Fe bruary 1 is sh own in Table 6. PCBs wer e not de tected ln any amb i en t air
samples. However, most of the data are questionable because of malfunction
of the DuPont pumps due to the low temperature and high humidity conditions~
METEOROLOGICAL DATA
The results of wind speed, wind direction, ambient temperature, relative
humidity, and barometric press ure measurements pe rformed at t he Wa rren Cou nt y
landfill during the period January 26 -February 1, 1983 are presented in
Appendix C.
VENT FLOW RATE MEASUREMENTS
Gas flow rates from the vents on the landfill site were measured by
EMSL/EPA/RTP personnel on March 2, 1982. The measurements were performed by
sealing the vents and determining the volumetric flow of the exit gas with a
bubble meter. Flow data for the main vent are given below. No flow was
detected from the other vents on the landfill.
Time
0945 hrs.
1200 hrs.
1500 hrs.
Main Vent Exit Gas Flow
F\pw, sec/min
(25 C, 760mn Hg)
4854
6000
6400
Avg. 5751
.]
J .
J
I
~
I
I
I
J
I
I
--------·-···-· ----
DISPERSION MODELING
In order to obtain confirmation of the ambient air concentrations
measured during the field monitoring, standard dispersion models were used to
calculate downwind concentration of PCBs using emission parameters and
meteorological conditions that prevailed during the field monitoring program.
Two EPA UNAMAP models, PTPLU and PTDIS, respectively, were employed to
calculate 1) estimates of maximum hourly concentr;,tions under a foll spectrum
ot meteorological conditions and 2) estimates of the range of hourly ambient
concentrat i or,;; t hat wo uld occur at down wi n<l di stances of 50n, 10011, and 15011
under the meteorological conditions that probably controlled dispersion
during the field monitoring on January 29.
The following par·ameters were either used explicitly in the modeling or
provided guidelines from which maximum and minimum limiting concentrations
could be calculated.
PCB emission rate fr~n ma in vent* --12.1 ng/sec
Main vent gas exit velocity** --0.012 m/s
Vent gas temperature (estimated) --288.2K (15°c)
Vent diameter --0.102m (4 inches)
Height of vent above ground --J/.2m
Observed ambient temperature during
monitoring (1/29/83) --minimum= 274.2°K (1°c)
maximum= 286.2°K (13°c)
8-hr. average= 282.2°K (9°c)
Observed wind speed during
monitoring (1/29/83) --minimum• 0.72 m/s (1.6 mph)
maximum= 2.3 m/s (5.1 mph)
8-hr. average= 1.6 m/s (3.5 mph)
* Average of emission measurements made on January 26, 27, and 28.
'Ir* Average of flow rate measurements made by EPA on 3/2/83.
...
Since the terrain sloped downward from the location of the vent pipe to
the ambient monitoring locations, each model was run for two scenarios to
bracket the expected actual concentrations. One scenario treated the vent as
standing 1.2 meters above a flat terrain while the second scenario placed the
vent exit at a height of 5.2 meters above a flat terrain.
The one-hour concentration predictions of the model were converted to
eight-hour averages by multiplying by a factor of 0.6. This factor was
selected after a review of the EPA publication, Workbook of Atmospheric
Di spersion Es timates (AP~2 6) by D.B. Turn er (pp 37-38).
The maxi mum one -tiour PCB con centrations pr ~di cted by t he PTPLU morlel
under the two scenarios are shown in Table 7.
TABLE 7 PREDICTED MAXIMUM ONE-HOUR DOWNWIND PCB CONCENTRATIONS
FOR VARIOUS VENT HEIGHTS
Scenario
Vent 1.2m
above flat
terrain
Vent 5.2m
above flat
terrain
Maximum
1-hr. Conce~tration
(ng/m ) .
4.0 X 10-6
1.4 X 10-7
Distance
to Maximum
Concentration,m
14
75
Conditions Producing
Maximum Concentrations
Wind Speed Atmospheric
(mps) Stability Class
0.3 4 (neutral)
0.5 4 (neutral)
Using the PTDIS model, the average wind speed observed during the
monitoring period on January 29, Class 4 stability, and the 0.6 conversion
factor, the estimated ranges for 8-hour average ambient concentrations at the
three downwind distances calculated. The results are shown in Table 8.
\
J.
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
' I
I
I
' I I
.,_
\
TABLE 8 PREDICTED 8-HR. DOWNWIND PCB CONCENTRATIONS FOR JANUARY 29, 1983.
Distance
Downwind from
the Vent (m)
50
100
150
Range of 8-Hour
PCB Ambient Co~centration
{ng/m)
1.5 -8.0 X 10-8
1 -8 2.0 -2.5 X 0
1.25 ~ 1.35 X 10-B
The concentration range limits were taken from the ~odel output for the
two vent height scenarios.
A wider concentration range estimates can be obtained by using the
maximum and minimum one-hour concentrations calculated for the two scenarios
under all combinat ion s of the three wind speeds (minimum, maximum, and
average) and the six stabi lity classes. The concentration l imits pred icted
by the model for the three downwind points for these conditions are shown in
Table 9.
TABLE 9 RANGE OF ONE-HOU~ CONCENTRATIONS FOR VARIOUS WIND SPEEDS
ANO ALL STABILITY CLASSES
Monitor Distance Minimum 1-Hour Maximum 1-Hour Downwind from PCB Concentration PCB Concentration
Vent (m) (ng/m3) (ng/m3)
50 1.5 X 10-lQ 4.5 X 10-7
100 7.0 X 10-9 2.0 X 10-7
150 3.5 X 10-9 1.0 X 10-]
J
Ill'
1
f
r . •
.,_
\
For each downwind location the conditions which yielded the maximum 1-
hour PCB concentration were; a 1.2m vent height, a wind speed of 1.6 m/s and
Class 6 (very stable) stability. Under this set of conditions the PTPLU
model predicted that the maximu~ PCB concentration would be 4.8 x 10-7 ng/m 3
and would occur at 37m downwind of the vent •
In surrmary, the dispersion models predict that downwind PCB levels under
prevailing and worst case meteorolo gic al condi tions should be significan tl y
lower than concentrations that could be detected by the monitoring techniques
emp loyed in this study. Thus, the monito r ing data for January 29 are
consistent with the modeling predictions in that PCBs were not detected in
any downwind ambient air samples.
• I
l
I
I
I
I
I
I
!
I'
I
' I
, I
,:.
\
SECTION 5
QUALITY ASSURANCE DATA SUMMARY
PUF CARTR !OG E CLEA N-UP CHECKS
All PUF cartridges were pre-cleaned before being used for PCB sampling.
One cartridge from each batch of 20 clean cartridges was re-extracted and
analyzed for ·PCB contamination. The batch of cartridges was considered
acceptable for sampling if the PCB level in the check sample is <10 ng.
FLOW RATE CALIBRATIONS
The flow rate of the DuPont pumps was calibrated with a bubble meter
before and after each sampling period using a DuPont Calibrator system. The
flow rate calibration data are sunmarized in Table 10. Average flow rates
for the sampling period were calculated from the pre-and post-sampling
calibration data.
PERFORMANCE AUDIT
A flow rate audit of the DuPont sampling pumps used during the study was
performed by W.F. Barnard, EMSL/EPA/RTP.
QUALITY CONTROL SAMPLES
A set of 18 quality control samples consisting of PUF cartridges spiked
with various quantities of Aroclor 1242 and Aroclor 1260 were analyzed with
the vent and ambient air samples. The QC samples were prepared by BCL using
NBS/SRM 1581 (Aroclor 1242 and Aroclor 1260 in oils). Results of the
analysis of the QC samples are given in Table 11.
--'Ill: ' ...
1
' I TABLE 10. DUPONT PUMP FLOW CALIBRATION DATA
I
I Date Pump Sampling Calibrated Flow Rate, sec/min · Avg Flow
S/N Location Before Sampling After Sampling Rate,scc/min
I 1/26/83 A-083 V-A 1370 1446 1408
A-080 V-B 1230 1243 1237
I A-118 V-C 1370 1478 1424
4789 V-D 1397 (a)
A-06 2 V-F. 1388 1531 1460
l A-089 2A 3748 4069 3908
A-121 28-1 3710 3888 3799
A-088 2B-2 3722 4007 3865
I 4803 4A 3760 3927 3844
A-038 4B-1 3728 3894' 3811
A-032 4B-2 3752 (a)
' A-127 4C 3710 (a)
A-061 5A(4) 3705 3782 3744
A-125 SA{lS) 3736 3908 3822
l 4696 58{4) 3728 3894 3811
A-092 5B{lS) 3710 4056 3883
A-087 SC ( 4) 3748 3901 3825
I A-037 SC(lS) 3751 3901 3826
A-126 6A 3788 3901 3845
5136 6B 3794 (a)
I A-120 6C · 3800 4007 3904
A-143 A3 I 3782 3908 3845
A-094 A7 3754 4034 3894
I 4779 AB 3801 3987 3894
1/27/83 A-118 V-A 1301 1416 1359
I A-079 V-B 1306 1411 1359
A-062 V-C 1301 1519 1410
A-120 V-0 1276 1383 1330
I 9806 V-E 1209 1309 1259
1/28/83 9806 V-A-1 1206 1301 1254
' A-062 V-A-2 1252 1441 1367 . A-037 V-B 1245 1408 1326
A-118 V-C 1283 1492 1388
A-083 V-0 1242 1405 1324
5138 V-E 1242 1305 1274
a) Pump malfunctioned during sampling period.
...
-TABLE 10. DUPONT PUMP FLOW CALIBRATION DATA (Cont'd.)
Date Pump Sampling Calibrated Flow Rate 1 sec/min Avg Flow
S/N Location Before Sampiing After Sampling Rate,scc/mir_:i
1/29/83 A-126 2A 3692 3758 3725
A.:037 28-1 3710 3949 3830
A-079 28-2 3787 3848 3818
4803 4A 3681 3688 · 3685
A-088 4B-1 3698 3771 3745
4779 48-2 3710 3795 3753
A-092 4C 3692 3753 3722
A-080 5A(4) 3721 3820 3771
A-118 5A(l5) 3704 4002 3853
9806 58(4) 3669 3877 -3773
A-062 58(15) 3681 4058 3870
5138 5C(4) 3687 3896 3792
A-083 5C(15) 3692 3864 3778
A-127 6A 3779 3724 3752
A-061 6B 3768 3878 3823
A-094 6C 3768 3910 3839
A-089 A3 371 0 3022 3366
A-121 A7 3779 3802 3790
I A-032 AB 3687 (a)
I
I 1/31/83 5117 2A 3731 4060 3896
2/1/83 4696 4A 3738 4258 3998
4789 48 3772 3992 3882
5942 4C 3743 4144 3944
All other pumps used on this date malfunctioned during
sampling period.
a) Pump malfunctioned during sampling period.
1
1 . '
]
I TABLE 11 QC SAMPLE ANALYSIS RESULTS(a)
I Sample No. Aroclor 1242 Aroclor 1260
I Added,ng Found,ng % Recovery Added,ng Found,ng % Recovery
----....... ._ ...... , ... _.,_.,.
I 1 60 64 107 0 37
6 60 52 87 0 32
I 5 600 680 113 0 ND
13 600 530 88 0 85
' 8 6000 3700 62 0 190
9 6000 3200 53 0 ND
l 10 0 ND 60 70 111 ·
14 0 ND 60 180 300
4 0 ND 600 515 86
7 0 ND 600 600 100
2 0 ND I 6000 4700 78
12 0 ND 6000 4000 67
15 120 90 75 60 120 200
17 120 85 71 60 70 117
11 400 260 65 200 170 85
16 400 460 115 200 260 130
3 4000 1820 46 2000 1530 77
18 4000 1320 33 2000 2950 148
a) ND -Not detected. Minimum detectable levels of Aroclor 1242 and
Aroclor 1266 are estimated to be l0ng and 15ng, respectively.
I
I
I
I
r
r ~
FIELD BLANKS
Eight field blanks were analyzed with the ambient air samples. The
blanks were PUF cartridges that had been carried through all field operations
except sampling. PCBs were not detected in any of the blanks above the
minimum detectable level i.e. 10 ng for Arochlor 1242 and 15 ng for Aroclor
1260.
CO-LOCATED MONITOR ING
Co-located monitoring of the main vent was performed on January 28. (See
T~ble 3 for results). Concentrations determined from the co-located monitors
differ by 9% for the Aroclor 1242 and 6% for the Aroclor 1260. Co-located
ambient air monitoring data cannot be evaluated since PCB levels were below
minimum de t ectable levels in all paired samp les.
)
t
1 • -I •
r
L
.. -.
1. Federal Register, Vol. 44. ~. 2n. tlonday, Deceuber 3, 1979, Pgs. 69501-
69509.
2. Webb, .1t.6. ·.and .McCall, A.C.~ •Quantitiltive 1'CB Sumdan:ls for Electron
Capture Gas Chroma tography8, Journal of Chromatogr~ic Science, 11, Pgs.
366-373, July 1973. -
I
I I •
]
I
I
I
I
f
I
'1
APPENDIX A
PROCEDURE FOR PCB SAMPLING WITH
DUPONT P-4000A PUMPS AND PUF CARTRIDGES
(1} Calibrate t he f fo w r.at~ of the DuPont pumps before samp li ng with a
DuPont C~li brator sys tP..m .
(2} At the field site, place pumps at designated sampling locations. Record
pump S/N and corresponding sampling location I.D.
(3) Using latex glove·s, remove a clean PUF cartridge from its sample bottle,
carefully unwrap the aluminum foil from the cartridge. Fold aluminum
foil, replace in sample bottle, and tightly close the bottle cap.
Connect the PUF sampling cartridge to the DuPo nt pump sampling inlet
using a short piece (12-18 in.) of Tygon tubing. (Note: Clean latex
gloves must .be worn at all times when handling the PUF cartridges). --.
(4) Using metal three-prong clamps that have been rinsed with ·s&J hexane,
mount the PUF cartridges orl the sampler support rod in a vertical
position with the inlet pointing downward. Record cartridge height
above ground.
(5) Turn pumps on and begin sampling period. Record starting clock time.
During the sampling period check pumps at least every 2 hours for proper
operation. Record any abnormal conditions.
(6) After sampling for the ~pecified time, terminate sampling period by
turning pumps Dff. Re.cord clock time that pump was turned off. Just
before turning pumps off, push test button on pump and check low flow
light and the elapsed time indicator lights. If low flow light comes
on, it indicates that a low flow condition existed during the sampling
\
]
I
)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
[
\
period, e.g., Tygon tubing crimped, cartridge plugged, pump stopped,
etc). Record results of the low flow check. Record elapsed time from
the pump timer as a check on the clock time.
(-7) As soon as possible after termination of sampling, remove the PUF
car tri dge from the ·ryg01 s~np1e li ne {usi ng l atex gl oves ), wrap
cartridge in its original alum i num foi l wrapping , and place in the
original sample bottle. Cap tightly, label bottle with sampling data
and sample I.D. and seal the bottle cap with a strip of NEvidence Tape".
(8) Re-calibrate the flow rate of the DuPont pumps after completion of
sampling.
\
APPENDIX B
PROCEDURE FOR ANALYSIS OF PCBs
IN PUF CARTRIDGES
I. Equ i~nent and Reagents Required for PUF Sample Extraction
1. Glassware
500 ml boiling flasks
300 ml capacity Soxhlet -extractors
3 ball condensers
500 ml Kuderna-Danish apparatus
15 ml receiver tubes
Snyder columns
Filter tubes (Corning 9480-32)
Pre-scored (1 ml, 5ml) amber glass vials with teflon-lined caps
9" long dispos~ble transfer (Pasteur) pipets
Wash all glassware with Alconox; rinse with deionized water,
acetone, hexane, and deionized water; then fire in kiln (500 C)
2. Equipment
Extraction Apparatus, Multi-Unit Heater (CMS 119-362)
Blunt-end forceps
Surgical tongs (approximately 12")
Steam bath
Nitrogen blow-down evaporator
Glass wool (Heater overnight at 350 C in muffle furnace)
Boiling granules (Heater overnight at 500 C in kiln)
Teflon wash bottles
)
l
1
I
I
f
l
11.
\
3. Reagents
Burdick and Jackson, Distilled in Glass Solvents:
Acetone
Hexane
Ethyl Ether (Preserved with Ethanol)
Sodi um Sulfate, 12-60 mesh, Anhydrous (Baker 5-3375) (Heated
overnight at soooc in kil n).
Sample Receipt and Extraction
1. Log samples in log book. Note any damage to sample or
irregularities (i.e., EPA chain of custody tape broken).
2. Prepare 5% ethyl ether in hexane. Prepare by case lot of hexane.
Remove 200 ml of hexane from freshly opened bottle and add 180 ml
of freshly operyed ethyl ether (preserved with ethanol).
3. Rinse condenser towers with 5% ether/hexane.
4. Wipe off lab bench wit~ 5% ether/hexane.
5. Add 300 ml of 5% ether/hexane to 500 ml boiling flask. Add boiling
granules (no more than 3 granules).
6. Dim lights in laboratory before removing first sample. Rinse a
large sheet of aluminum foil with 5% ether/hexane. Be sure to use
waste rinse container. Place foil, rinsed side up, on lab bench.
Use this for forceps and tongs. Rinse forceps and tongs with 5%
ether/hexane.
7. Carefully remove sampling cartridge from jar .and unwrap aluminum
foil. Handle cartridge minimally, placing it on its own aluminum
foil wrapping.
8. Note in project log book any breakage or damage to sampling
cartridge.
r
r·
I
I
!
\
9. With pre-rinsed forceps, carefully remove the foam plug (PUF) from
the sampling cartridge.
10. Place the PUF in the Soxhlet, and connect the Soxhlet to the 500 ml
boiling flask. {If hi-vol sample, also place corresponding
particulate filter in Soxhlet with PUF plug). Wet the joint with
5% ether/hexane. Place the forceps on the aluminum foil wrapping.
Label the boi ling f1 ask with samp le 1.0.
11. Taking the pre-rinse d tongs, adjust the PUF in the Soxhlet to wedge
it midway along the length of the siphon. Rinse the tongs into the
Soxhlet with the 5% ether/hexane. Rinse the forceps, glass
sampling cartridge, and aluminum foil wrapping with 5% ether/hexane
into the Soxhlet. Place the forceps and tongs on the aluminum foil
sheet. Dispose of the aluminum foil wrapping and place the glas
cartridge aside for washing and recycling.
12. Connect the Soxhlet to the condenser, wetting the glass joint with
5% ether/hexane for a good seal.
13. Repeat the process for the day's samples being sure to include a
solvent blank, field blank, and a control sample.
14. Check water flow to condenser towers, and turn on heating units.
· 15. As samples begin to boil, check Soxhlets making sure they are
filling and siphoning properly (4 cycles/hour). Allow samples to
cycle overnight or for a minimum of 16 hours.
16. Turn off heating units and allow samples to cool to room
temperature. Be sure the lights are dim.
17. Set up Kuderna-Danish {K-0) with receiver tubes. Add one boiling
granule to each set up. Label the K-D's with the sample I.O.
18. Pack filter tubes with glass wool and sodium sulfate. Place tube
in neck of K-0.
19. Carefully remove Soxhlet and boiling flask from condenser tower.
Drain remaining solvent into boiling flask.
J \
I
)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I III.
I
I
I
I
I
(
I
I
'
20. Carefully pour sample through filter tube into K-D. Rinse boiling
flask 3 times with hexane. Swirling hexane along sides of boiling
flask. Once sample has drained, rinse down filter tube with
hexane.
21. Attach Snyder column to K-D and rinse Snyder column to wet joint.
22. P'lace K-D on steam bat h and evaporate sample to approximate ly 5 mL.
Do not l et sample go to dryness.
23. Remove sample from steam bath, rinsing Snyder column with a minimum
of hexane. Allow sample to cool.
24. Remove sample from K-0, making sure to label receiver tube.
25. Rinse nitrogen blow down spouts with hexane and place samples so as
to further concentrate. Transfer samples to pre-scored vials using
transfer pipets. Rinse receiver tube 3 times making a quantitative
transfer. Concentrate samples to 1 ml or per instruction from
analyst.
26. Make a master list of ail samples prepared, date received, and
processed. Give the 1{st and sample extracts to the GC analyst.
GC Analysis (EPA Method 608)
1. Analyze samples using the following GC operating conditions.
Column: Supelcoport 100/120 mesh coated with
1.5% SP-2250/1.95% SP-2401 packed in
glass (180 cm x 4 mm ID)
Carrier:
Column
Temperature:
Detector:
5% methane/95% Argon at 60 ml/min
200 C, isothennal
ECO
2. Calibrate the system daily with a minimum of three injections of
calibration standards which have been referenced to NBS/SRM 1581
(Aroclor 1242 in oils)
3. Inject 2-5 µL of the sample extract using the solvent-flush
technique. Smaller (1.0 µL) volumes can be ;njected ;f automatic
devices are employed. Record the volume injected to the nearest
0.05 µland the result;ng peak size, in area units.
4. If t he peak are a exceeds the 1;near range of the system, di lute t he
extract and reanalyze.
IV . Qu ality Contro l (QC)
1. Analyze one laboratory blank per each batch of 20 samples.
2. Analyze one laboratory spike per each batch of 20 samples.
J
]
]
1
)
I
I
I
I
I
I .
I
APPENDIX C
METEOROLOGICAL DATA
The r~sult of t he meteorc'nui .al ~e ~s~rcments perf ormed at he ~arren
County Landfill during the PCB monitoring period are given in Tables C-1
through C-6.
~ ~ I
I I
~ I,
I
:
I I
l
11
I I
TABLE C-1. METEOROLOGICAL DATA FOR FIELD MONITORING PERIOD(a)
Date: January 26, 1983
Time Wind Speed Wind Direction Ambierir Rel. Humidity Bar. Press.,
hrs. EDT mph Deg. (Compass) Temp, F % in Hg
0000-0100
0100-0200
0200-0300
0300-0400
0400-0500
0500-0600
0600-0700
0700-0800
0800-0900
0900-1000
1000-1100
1100-1200 58 29.95
1200-1300
1300-1400 46 29.90
1400-1500 3.3 150
1500-1600 3.0 120 48 29.89
1600-1700 2.8 135 49 29.89
1700-1800 1.6 150
1800-1900 0.1 150
1900-2000 0.7 80
2000-2100 0.2 105
2100-2200 1.3 95
2200-2300 1.9 75
2300-2400 1.9 60
a) Ambient temperature, relative humidity, and barometric pressure data are
single readings taken during the time period. Wind speed and direction values
are hourly averages calculated from continuous monitoring data.
-1
1
1
1
)
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE C-2. METEOROLOGICAL DATA FOR FIELD MONITORING PERIOD~a)
Date: January 27, 1983
Time Wind Speed Wind Direction Ambie'bt Rel. Humidity Bar. Press.,
hrs. EDT mph Deg. (Compass} Temp, F % in Hg
0000-0100 1. 7 90
0100-0200 0.8 90
0200-0300 1.8 15
0300-0400 1.7 30
0400-0500 1.3 30
0500-0600 1.9 15
0600-0700 2.6 30
0700-0800 2.7 90
0800-0900 2.8 75
0900-1000 4.1 45 43 88 29.93
1000-1100 6.9 45 44 81 29.93
1100-1200 8.5 60 47 66 29.90
1200-1300 8.2 60 45 71 29.87
1300-1400 9.0 60 46 68 29.86
1400-1500 6.8 60 46 65 29.86
1500-1600 8.0 60 45 67 29.86
1600-1700 8.7 45 44 78 29.84
1700-1800 7.8 45
1800-1900 9.3 45
1900-2000 7.8 45
2000-2100 8.5 45
2100-2200 11.1 45
2200-2300 9.4 45
2300-2400 9.2 45
a) Ambient temperature, relative humidity, and barometric pressure data are
single readings taken during the time period. Wind speed and direction values
are hourly averages calculated from continuous monitoring data.
,·
\
1 -.
1
'
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
"
...
\
TABLE C-3. METEOROLOGICAL DATA FOR FIELD MONITORING PERIOD~a)
Date: January 28, 1983
Rel. Humidity Time Wind Speed Wind Direction Ambie'bt Bar. Press.,
hrs. EDT mph Deg. (Compass) Temp, F % in Hg
0000-0100 10.9 45
0100-0200 12.7 45
0200-0300 12.9 45
0300-0400 12.9 45
0400-0500 12.6 45
0500-0600 11.4 30
0600-0700 12.0 30
0700-0800 11.5 30
0800-0900 10.4 25
0900-1000 9.5 15 37 87 29.82
1000-1100 10.3 360 38 83 29.84
1100-1200 10.9 15 40 75 29.85
1200-1300 11.9 15 46 64 29.82
1300-1400 11.6 360 49 54 29.80
1400-1500 11.5 360 50 49 29.80
1500-1600 10.9 366 50 43 29.80
1600-1700 7.5 360 48 43 29.81
1700-1800 14.8 360
1800-1900 2.3 360
1900-2000 1.5 315
2000-2100 1.2 300
2100-2200 1.7 30
2200-2300 1.1 30
2300-2400 0.8 50
a) Ambient temperature, relative humidity, and barometric pressure data are
single readings taken during the time period. Wind speed and direction values
are hourly averages calculated from continuous monitoring data.
Po
]
J
]
]
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•== sr· er i a 11-.z . ·-•• • .. .... Oiliilllilil · u111·-·■ iii"iilli iil~iiHliii;-'1:-ii
'
TABLE C-4. METEOROLOGICAL DATA FOR FIELD MONITORING PERIOD{a)
Date: January 29, 1983
Time Wind Speed Wind Direction Ambief},t Rel. Humidity Bar. Press.,
hrs. EDT mph Deg. (Compass) Temp, F % in Hg
0000-0100 1.2 345
0100-0200 1.2 31 5
U20U-u.:S00 1.3 300
0300-0400 (b) (b)
0400-0500 (b) (b)
0500-0600 (b) (b)
0600-0700 (b) (b)
0700-0800 (b) (b)
0800-0900 (b) (b)
0900-1000 (b) (b) 34 86 29.99
1000-1100 1.6 90 45 57 29.99
1100-1200 2.1 180 49 44 29.97
1200-1300 3.6 150 55 33 29.92
1300-1400 3.5 180 56 32 29.89
1400-1500 3.9 18~ 55 39 29.86
1500-1600 5.0 195 54 42 29.84
1600-1700 5.1 195 50 49 29.84
1700-1800 3.7 180
1800-1900 2.3 180
1900-2000 2.2 180
2000-2100 1.8 195
2100-2200 1.4 210
2200-2300 1.6 210
2300-2400 0.4 180
a) Ambient temperature, relative humidity, and barometric pressure data are
single readings taken during the time period. Wind speed and direction values
are hourly averages calculated from continuous monitoring data.
b} Data missing due to instrument malfunction.
.,
TABLE C-5. METEOROLOGICAL DATA FOR FIELD MONITORING PERIOD~a)
Date: January 31, 1983
Time Wind Speed Wind Direction Ambient
Temp, 0f
Rel. Humidity Bar. Press.,
hrs. EDT mph Deg. (Compass) % in Hg
0000-0100 1.1 330
0100-0200 1.1 345
0200-0300 0.5 355
0300-0400 1.6 315
0400-0500 0.9 345
0500-0600 0.7 330
0600-0700 0.3 345
0700-0800 0.7 325
0800-0900 0.3 315
0900-1000 2.2 360
1000-1100 5.1 5
1100-1200 4.8 5
1200-1300 4.5 360
1300-1400 5.3 300
1400-1500 3.5 34c
1500-1600 3.0 255
1600-1700 2.5 270
1700-1800 0.3 270
1800-1900 0.8 240
--19009'.2000 1.2 360
2000-2100 1.0 180
2100-2200 0.6 240 40 87 29.84
2200-2300 0.3 165 39 92 29.84
2300-2400 0.9 180 36 95 29.84
a) Ambient temperature, relative humidity, and barometric pressure data are
single readings taken during the time period. Wind speed and direction values
are hourly averages calculated from continuous monitoring data.
Time Wind Speed Wind Direction Ambieit Rel. Humidity Bar. Press.,
hrs. EDT mph Deg. (Compass} Temp, F % in Hg
0000-0100
0100-0200
0200-0300
0300-0400
0400-0500
0500-0600
0600-0700
0700-0800
0800-0900
0900-1000
1ouo-11ou
1100-1200
1200-1300
1300-1400
1400-1500
1500-1600
1600-1700
1700-1800
1800-1900
1900-2000
2000-2100
2100-2200
2200-2300
2300-2400
0.4
0.7
1.0
1.0
0.5
0.5
150
195
180
360
5
5
36 91 29.83
32 95 29.84
31 89 29.84
30 29.91
a} Ambient temperature, relative humidity, and barometric pressure data are
single readings taken during the time period. Wind speed and direction values
are hourly averages calculated from continuous monitoring data.
•. r .
/~----• A .-:-N-~-~-na_N_o_~_o•-~:-~---1-~-~-ns_J.._~_sc __ c_ia_E_t_e_s_,_I_n_c_. ____________ _ A CIVIL ENGINEERl:Z..O • STRUCTU'lUL ENOIXE'l::JllNO • GEOTECU:SIC.LL E?.GI.SEERI:-.G • llATEIUALS TESTL',G SE:R\"ICES
,01 GLENWOOD AVE .. P. 0. Box 12447. RALElGll. N. C. 276O~
919/828-0801
March 7, 1983
North Carolina Department of
Natural Resources & Community Development
Raleigh Regional Office
3800 Barrett Drive
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27687
Attention: Mr. Edward L. Berry, Hydrologist
Re: Monitoring Wells
PCB Landfill
Warren County, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Berry:
~AR -=-91983
hAl.r..iUH nf.GIONAL OFFICE
As requested by Jim Lineberger Grading & Paving, Inc., of Gastonia,
North Carolina, Ezra Meir Associates, Inc. constructed four (4) moni-
toring wells around the PCB Landfill in Warren County, North Carolina.
The wells were constructed in August 1982 under the direction of Mr.
Daniel H. Biechler, of Sverdrup & Parcel, Consu~ting Engineers, Greens-
boro, North Carolina. On August 25, 1982, Mr. Biechler accepted the
construction of the monitoring wells and the grouting of all open holes.
Effective on August 25, 1982, it is our understanding that the State of
North Carolina assumed responsibtlity of the wells.
Attached, please find monitoring well construction records and one (1)
copy of the well specifications. If you need any further information in
this regard, please let us know.
Very truly yours,
EZRA MEIR ASSOCIATES, INC.
y __ ,,,,,,,. % 1,-,,,:, ~
Edward G. Aguirre
Enclosure
EGA:sam
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEME~I
Bzra Meir Associates, Inc.
P.O. Box 12447
Rale¼~h, NC 27605
ATTENTION Mr. Edward G. A~uirre
Dear Mr. Aguirre:
f
RE: Monitoring ~ieJ.ls In Warr~n Co./
and DEM Groundwater Re~ulatioi
I am writing to inform you that we have received the well construc-
tion information on the four Warren County wells 3nd to thank vou for
your prompt action.
I would also like to inform vou and vo11r corporation that any wells
that you construct for groundw3ter information 3hould oe reported to
us regardless of who they a~e for~~ what groundwater information is
being sought. If the information is ~fa confidential nature. 3enj
3 letter ~equesting confidentiaility ql~ng witt1 sta~~d r~~s~~~ to
have us restrict ~ny release of tn~ inform3tio:1 for som~ so~~~fted
time oeriod.
Again thank vou for yo~r c~o~~~~~i0n ~n-j cont~ct m~ if I aan be
of helo.
EB:bch
cc: ?e-:'r·y IJ:=lson
Edw31·d Berry
Hydrologist
• co.MPUTAT10Ns FoR MorJ1roRJN G
.---
'4 I
I
I ;
---·
L
---
I -
- -
ToP
ELEV -------·----
:?·i-2 --
32B ---
32Z --·-
'326
-------
. • 4 . · ••.. 4 A. • A •
V
' . CoNC. SUB.·.
-------r-------Bo,-rofv?
€LEV ---.. ·----·-
Z9/
2.81 --
281
zs,
SC.€.=S'AJ
,_ ~ ~·':l ~TI-L
2, 0 I
Zo' -
zu' ----
1..0. --
··. •··
DATE jut,.."(
DY ~f?i{2_
I OF I
9, I 9 8 L
CHKO
i5TE6L CAP
HING€'/)~ J_ oc~:~_"'3i £
PVC c.r,P
8" S T~cL P,-pt;
SCl-t<=DvLc -40
, .. -. 8., A; o ,J t;
1
.....
i .r4@u'' 1:Art-1 01~knot.J·
oR. G. "4> ><. 4/i-W w F
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
WELL RECO~D DIVISION Vt ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
P.O.Box27687 -RAL,El~,N.C.27611 919·733·2020
DRILLING CONTRACTOR C2~e"/,' ,,.-/s~y,,,,i~ NO. WELL CONS'.'J1.UCTION PERMIT NO.
1. WELL LOCATION: (Show alcetch of the location below) -;,:t'; D 3 .3 Y /
Nearest Town: ~~,Y"~.A/" N',~. County: W~JU/."A.I 6k,\?z{/
---------,------,-,-,,--,--,-------,------Ouadrangle No. /1//bA.I · ¼.S&~.
(Road,Co111111unity or Subdivision and Lot No.) /97 / •
2. OWNER:"""$./ ,::rd~ ac:A1,d ~---?~:V.-1"'. _:RILLING LOG
: ...
j ·.
.~ i
3. ADDRESS ;.1 _____________________ _ DEPTH
FROH--TO FORMATION DESCRIPTION
4. TOPOGRAPHY: draw,valley,alope,hilltop,flat(circle one)
.. 5. USE OF WELL: /7/l)Alfl,£'//V'f DATE1 8 -/8 ·8 3 ✓ ·vr~ 6. DOES THIS WELL REPLACE AN EXISTING WELL?_.....J-,,__ __ :2"----
/ I
7. TOTAL DEPTH: S/ RIG TYPE OR METHOD: ·------
8. FORMATION SAMPLES COLLECTED: YES NO_.....c.X;..J.. __ _
9. CASING: Depth Inside
Dia. ::1,; :3qzto2'13 ft_'\ __ q_'_
Wall thick. type
or weight/ft.
// ¥ :SC-!IEbt.dE .!,J() ~VL
10. GROUT: Depth Material Method
From~to3o1 ft_ .... 3,o..;S::;.._'_
Depth Dia. Type, Opening
if adaitional space is needed, use back of form
From203to1i.1.._ft _ ___._f0_1_ u,,v7✓/.I/IOv~ SLO I LOCATION SKETCH
12. GRAVEL: Depth Size Material
Frorn3Q}_to2'f./ ft :1. 22
13. liATER ZONES(depth) : _____________ _
14. STATIC WATER LE:VEL1 __ ft.~~~~=top of CAsing
Casing i ■ __ ft. above land surface ELEV:
15. YIELD(gpm) : ______ METHOD OF TESTING: ___ _
16. PUMPING WATER LEVEL: _______ ft.
after ____ hour11 at ______ 9p0.
17. CHLORINATIOH: Type ______ Amount. ____ _
18. WATER QUALITY: TUIPERATURE (°F) __
19. PERMANENT PUMP: DAte Installed _________ _
Type. ______ capacity _____ (gp::i) HP __ _
Make __________ Intake Depth _____ _
Airline Depth _____ _
(Sho~ distance to numbered roada, or other map refereoce pointa)
20. HAS THE OWNER BEEN PROVIDED A COPY OF THIS RECORD AND IlffQR.Y.ED OF THE DEPARTME!ITS Ju:Q:JIR!:~!£!:TS JI.ND
RECOMMENDATIONS?
21. REMAIU<S -------:----------------------------1 do hereby certify that this well was constructed in Accordance with N.C. ~ell Construction
Regulations and Standards and that this well record is tnie and exact.
I
I
I I
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
WELL RECORD . OIVISIOi-i Vt ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
· P.O.Box27687 -RAL,El~,N.C.27611 919-733-2020
DRILLING CONTRACTOR £2~~/L' ,,.-/5~y✓,;tik5: NO. WELL CONS'_'fl.UCTION PERMIT NO.
1. WELL LOCATION: (Show sketch of the location below)-;,:// D3.3 YI
Nearest Town: ~L,e"Y-'/'Vll,A/" N, ~. County: W,,(J,240.J Ll)~,vz{/
----~----------------Quadrangle No. /f/'72),,v ~.S&.:5:".
(Road,Co111111unity or Subdivision and LOt No.) /?'7 / •
2. OWNER: d?/ .5du-aC:~JVh ~ ... ?d:V-4'. :RILLING LOG
3. ADDRESS_: ____________________ _
4. TOPOGRAPHY: draw,valley,slope,hilltop,flat(circle one)
. 5. USE OF WELL: /7/~;-/,_e/N'.::j DATE: 8-/8 -83 v 6. DOES THIS WELL REPLACE AN EXISTING WELL? 0 V/$ I . I
,. TOTAL DEPTB1 S/ RIG TYPE OR METHOD: ·------
8. FORMATION SAMPLES COLLECTED: YES NO_..,.X:...,,.._ __
9. CASING: Depth Inside
Dia.
:;1::i 31/Z to 2"i 3 t t _'\ ___ 'i __ '_
Wall thick. type
or weight/ft.
// ii ::SC-IIEbut.E .:,JO ~VG
10 . GROUT: Depth Material Method
From~to~04 ft_....,3c..;S:;__'_ cu..., .... ;':),
I I
11. SCREEN: Depth Dia. Type, Opening
DEPTH FRO-H--TO FORMATION DESCRIPTION
If ada1t1onal space is needed, use back of form
From203toli.}_ft __ f.__0_1_ t.D¥'T✓;,.l1,1()v~ SLO I LOCATION SKETCH
(Show distance to nUlllbered roada, or other map reference pointa)
12. GRAVEL: Depth Size Material
Froro.,°?O3 to 2 'if ft :t 22
13. WATER ZONES (depth): ____________ _
14. STATIC WATER LEVEL, --ft abovet 0 below op of casing
Casing i■ ft. above land &urface ELEV: --
15-YIELD(gp111): METHOD OF TESTING: ----
16. PUMPING WATER LEVEL: ft.
after hours at gp~.
17. CHLORINATIO!l: Type Amount
18. WATER OUALITY: TU1PERATURE (°F) __
19. PERMANENT PUMP: Date Installed
Type _____ Capacity _____ (gpr:,) HP __ _
Hake __________ Intake Depth ____ _
Airline Depth _____ _
20. HAS THE o;n:ER BEEN PROVIDED A COPY OF THIS RECORD kND IIIFOR.".ED OF THE 0£PARTl'l.£!1TS R!:Q:JIR!:~!E:;Ts J>.ND
RECOMMENDATIONS?
21. RE!'.AJU<S --------:-----------------------------1 do hereby certify that this well was constructed in accordance with N.C. ~ell Construction
Regulations and Standards and that this well record is tnie and exact,
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
WELL RECOl:D DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
P. 0. Box 27687 -RALEIGH, N.C. 27611 919·733-2020
DRILLING CONTRACTOR eZ.,,e,f ~Or° /4.;1~,.r"?f<:'REG. NO. WELL CONSTRUCTION PERMIT NO.
1. WELL LOCATION: (Show sketch of the location below)-.,vl'.z D34U.2.
Nearest Town =·--=M~':4..:...=6'.::a--..a-~:...•:...;;._·~<.....:;;~;..;.'/..;;.1/...._, .;;.,.✓.~,.i..C...:-_________ County: ~.,,~/,1/ d,,,..,, /i,c
______________________ Quadrangle No. Arro,v7 US6-5
(Road,Community or Subdivision and Lot No. l /97/
2. OWNER: .:5/4 ~ t,/ /Ir,£$ U.,,b/4';,,,,,,-? DRILLING LOG
3. ADDRESS: DEPTH
4. TOPOGRAPHY: draw,valley,slope,hilltop,flat(circle one)
5. USE OF WELL1 ,#4,,y,, 'z/,,,e/#t; DATE: 8 -10. 8 Z.
6. ooEs THis WELL REPLAc/2N EXISTING wELL? Vc-5.
I
7. TOTAL DEPTHI ~7 RIG TYPE OR METHOD: ------
8. FO?.MATION SAMPLES COLLECTED: YES NO K
9. CASING1 Depth Inside Wall thick. type
Dia. or weight/ft. Eu
From 3ZtJ to Zi:J/ ft ~S" ,y ~c.,,/.,.,-..&v..t / ~~,Py,:;-.
10. GROUTi Depth Material Method
From32t3 ta.?~..Vft -t .7~"
11. SCREEN: Depth Dia. Type, Opening
FRO-H--TO FORMATION DESCRIPTION
. ·'
,v~ ,e4:,t-4:"A"""~'-'/.o-;-/2:...:.-<( .
If aad1t1onal space is needed, use back or form
LOCATION SKETCH From 303 to~ft 2.0' {Show diataoce to oWtbered roads, or other aap reference point
12. GRAVEL: Depth
From3D3 to_?.B/ft
Size
z. 2 /
Material
13. ;;ATER ZONES(depth) : _____________ _
14. STATIC WATER LEVEL: above ft.belowtop of casing
Casing is __ ft. above land surface ELEV:
lS. YlELD(gpm) 1 ME'l'HOD OF TESTING: ___ _
16. PUMPING WATER LEVEL: _________ ft.
after ____ hours at. ______ gpr:i.
17. CHLORIIIATION: Type ______ Amount ____ _
18. W/,7ER QU/,LlTY : _______ TU·!PERATURE t0 F) __
19. PER!'J..NEllT P~tP: Date Installed. ________ _
Type ______ Capacity _____ (gprr,) HP ___ _
~:ake __________ Intake Depth.;.._ ___ _
Airline Depth _____ _
20. f'_&.s THE c:-:::ER EEES Pi<OVICED A COPY OF ';HIS F-ECORD ;..1w r:;roR..~:'.D m· 'Ii:E DEFr . .!lT/'..£:;;s REQUIREl-'..El;;s ~;o
RECO}:l'.EllDATIC!IS?
21. REl-:AFJ<S ---------------------------------------1 do hereby certify that this well was ccnstructed in accord4~ce ~ith ll.C. ~ell Construction
Regulations and Standards and that this well record is true and exact .
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
WELL RECOr.o DIVISION OF ENVIRONl,\E:-.IT AL MANAGEMENT
P. 0. Box 27687 -RALEIGH, N.C. 27611 919-733·2020
DRILLING '.:ONTR>.CToR.£'Y,1 ~~ /..$:Y:,,.,;;,;,:r.:S REG. NO. WELL CONSTRUCTION PERMIT NO.
1. WELL IA'CATION: (Show sketch of the location below) ::::r-3 D i,J/-u 5
Nearest Town1 t-'.4.c,,~~✓ /✓,C, County: M.~;..v' ~v,.,,,✓,,,, • ___ .:.:.:=..;..;.;...:;__,;;.-..;..:...:..;;..;.;.._________ /
_______________________ Quadrangle No. l[r'TCJ,,1/ V .<; 6-<;
(Roa-J,Co111111unity or Subdivision and Lot No. l /'i7/
2. OWNER:-= g;: 3/4k ,,/,,,1,1:,,d ~MA-'4 DRILLING LOG
3. ADDRESS1;.. ____________________ _
4. TOPOGR>.J•HY: draw,valley ,slope,hilltop, flat (circle one)
5. USE OF 'fELL: 6,✓, •6...e-,,4"~ DATE: 8· 17. • 8 L
6. DOES THIS WELL UP~ EXISTING WELL? #"".S,
7
7. TOTAL DEPTHI fl'/ / RIG TYPE OR METHOD : _____ _
8. FORMATION SAMPLES COLLECTED: YES NO _ _.Xc..:... __ _
9. CASING1 Depth Inside Wall thick. type
e/J
From 32Z to 2.,&3 ft -----
Dia. or weight/ft.
3 r / r /'.::Sc-,-~C;o/ z0 ..,..,.;z:
10. GROUT: Depth Material Method
j-'.2 /'Ir' ,:1 / e I Fro~ to..;x.., ft_--'----
11. SCREEN: Depth Dia. Type, Opening
Fro:u 303 to '283 ft
DEPTH
FRO-H--TO FORMATION DESCRI?TION
lf aod1t1onal space 1s needeo, use back of !orm
LOCATION SKETCH
(Show distance to nwcl>ered roada1 or other -e reference po1nta)
12. GRAVEL: gepth Size Material
From 303 to 28/ ft ! Z2
13. WATER ZONES (depth) : _____________ _
14. STATIC !•;ATER LEV!:L: above ft.belowtop of casing
Casing is ft. above land s·.:rface ELEV:
15. YIELD(gp:u) , _____ METHOD OF TESTltlG: __ _
16. PUM.PING WATER LEVEL: _______ ft.
after ____ hours at ______ 9pr:i.
17. CHLORINATION: Type ______ mount ____ _
18. WATER QUALITY: ______ __;TLMPER.ATUI\E (OF) __
19. PERMANENT P~!r: Date Installed _________ _
Type ______ Capacity _____ (gp:n) HP __ _
Hake __________ Intake Depth;._ ___ _
Airline Depth _____ _
20. HAS THE OWNER oEEN PROVIDED A COPY or THIS !'.ECORD ;.:;o 1:::Ci-."J::D or r ;;E D!:?.•.:=:-'.:::~TS R?.QtJJ;;.<:!'.E:::-s A':o
RECO~-v.E:mJ..TlO:;s?
21. RE MA li.J<S --------:--------------~----------I co hereby certify that thi• well \.as constructc:! i n ac==r::a::ce -..·Hh !LC . ..-ell Cons truction
Regulations an:! Standards and that this well record is tr~e and exact.
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
WELL RECOl:O , DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENT AL MANAGF.nifNT
P. 0. Box 27687 -RALEIGH, N.C. 27611 919-733-2020 .
DlllLLING CONTRACTORfze',4 d'°,K° ,4~,8' REG. NO. =-:'W":E:=LL:::::::C:::::O:::::NS:::::T:::::R:::::U:::CT:::::l:::::O:::::N:::::P:::::E:::::RM::::::;IT::::::::N::O:::::.====== ~-
1. WELL LOCATION: (Show sketch of the location below);;;,' ,y D '34 l,l ~
. Nearest Town ··---=~=.:":::.:U'::.:~;..;·Y.:_;..,..-,.;~,/-=~;::;',;'.:c,/-.J,.CJ.M~,_t:_. _________ coun ty: ~~&-A/ L~..v./v
0uadrang le No. /f/;l2'/./ / V SG,5 . --(Ro_a_d_,_C_o_mm_u_n_i_ t.tJ __ o_r_S_ub_d_i_v_i_a_i_on_a_n_d ___ Lo_t_N_o __ -,------/171
2. OWNER~ :::[-:/JV ~/ ~ 4..t:!'~_,,(Jv,1 DRILLING LOG
3. ADDRESS;..' _____________________ _ DEPTH FRO_M_·_TO FORMATION DESCRIPTION
4. TOPOGRAPHY: draw,valley,slope,hilltop,tlat(circle one)
s. usE OF WELL:4--✓✓k,,:v-? DATE: f:!r I:>· 82
6. DOES THIS WELL REPuc/4 EXISTING WELL? Y1/'$ • l 7. TOTAL DEPTB1 _,..3_.9' ___ .1_ R.IG TYPE OR HETHOD1 _____ _
I. l'ORKATION SAMPLES COLLECTED: YES NO X
9. CASING1 Depth Inside Wall thick. type
Ea
From 32D to 283 ft
Dia. or weight/ft.
371 ~X,-,,/r.U/U' p'~ /'Y.C.
10. GROUT: Depth Material Method
From32D fo 30°1ft :t /(p , ,::>vP/? ; 7
-----If additional space is
11. SCREEN: Depth Dia. Type, Opening
Fr0111.3o3 to 26$ ft 2.L>' CIJNT✓NVl)U.:S .:5Lor LOCATION
(Sho\l distance to n~ercd road1 1
12. GRAVEL: Depth Size ~:aterial
From3O3 to 'Z.81 ft 7 ZZ.
13. WATER ZOl.iES(depth) : _____________ _
14. STATIC WATER LEVEL: __ ft.~!r~:top of casing
Casing i ■ __ ft.. above land surface ELEV:
15. YIELD(gpm): METHOD OF TESTING: ___ _
16. PUM?WG WATER LEVEL: _______ ft.
after ____ houra at ______ 9pr:1.
17. CHLORIN~TI0N: Type ______ k~o1:.nt ____ _
18. "ATER ou.-.LIT'i : ______ ___;n::•1l'EAATUR£ (0 F) __
19. PERM.•~-..ENT PllMP: Date Installed
: Type_· _____ , Capacity _____ (gpm) HP __ _
Make __________ lntake Depth.;._ ___ _
Airline Depth _____ _
needea, use back ot form
SKETCH
or other a.a~ re!creoce eoinu)
20. HAS THE OWt-i:R BEE?I PROV ICED A CC?¥ OF 'rr.I S RECORD 1-..!lD rn,OF-'2i) OF ':'HE 0EPhRntt:::-rs REQUIRE.'-IF.STS 1-.!lD
REC0MMEllDATIO~S?
21. REMAE.KS -:-----:-----:--------------....:...... ___________ _
I do hereby certify that this well was constructed in accorda~ce with N.C. ~ell Constr~ction
Regulations and Sta~dards and that this well record is true and exact.
c. Estimated Waste Volume
The landfill aite will be conatructed to
accommodate up to 40,000 cubic yards of soil
contaminated with PCBa.
E. 'Description of Environmental Setting
1. Roadside
The discharge of material containing PCBs occurred
on approximately 211 shoulder miles of North Carolina
highways. The PCB spills have been identified in 14
counties. See Figure l for a general location of the
spill areas. The discharge of material containing PCBs
occurred mainly in rural areas on the roadway shoulder
within 24. inches of the pavement edge.
2. Disposal Site
a. Location and General Description
The proposed disposal aite is located in the
northeastern North Carolina Piedmont Plateau of
Warren County, approximately four miles south of
Warrenton. See Figur·e 2 for a county map showing
the site location.
The proposed disposal site consists of ap-
proximately 142 acres of which about five acres
will be used for the actual disposal of the soil
contaminated with PCBa. The remaining acreage
will serve as a buffer zone for the disposal area.
b. Hydrology-Topography
Surface water discharges are controlled by
the topographic position of the land. The proposed
disposal area occupies the crest of a gently
sloping upland ridge which has 70 to 80 feet of
relief. Surface water discharge from the site is
toward seven draws located in a radial pattern
around the aite. See Figure 7 for surface drainage
· patterns. Two large draws immediately Northeast,
and West of the aite receive the major portion of
surface run-off. Exposed clayey subsoils, topogra-
phic poaition and side slopes tend to minimize .
surface water infiltration and maximize surface
water run-off.
15
I ·-
\..J ~ .II -I lr-'11 "-/,.:../ l , • ./\ . "\ '"-// _ ~" I
SURFACE DRAINGE FROM PCB
DISPOSAL AREA
~ v-
,: 9 -:::::= =====
I
'
J .
I
• I •
I ~ -
~--I
. ,:,~~ . ~ /r,. <· ~ '
To) \ -• •• . r._ { ::.,., ~ ~-~ .
'·':-. \ . LEGEND ·. ~
;, \ • :J • SOIL BORING LOCATION @
-:.) \ 7 -SURFACE DRAINAGE ~·
_-=-r-;;;:;_.,_.1-W,..---...L..-..!.-....L.-l....~~-·~ll.iSJ?~..C::LC \ \ \sc~~l~da·--
surface water discharge is to Richneck Creek
and an unnamed tributary to Richneck Creek via
draws around the site. Richneck Creek discharges
to Fishing Creek. The confluence of Richneck and
Fishing Creek is approximately 3 miles downstream
and Southeast of the Warrenton raw water intake.
Stream classifications for Richneck Creek and
Fishin9 Creek in the discharge area is class C. Approximately 40 miles separate the site discharge
area and the closest raw water intake.
U. S. Geological Survey Flood Records of N. c. streams indicate that the 100-year flood eleva-
tion is not more than 8 feet above average water
levels in Richneck Creek and its tributaries. The
site is 70 to 80 feet ~ove these streams and not
subject to flooding.
Recharge of groundwater ~esulting from su~-
face water infiltration and percolation is esti-
mated to be low. There should be no significant
fluctuation in water table elevations beneath the
ridge occupied by the disposal site. All features
on the site which enhance surface run-off reduce
groundwater recharge. Rapid run-off and ti).e rela-
tivelr small area of gently sloping ridge crest
minimizes the volume.of precipitation available
for infiltration and recharge. The close proximity
of 2 deep draws for ground water discharge and the
relative low retention and water storage capacity
of deep subsurface ·weathered rock (silty sand and
sandy silt) indicates a low potential for buildup
of any significant hydraulic head or water table
below the ridge. The net effect of constructing
impermeable barriers on the ridge crest and divert-
ing any off-site surface water will be to further
reduce the potent~al for mounding of groundwater below the site. .
Precipitation ~ata from the U. s. Weather Bureau Station at Arcola in Warren County indicated,
that at the time of the September study, rainfall
in Warren County was approximately SX greater than
the preceding S year average. There were no
observed evidence of reduced soil colors or mottling
of soil colors to jndicate the presence of a
permanent water table. At the time of the boring,
no water table was observed at the 42 foot depth.
It is concluded that the water encountered in the
September study was a result of normal vertical
movement of percolating surface water rather than
ground water tables.
16
Representative Bydrographs of wells in Warren
County indicate that during September ground water
levels are declining. Ground water levels are at
maximum elevations during the period from January
to April. Borings performed during Februarr 1,
1979 by the consulting firm of Soil & Material
Engineers Inc. indicated a static water level of
~pproximately 303' to 306' in elevation or 37 to
32 feet below land surface. Boring depths were
45' below land surface. In the Warren Section of
the report title 11Geology and Ground Water Resources
in the Raleigh Area", compiled by the U. s. Geolo-
gical Survey, the static water level of well
number 122 was measured to be 47' below land
surface. For location of well number 122 see
Figure 3. This well is similar to the disposal
site borings with respect to elevation, topographic
position and time of water level recordation.
Bydrographs of observations wells in Warren County
show ground water fluctuations from approximately
5 to 11 feet. The study conducted by the firm
Soils & Materials Engineers Inc. was carried out
during the middle portion of maximum seasonal
fluctuation of 9round water.· The measured elevation
of groundwater 1n February, 1979, was 303 to 306 feet. Ground water elevations could be predicted
to rise an additional 5 to 6 feet. The predicted
highest ground water elevation would be 309 to 312
feet. Maximum surface elevation in the disposal
area is 343 feet. The highest predicted water
table elevation is 31 feet below land surface
which would allow a maximum excavation depth. of
24' to remain 7 1 from the high wa~er table elevations.
Construction of a clay liner would afford a 14
foot separation from the high water elevation.
c. Soil Conditions
Soils on the aite are characterized within
the standardized engineering concept of surficial
earth materials. Procedures established by the
American Association of State Highway Officials
(AASBO) and the American Society for Testing
Materials (ASTM) were utilized for soil evaluation.
The N. c. De~artment of Transportation and Soil &
Material Engineers, Inc. independently evaluated
site conditions and performed pertinent field and
laboratory analysis on materials obtained from 19
soil borings in the disposal area. ·.
Surficial soils on the site consists of
red-brown silty clays. The top soil on the site
is significantly eroded but where present extends
to a depth of 3 to 6 inches. Subsoils are clayey
17
\
I
I
l '--
I I
\
I
I
and silty and extend to depths of 38 to 45 feet.
In general, a gradual transition exist between
upper silty clays and deeper clayey silts. Obser-
vations of soil borings on site indicate that the
clayey silts grade into sandy silts and silty
sands. The general stratifications of clays
overlying silts which grade to fine sands is typi-
cal of the Piedmont province. Detailed analysis
of the aoil materials were performed by the N. c.
Department of Transpor~ation laboratory and Soil &
Material Engineers, I~c. ~he two laboratory
analysis indicated an upper layer of clayey soils
ranging in depth from Oto 38 feet below land
surface. Soila at the 45' maximum drilling depth
were classified as silty sands and sandy silts.
Standard Engineer nn-+'lll'l'r1oratory tests for
maximum density at optimum moisture and permeabi-
lity at 95 and 100 percent maximum density were
performed on the soils. At 9~% maximum density
the permeability of 1.9 x 10-c:n/sec and minimum
permeability of 1.8 x 10-~ cm/sec. At 100 percent
maximum ~,nsity no permeability was greater than
1.0 x 10 cm/sec, 8 acres encom assed b de-
tailed soil borings and ana ysis emonstrates at
50,000 to ?s oo cubic ards of cla e materials
e avai able to cons 1g y e soil
d. nv1ronmental Profile
The proposed disposal site occurs on open,
rolling cultivated land presently utilized for
soybean production. In addition to the soybeans,
various weeds and grasses have been obsetved
growing on the proposed disposal site and include
such species as foxtail, ground cherry, thistle,
broomsedge, ragweed, aster, and horseweed. Mixed
deciduous hardwoods in association with pine occur
on the periphery o~ the soybean field. Oaks in-
cluding white, southern red, blac, and post, red
maple, sweetgum, tulip poplar, hickory and loblolly
pine are the major canopy species present. Under-
story species consists of redbud, dogwood, American
holly, red cedar, and winged sumac scattered among
small shrubs, saplings and vines -primarily
honeysuckle.
18
II. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION
AND THEIR POTENTIAL IMPACTS
A. Procedures Utilized to Evaluate Alternative
Disposal site Locations
The.North Carolina Department of Suman Resources,
Division of Health Services conducted a site search for potential land areas that would be suitable for the permanent
storage of the PCB contaminated soil. The objective of the investigati~n was to evaluate available State and offered private property for potential usage as disposal sites. It
was anticipated that several suitable sites could be located. A set of general guidelines was developed .to assist in the
evaluation of potential sites.
The following is an outline of general site criteria
and EPA technical re9Uirements utilized in the location and
evaluation of potential disposal sites for the PCB contami-nated soil.
1. General Area of Potential Site Locations
The search for potential disposal sites was gen-
erally limited to an area bounded by the counties where the PCB spills had occurred. Areas east of the spills
were generally eliminated due to evidence of seasonal high ground water levels relatively close to land sur-
face . Potential sites in areas of the western portion
of the State were given a low priority due to the long haul distances.
2. General Site Screening & Evaluation Procedures
(a) Site Relief
A PCB chemical waste landfill should be loca-
ted in an area that provides low to mode;,to ~QQQi-
xra2hic relief to prevent landslides ors umping. eria! photogtaphs,· U. s. Geological survey topo-
graphy maps and field measured elevations were
utilized to evaluate site relief suitability.
Sites with potential of land slumping resulting
from required construction activity were rejected.
(b) Topographic Position
Hill, flat, slope and draw are the four basic
topographic positions for surface features. Wells installed on hill or ridge positions normally
exhibit the lowest average yield of 9round water
per foot of well. Bill or ridge positions are
also amenable to diversion of surface water and
control of local recharge to ground water by
19
I .
minimizing areas available for recharge. Hilltop
and ridge were assigned a high ~riority for topo-
graphic position. Sites predominated by draws or
difficult to manage slope position were rejected.
U. s. Geological Survey topographic maps and
on-site evaluations were used to determine topogra-
phic position suitability.
(c) Soils
Surficial soils are formed bf weathering of
subsurface geological rock formations. The charac-
teristics of the surficial soils are determined by
the chemical and physical properties of underlying
rock formations. Therefore, detailed geological
maps of specific areas and State and County soil
surveys were used to delineate sites with poten-
tially suitable soils. Site specific surface
evaluations, soil borings and field & laboratory
testing of soil materials were performed on sites
with reasonable probability of meeting the hi9h
silt and clay content parameters for PCB chemical
waste landfills. Sites with sandy surface soils,
rock outcrops or exposed boulders, surficial soils
with shallow depth to bed rock and insufficient
on-site soils for clay liners were rejected.
Surficial soils contained within the landfill site
which could not meet the following EPA technical
requirements were rejected. ·
(1) permeability 1.0 x 10-7 cm/sec.
( 2) percent passing no. 200 sei ve 2 30
(3) plasticity index~lS
(d) Hydrology
Potential contamination of ground or surface
water were major considerations for screening all
sites. Any site that could not be designed to
prevent hydraulic connection between the PCB con-
taminated soils and surface streams or springs and
ground water was rejected. Sites within the
100-year floodplain, within close proximitf of a
class I or II reservoir utilized as a public water
supply or within~ mile of an A-II stream as de-
signated by the D.E.M. were rejected. A separa-
tion distance of 500 feet from the site and water
supply wells was used as a ·site screening para-
·meter. The depth to ground water would limit the
depth of excavation and total storage volume of a
given site. The standard for site evaluations
with respect to ground water separation was 50
feet. It was acknowledge during the site evalua-
tion process that the probability of locating
20
sites with ground water levels below 50' from land
surface would be difficult if not impossible~
Therefore, sites were screened according to the
predicted or measured minimum depth from land surface to the upper limits of ground water tables.
Transmissivity, gradients and discharge areas for
ground water were considered in site evaluations.
Ground water fluctuations were predicted from
data generated by U. s. Geological Survey publi-cations on geology and ground water resources and field observations or measurements. Predicted,
observed or measured upward fluctuation of ground
water resulting in relatively shallow water tables
would cause a site to be rejected. Rainfall and evaporation data from the U. s. Weather Bureau in
combination with U. S. Geological Re~orts and
field measurements were used to predict the maximum : upper fluctuation from the measured static water levels on sites that were drilled.
(e) Site Size
The disposal site for ·the PCB contaminated soil should be large enough to allow adequate con-
struction and protection of the disposal area.
Considerations for sizing a site include: con-struction of disposal pit; storage area for stock-
piling borrow materials to allow separation of
earth liner, topsoils, leachate collection and spoil materials; access and turn around area for
haul vehicles, separate sedimentation ponds for
runoff from disposal pit and soil stockpile areas;
areas for installation of monitoring wells up gradient and down gradient of disposal pit; berms
or ditching for diversion of surface water and a
buffer and security zone. A minimum 16-20 acres
in a fairly re~lar configuration was the rejection criteria for site size.
(f) Access
Sites with deeded right-of-ways were assigned higher priority than sites with no road ~rontage,
no deeded right-of-wars or property access by easement. Consideration was also given to the
length and construction difficulty of access roads from state maintained roads to the disposal pit.
(g) Isolation of Site
Population densities within 1 mile of proposed
sites and sites which would require transportation of the PCB contaminated soil through highly popu-
21
. '
-lated areas were considered for site evaluations.
The objective of this standard was to locate sites
which would impact the least number of citizens
during transportation and disposal.
B. Alternative Sites Evaluated
1. Total Sites Evaluated
The above outlined standards were utilized to
evaluate approximately 90 sites in 20 counties. Every
available tract of state-owned land considered to be a
possible candidate as a site to receive PCB contaminated
soil was investigated. These included properties
assigned to the National Guard, institutions, tower
sites, prison property experimental farms, state parks,
state forests, utility-owned property and properties
under Department of Transportation jurisdiction.
Federal property on the Fort Bragg military reservation
was also evaluated. ·
The remaining sites were offered for evaluation by
private individuals and corporations, and county govern-
ments.
2. Site Rejection
Approximately 90 percent of all potential sites
were eliminated due to violation of one or a combination
of evaluation standards. A majority of the sites were
eliminated due to the location with respect to private
or public water supply reservoirs, intakes and wells;
high water tables and unsuitable soil characteristics.
The range of site evaluations included sites from 1.5
to 1300 acres; soils from highly impermeable saturated
marine clay materials in Wilson County and impermeable
clay stone pits in the Triassic Basin to sand dune sur-
ficial deposits on the Fort Bragg Military Reservation.
Water table elevations varied from 3' to greater than
40' below land surface.· Topographic positions varied
from relatively flat areas to areas with greater than
30 degree side slopes and population densities from a
few homes per square mile to hundreds within a mile of
the site.
Eleven of the total available sites were considered
to have a high probability for meeting the criteria for
PCB chemical landfills. Detailed soil borings and sub-
surface investigations were made on these eleven sites.
Table II lists these eleven sites. Sites in Franklin
County, the Nash County Prison Site, the Wake County
Prison Site, Chatham County Brick Plant site and the
Barnett County O.O.T. Borrow Pit site were rejected
from subsurface investigations. The remaining 6 sites
22
in Person, Warren, Nash, Wake, Chatham and Granville
Counties were evaluated by EPA and State personnel.
Consideration was given to multiple site distribution
by development of these sites; however 4 of the sites were rejected and more detailed subsurface analysis
were required on the Chatham and Warren sites.
Maximum density, ~ermeability at 95% maximum dry density and optimum moisture tests, volume of material suitable for clayey liners and water table monitoring
test were performed on the Chatham and Warren sites.
Both sites afforded essentially equivalent evaluations.
The Chatham County site was unavailable for purchase by the State for development as a PCB chemical landfill
and therefore rejected from further considerations.
In order to increase the disposal site alternatives
requests were made by the State to County Boards of
Commissioners for permission to evaluate existing sani-
tary landfill sites as potential sites for disposal of the PCB contaminated soil. Table III illustrates the
result of subsurface evaluations for suitable soil
materials and water table elevations. The sanitary landfill sites were either unsuitable for development
or were unavailable for development as a PCB chemical
landfill.
3. Selected Site
Of the six most suitable sites located in Nash, Person, Wake, Granville, Chatham and Warren counties
the Warren County site on SR 1604 demonstrated the least restrictions and the greatest degree of protec-
tion of the public health and environment. Additional
tests were performed by an independent consulting firm
to confirm the state's evaluation of the site. Appli-
cation was made to EPA for site approval for this site to be developed into a disposal site for the PCB con-·
taminated soil. Site and conceptual plan approval was granted.
23
' >
! '
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR .
RALEIGH 27611
JAMES 8. Hu NT, JR .
. GOVERNOR
December 12, 1978
Dear Mr. White:
As you know, the State of North Carolina had some 200 plus miles of highway
shoulder contaminated with polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) by illegal dump-
ing this summer. The State of North Carolina intends to remove this contami-
nated soil and dispose of it in an approved chemical waste landfill as re-
quired by the Environmental Protection Agency regulations promulgated in
the Federal Register on February 17, 1978 as amended on August 2, 1978.
Enclosed is our application for a site in Warren County, North Carolina,
which is presently privately owned. The State will initiate final procure-
ment action for this property upon receipt of a tentative approval from you.
We would appreciate your prompt attention to this application. We under-
stand from your staff that you will issue a tentative approval or disapproval
of the conceptual design after opportunity for public hearing. We think
it beneficial to hold a joint EPA/State hearing within 10 days after you
have co mpleted your review of this submittal. When your tentative decision
is reached, if it is approved, we will initiate the final engineering design
in accordance with the approved concepts. When the final design is com-
pleted, it will be submitted to you for final approval prior to initiation
of any disposal. ·
My warmest personal regards.
Mr. John C. White
Regional Administrator
Environmental Protection Agency
345 Courtland Street, Northeast
Atlanta, Georgia 30308
Enclosure
cc: DavidE. Kelly
:·." l .
\
APPLICATION TO U.S. EPA REGION IV
for
PCB DISPOSAL SITE
WAR.REN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
by the
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
I ' .
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Pages.
SITE LOCATION -------------------------------------------1
LANDFILL DESCRIPTION------------------------------------1-2
ENGINEERING REPORT----------------------------------2-6
SAMPLING AND MONITORING----------------------------6
WASTE VOLUMES EXPECTED----------------------------------6
GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF WASTE MATERIALS-------------~-----7
OPERATIONAL PLAN---------------------------------------7-9
LOCAL AND STATE PERMITS----------------------------------9
SCHEDULE OF CONSTRUCTION---------------------------------9
WAIVERS REQUIRED-----------------------------------------4-6
ATTACHMENTS: 1, 2, and 3
I I
I. Site Location
The PCB landfill in Warren County, North Carolina,is located on the
property of Carter C. Pope ·and wife, Linda W. Pope. The State of
North Carolina will buy approximately 142 acres from Mr. and Nrs. Pope
on which the trench will be constructed. The exact site location is
shown on County Map, the USGS quadrangle sheet and a property boundary
drawing to scale on Pages 10 -12.
II. Detailed Description of Landfill
The State of North Carolina proposes to construct the PCB landfill as
shown on the conceptual sketches shown on Pages 14 -19.
the landfill will be constructed as follows:
In general,
Excavate to within seven feet of the high groundwater elevation.
Select borrow and stockpile which will allow reconstitution and
compaction of a five-foot liner which will have a permeability
-7 of lxl0 cmrs.
Construct five-foot liner in the bottom of the trench and up
the sides five feet in elevation.
Install 4-inch PVC perforated leachate collection system leading
to a sump which will allow liquid withdrawal for the relief of
any head buildup.
Place one foot of selected sand or other high permeability
material around the plpe over the entire bottom of the trench.
The trench will be sloped to drain to the sump.
The side slopes will be 2: 1.
The waste will be placed on top of the one foot of sand in lifts
as described in the oµcratinns plan.
When a 11 the \flS te is ln pl.:ice, the Lmdfi 11 \;ill be covered \:i th
one fuot of soil (excava tcJ from trench). A 10 mil artificial
. ,'
(
liner will be placed on top of the one foot of soil . A 1.5 foot
layer of excavated soil will be placed on top of the liner and
six inches of topsoil will be placed on top of this.
The top surface will be sloped at about two percent to facilitate
runoff of rainfall. The top will be seeded with a perennial grass.
All surface drainage during construction and after completion will
be diverted from the landfill surface.
III. Engineering Report
1. Description of the general geology of the area.
The proposed site is located in the northeastern North Carolina
Piedmont Plateau, approximately four miles south of Warrenton,
No rth Carolina. The site is more than 20 miles northeast of the
maximum extension of the Jonesboro Fault.
Site geology consists of foliated and gneissic rocks striking
in a northeast direction. Predominant rock types include biotite-
feldspar gneiss, quartzitic gneiss, garnetiferous biotite gneiss,
and interbedded mica schist and gne i ss. All are metamorphic rocks
which show banding, foliation, or gnessic texture. The mica
gneiss on-site is deeply weathered,forming thick layers of brown-
red clay residum soils. Residum soils are classified as: clayey,
kaolinitic, thermic; typic hapludults.
The aquifer below this site is associated with consolidated bedrock,
flows toward topographic lows, and groundwater encountered in the site
borings indicates the upper aquifer elevations. Local existing wells
on ridges and elevations similar to this site have a depth of 40-47
feet to water table. (See schematic on Page 13.)
-2-
.· .. · .·
I (
Therefore, this site does not meet the first technical requirement
of being "located in thick, relatively impermeable formations such
as large-area clay pans." Since the above is not possible, the site
meets or exceeds the remaining criteria of paragraph 761.41 (b)(l)
as follows or a waiver is requested with justification:
Required
(i) In-place soil thickness four
feet, or compacted soil liner
thickness three feet.
(ii) permeability lxl0-7 cm/s
Actual
Five feet compacted soil.
lxl0-7 cm/s permeability
Discussion: The soil characteristics as shown by the sieve analysis
and the atterburg limits and the percent moisture vs. compaction curves
indicate that the native clay MH-CH will compact to 93 lbs/ft.3 which
should yield lxl0-7 permeability. To date this has not been vertified
by laboratory !)ermeability. This verification is in progress, and if
the permeability is less than lxl0-7 additional depth of compacted
soil will be added so the equivalent of five feet of lxl0-7 will be used.
Required
(iii) Percent passing No. 200 sieve > 30
(iv) Liquid limit> 30
(v) Plasticity index> 15
(vi) Artificial liner
Actual
Average passing No. 200 = 65%
(See soils data attachment)
Average LL= 50
(See soils data attachment)
Average PI= 18
(See soils data attachment)
None
Discussion: A waiver is requested for this requirement. ~c State of
:forth Carolina does not feel that the lack of an artificinl liner will
present an unreasonable risk of injury to heallh or the environ:::ent from
PCB's for the following reasons:
-3-
2.
This landfill is not a commercial facility which will be in
operation for a long period of time. It is a one-shot (90 days
open) operation for a special problem. (Soil with low concenttation
of PCB generally expected to be less than 500 ppm based on test dig,
see attachment.)
The 5-foot compacted clay liner exceeds the requirement found in
761.41 (b)(l)(i)~ EPA-Part V-PCB Disposal and Marking.
There will be a 10 mil plastic liner placed on top of the landfill.
This "umbrella" top will be covered by two feet of soil which will
support the growth of grasses. The grass, the 2 percent slope,
drainage ditches, and the top liner will effectively prevent any
,._,,/
rainwater infiltration into the landfill.
Hydrology
The landfill is located on a hill slope well above the floodplain,
as can be seen by the location on the USGS quad sheet. There is
no hydraulic connection between the waste and any ground or surface
water. The bottom of the waste will be a minimum of lOl/feet above
the seasonal high groundwater table.
Y A \-;a iver is requested for the 50 feet separation between the site
and the groundwater. The State of North Carolina does not feel that
this will present an unreasonable risk to health or the environment
from PCB for the same reasons stated for the liner waiver. In addition,
we do not believe that this requirement can be met in North Carolina in
a r easu:iable manner by maintaining proper corr.plianc~ with the other re-
quircme nts, kee ping in mind that taxpayer dollars must be spent to
:ichicve this t ask . This i s b.:1sed on the fact that the grounch,ater is
within ~O feet or l ess of the surface in essentially all the Piedmont
area of North Carolina.
-4-
(
3. Flood Protection
The site is above the 100-year floodwater elevation (See Attachment 2).
The runoff diversion structures will be designed to handle the 25-year
24-hour storm runoff.
4. Topography
The topography of the area is low to moderate as evidenced by the USGS
quad sheet.
5. (i) Monitoring Systems
(a) Baseline samples of ground and surface water will be
collected and analyzed prior to the initiation of con-
struction and the data will be forwarded to EPA prior
to the issuance of the final approval. Sampling loca-
tions are shown on Page 12.
(b) The monitoring wells and the surface streams will be
monitored monthly while the site is open.
(c) The monitoring wells and the surface steams will be
monitored biannually after closure of the site.
(ii) (a) The wells are located on Page 12.
(b) The wells will be constructed as stipulated by Paragraph
761.41 (b)(5)(ii)(b), EPA-Part V-PCB Disposal and Marking.
(iii) All samples will be analyzed for:
(a) PCB
(b) pH
(c) Conductance
(d) Request a waiver for the analysis for chlorinated or6anics
since PCB is the only chlorinated organic to be disposed in
the landfill.
6. Leachate Collection
-5-
1 •'·
(
(
'
A leachate collection system will be installed on top-Y of the 5-foot
compacted clay liner. The system will consist of one foot of sand
with a 4-inch PVC perforated pipe in the bottom four inches of the
sand. The entire bottom of the trench will be sloped toward a sump.
The sump can be pumped out to the surface through an 8-inch pipe.
The individual collection pipes will be connected to a header which
will drain into the swnp.
y The State of North Carolina is requesting a waiver for the leachate
collection system being under the liner. We are of the opinion that a
more practical, sound engineering design is to construct a collection
system on top of the liner which will allow any head buildup to be re-
moved quickly. This leachate collection system design and the "umbrella"
top to prevent infiltration seems to negate the need of any leachate
collection monitoring system being placed under the five feet compacted
clay liner.
IV. Sampling and Monitoring
The ground\·1ater, surface water and sediment samples will be collected and
analyzed by the North Carolina Department of Human Resources, Division of
Health Services, Laboratory Section. The samples will be analyzed in the
Division's Laboratory Section in Raleigh, North Carolina.
V. Expected Wa ste Volume
This sjte is expected to receive approximately 31,000 cubic yards of soil
contamin.'.!te d by PCB from the state highway shoulders. In addition, there
will be upproxinately 8,000 cubic yanls of col'!t,minated soil from Fort Dragg,
?forLh Carolinn , road shoulder. (If a second site in the southern part of
tltc spill area ls used, the vohw'.e will be reduced to approximately one-half
at this site.)
-6-
VI. Waste Material Other Than PCB
The only waste to be disposed of in this site is contaminated soil. The PCB
contamination is 210 to 380 ppm (See sample dig results, Attachment 1).
VII. Operational Plan
(1) Record Keeping
All plans, quantity of waste received, and other information will
be placed in a permanent file. The EPA approval letter, including
a legal description of the disposal site, shall Qe filed in the
Register of Deeds' office in the Warren County Courthouse,
Warrent6n, North Carolina.
Results of all monitoring will be placed in the permanent file as
well as other necessary information.
(2) Excavation
The excavation shall be carried out as shown on the enclosed drawing.
The backfill ~r placing of the PCB waste will be as follows:
Two 10-foot lifts will be used. The trucks will back into
the open end of the pit and place the waste as near to working
face as possible without the truck wheels getting on the waste.
A track piece of equipment will be used to push and compact
the waste into place. Clean earth will be placed on the
floor of the pit as needed to keep the trucks out of the waste.
The leachate collection system will be constructed as placement of
first lift progresses. The open end of the pit will be closed
to the level of the first lift. A 1-foot layer of clean earth
will be placed over the first lift so the trucks can be on a
clean surface and the second lift will be comple~ed as the first.
After the s e cond lift has been co~pletetl, including placing the
-7-
,----
l
\
residue from the runoff collection system, the open end of the
pit will be completely closed. One foot of clean soil will be
placed on top of the waste. A ten mil plastic cover on a 2 percent
grade will be placed over this one foot of soil. Two feet of com-
pacted earth will be placed over the plastic cover on a 2 percent
grade. Erosion control procedures will be utilized as required
by the Division of Land Resources, Department of Natural Resources
and Conununity Development.
(3) Vehicle and Equipment Movement and Use of Roadways
Access will be controlled at all times. Vehicle and equipment movement
will be strictly controlled. Dust control methods will be applied as
needed.
(4) Surface runoff from the pit area will be collected in a holding pond as
shown on Page 16. The water collected in the holding pond will be
analyzed for PCB, and if negative, the water will be released to surface
drainage. If the analysis for PCB's is positive, then the water will be
processed through a carbon filter prior to release. The carbon filter,
if used, and the silt from the pit will be placed in the disposal area
prior to final closing.
(5) Leachate Collection System
Leachate collection system will consist of placing 4-inch PVC perforated
pipes on top of the clay liner graded to a sump with a stack to at lea st
two feet above the completed surface with a cover and lock. One foot of
porous material will be placed over the clay liner to enclose the per-
forated pipes.
(6) Sampling and Nonitorins
Three monitoring we lls will be pla ced on a line through the site. One
of the wells will be located above the dispos a l pit and two below, with
-8-
one of the wells located at the area with the lowest groundwater.
Sampling and monitoring of the leachate collection system, the wells,
and the receiving stream will be carried out as recommended by.the
Environmental Protection Agency.
Background samples will be collected and analyzed prior to the
placing of any waste.
(7) Types of Waste
Earth contaminated with PCB. (Test clean-up analysis is enclosed on
Attachment 1.)
(8) Supportive Facilities
A six-foot ~ire fence wil: be placed around the disposal area to
prevent unauthorized persons and animals from entering.
(9) The site shall be operated and maintained in a manner to prevent
safety problems and hazardous conditions. The State will have its
inspectors on-»scene during all operations.
VIII. Local, Sta te, and Federal Permits
The disposal site will be in accordance with local zoning codes. A State
pcrr.ii t \,'ill be issued by the North Carolina Dep_artment of Human Resources.
IX. Tentative Schedule
Submittal to EPA----------------------------------------December 12, 1978
Public Hearing -------------------------------------------January 4, 1979
EPA Tentative Approval Expected--------------------------January 25, 1979
!
Detailed Plans and Specifications Completed------------February 20, 1979
Final Approval Expected from EPA---------------------------March 7, 1979
Construc tion Started: (Upori completion of a North Carolin3 State ~egative
DecL:nati.on and as weather permits.)
Site Closed: Approximately 90 days after site preparation completed (as
\veathcr permits.)
-9-
. ......C::----v ---== 5 I i · . -rr I :. § jJ ' " i ~ -~-~, ! ~-"'11 f! / ;,.l t?.~·-~ T.-L_' -.:;;-: \\ '! ,~ I' I
-.
~ : N \, ·\,...... -;
>-..... z :::) 0 u z w ~ °' ~ /,' ~ +
'·, ·, .
~f;J-~-~ ·' ,, .. a::.,t~ \) 0:.:,../ ·-!':x~ i> .~/ ,.. 1f' ·'),--.. • r' .._
/0,l .~ z
) ! "\\ "
' ( 0 _j t • V r \ . . \ -~=-
z -\\:--. ( ' :
---,, ~ ·. ,::--''
/., 1~·~.r'
0 ~..-~
o -J!i •l ' ~"'--"-"+-'.,.__,,-y:-J: _.,,,..,.--,.,_,... \ :~1\\'-l\ "' ~ ~-'"-~, . -• I Ii ... ,r.-.. ! •:_~ • I. -z -· --i'•-.·, ____,, I I. ,~ ---~ j,-0:-----::-•• . "-' \,,, -
f > ,.:~. ..J \-~-l
/-✓; ! .;·::j ·.: /_s ·...--.---:--,. .... -:.~ ~)
; I •. ,. . (
: / ' ~ { I :
~ !-c;c~z. ~;:!"::~ ~,J.~,:~·· ;~-; _-.:,ii~'\: i'r ..... -. ... -..;-/ ~,::w-
"· '" ~:>f .~!3 I /~·, 'l~ 1:. ';--! .-, -•. , .\ i_.::.::~{1/ :_,7 / ./
.--.,1·.·:.--""t"· ~-~ : ~ ·• ... ·-~-~·\ :-.. t 1 ,. ..:, ' .---·-:·•Jj ~L_!) 0 IJ ... ,I """'.
·~ ~---rl . . \ '• '
·----..:-C f: ,: 'I. '\ i ~ 2: I ,.
I ~ ~ ~ -~ :: ;).:
~
(/)
...J (/)
...J ...J
I..!.. ...J
0 4. z 0 c::r z en ~, ...J <! 0..
0 ...J ~ w, w t:) ::> ~I (/) z 0
0 -...J, 0. I-z
0 en w -c:: X 0.
D.. w 0
DO <J
-10-
<( z :::; 0 n:: <( u ::i::: >-0,: 0 z
'-
· .. ,
'
_I
-ll-
·" .. l'ar;.,:,-;,\.ll ~
'. ':-,,. ,. ' ~-/ . '/
h ·
',, \ \ ..... /'/ , I ,i
'
0 I f-J l'-1 I I -~, ... ·-~· ·-----··-. ---------·•---------IL ,_ ("1 1 I-n: ·?-... <.' I} I . .. A!-c.!~Jo' .. v'\ .z,,. ·..J... '-'•J~,,· (' loJ • .J.--i . S°UIZ..~ \.IJ~~~ 511--M.~I"'-' 'Si~"t",ti"'->S ~r ) Nl<:0~•~1 2f-J3~j C .... Q.c.u..1-->tl '-N~n.tl. t,.l.c...:>1\'012. WEU... I # "' ., ;:d w 2 C, -<I. ::; :,:' ., .., a.. 0 .. IL II: I IAON"' ~ .,. "' ,0 ~ I"' O'I " ."'/ ~ ., CJ .. .. 2: Jl ~ ~ f .. ti r i" ; .. rr--~t·. .:' •. __ ,1;:___~; ·'"-/;;: . ~ , . I ....... .'-'-·"" . . . . . ' •·•"''' ,. .. ,., "-._ , . ~ • .!~s ~ ~y' V,. 1~ ;, -..:!.~-t~f!O ~-· "1 .;··..... ..,,.. • /47// ,r\,"' ~ " "o,, I <-r~ f ½ . .. ,/~ ! ' . I ' ~ ' .. ., " IRO#ot ,U\Jt4Q . • -J.a +,o!.,. ,•~o.o·,,,. \ .. 14Z.323 AC. !:>1s?os~L ·t::)? C'J1v1s •. --·--·-·-\ R. LOI'/[ LL. 111111111:; R[G L/ltll) !,UIIV(Yvf< / ., -. ';"I -·•·••··--· ,~~~ ... o ----'\.,, = .,. "' . :-:., ~. ~ -~ .·. , -,., .... , r,;..,,., . .. :•.;\\11 .. ~:Cu !-.i.·c..; ,·"t. l'"' " l ••· •.-r .. (, ,._ :,~·,. t er•. •u·c t ss•. zr· c S 1 •. I,:· ( $ ,u•. ,,• l SI)'• .. ,.,'( s ld•,;z·r. sz,•. L/'f. "'74'-22• l S 11•. <10' l sn'.21· c s •z•. ,1· t ''" •~o· 111 II) 1'1 , .... ·-,~ 1~,· 112· iso· ,~,· 440· C'~ ~~ 'S ~ "' •. J ~' f )::'4 S•>'-.:)'L 11' SH', vLL 2):, s ,~•. :o·c HC.' s•••-zi·c ,,:· S ":t•. ! 4 C 1r, s"' 4!-'. )1 · L IS: S ., •. !7' £ 12' ....... ,. .. I.• N ZI '. J~. C ., ST•'. Jc· C n 5 ,•. cl' l I!! S 14•. •a· C 16 ,· Tv •a• +~ ~ ~0\\ ti, 9 . .,,t<i,t. ---,,..,•;tCA';;, ,,,,,, -~-<. ·······~o< •• · l~ /.-'" •.;;-\~.\ $~(~ $(Al Y~ '"' L·IJ•l ~/~I 1. ,..,, ,.f;./~ ~ ~ < ,."'o tu•"",,'q_,. ~ \.?ii;ri:i:··~ ~-----,,,,,,,, .. , ... ,,,,,, PllOPE FITY OF CARTER C. POPE .. ,, WII( UtlDA w POP[ IIH[II OHO D• 218 ,&C[ 231 SHOCCO r,,wNSHII', WARHOi COUNft. II C ocrOhf.lf :ic.. 1)76 SCALE. 1· • J<.,t,' ~~ All , .. f (tr r. , .. ,., l",I ,,.., ~VO r ~• ••-I ,,: •:••, ~ ~7•-:° .. -~:, . ...:..;. ::.j 1. -~
,.· ,. i --.. I~ ... --.. : ~ -_:_+~----~------> -----------: --. : .
V\
·-·{-------.
J
] .. ·-
I
.,
t'
I
')./ s /. ti
c) \ \(\
\
-· -----------
I ,,
C >')
:<I
I
I I --·; ---1-.. I I ✓ G i I -l-,
I
,i I' ,\1
,'f\
' 'a --,,1
-13-
. -. --·-·--·-. £-=·=.:....= .
. '3 . -:.-·-· ---·
I I -I "8 ~ C, U;
t-1 i'-J N
. •, .. .. : .
T
l
I-
. 1------·1
l;---l
I i-----I
-14-
.. . . •
' 1.
I c
...:. ..
0
0
.T -. . I + ------~ --,
I t --------~
t + ___ .:_ ______ ~
I
[~
~ ~
I -:---i
T T
. .
T .--+--;_-7 I : !
l :0' I 1
I I
1 I I
l I I
I I L I _______ .J
·l · l
T TT
1
-I 1--
-15-
1
T
T T
I 1 l
'
--~--------. --,
I I
--------I --➔ I
I I -----------f
t I __ _..._ __ --
:11
------~·~•: ----
l
-16-
~~ "S;EC.""\"\~ \J La::.~ "T\ t) \.-J
A
-17-
(
--1
' ttJ I
I l
fl) l
2 i
( 0 I .,,.. I
hl ' I
v? \
l
1/l I ~ --1
I
' \
l
\
\
\ \ .
T \
\
1
~ w .5
. . .
J • . . :
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . , . . . . • • . . • . . .
--i
\~ -Q -~ T
= . -1-. . . . . . .
.
. .
.
-is-=
\!J
" ~
T ~
~ 1
.
J
I
I
I
I
I
i
I I
I
--l
l ·
\
: . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . • : . .
I
I
: /.
:/
:j' . . . . • . . .
: . . ,, ,, .
. ... . -· . .. ~ ·: . .. . .. . . . . • . . . . . .
t
. • ., l I{ I; . Ii . I ! . J ) ~ : ~ I . ~ • . • ; i . l . • . • . •
t
t
'
I--~-f--C--i, -~
• L
10--.,
• l
October 19, 1978
tIZHO IO: Mr. Robert A. Cart~f
.
FRO!-f: Ray E. Kelling, Lo.boratory Section ... .•
SUBJECT: PCB Results~ Warren County Test Cleanup
Given. below are the PCB results for the Warren County Test: Cleanup
taken on October 5, 1978. /u.l results are quantitated on the PCS-
Aroclor 1260.
A
B
C
E & D
(1)
170 ~/kg
0.13 ~g/kg
<100 JJg/kg
Wa!::h dm,;n
<O. 77 µz/1
Special 1
II 2
II 3
Background l ,, 2.
(2)
3.8 mg/kg
33 mg/kg
0.33 mg/kg
4lµg/l
130 1Jg/kg
77 mg/kg
330 mg/kg
(1)
{2)
(3)
(!1)
(5)
<100 itg/kg
<!$Zl iig/kg
(3)
210 mg/kg
3!,0 1ag/kg
<190 µg/kg
150 1.tg/l
Stor2-ge P lle
290 mg/kg
270 mg/kg
380 rig/kg
210 We>/ko-0 .:,
270 mo-/ko-o I:>
(4) (5)
41 rug/kg · 10 rr.g/k~
6 mg/kg 0.25 mg/kg
<100 11g/kg <100 µg/kg
75 1-1g/l 127 µg/1
United States Departn1ent of the Interior
GEOLOGIC.\L SU{ \TY
P.O. Box 2857
Raleigh, NC 27602
Attachment 2
November 29, 1978
Mr. Jerry C. Perkins, Head
Solid Waste and Vector Control Branch
Division of Health Services
N. C. Department of Human Resources
P. 0. Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Dear Mr. Perkins:
The proposed PCB disposal site located in Warren County at latitude
36°20'13", longitude 78°09'58", is above the 100-year flood level.
The site is located on a hilltop between Richneck Creek and one of its
tributaries. I estimate, based on flood records collected at North
Carolina streams, that the 100-year flood height is not more than 8 feet
above average water level in these creeks. The proposed site is
approximately 80 feet above these creeks and not subject to flooding.
Sincerely yours,
.~ /;./;, /''// ,/>✓-:~ '-'~? C ;.• ·, Ct:(': Cc:
✓-{2..-N. M. Jackson, Jr.
/ Hydrologist
m!J:ceh
I .. I''
(
\
(
,:-:r.
MATEF?I/\LS ll< TESTS Ur-:IT
SOILS L.AOOn~.TORY
, .. . roJ. --.. -------------------------·---
REPORT o:;-.r sA?.IPLBs oF _so.i.l_.f..c:,r __ Q.i,t_c1,l.:Lt:r_Jt .. r:L ______ ;.::_:. ___________ _
Project ___________ 4_._540JJ..OJ1 _____ ----------County ------~--_____ Jf.sJ.:r:r_cn ---~---__________ Ovmer ----:---------------
Date: Sampled --~--=-~~:-?~-----------~--: __________ · __ Rccdvc<l : •.. ~-":~~-:-.:?.~~----~---------ltcp:>r-.<:d ---~_:-;~?::?a ____ ~_
. S:miplcd fr~m ___ PCB _Pit _//4 ______________ . _____________ O:, _ J,. · S. _ D:citt. __________________________ · __
Submitted b7 ____ }! ! _ _P.!_~i~gtT.~~--------------~----~-------------------·-------·----------10. !.~--St:mdnrd S;mific:n
396732-396751 TEST nESuLTS ,!),.;;, j_
lA lD lC 2A 2ll 3A 313 4A _l_'r_o.:...j._S_a_m""'"p_le_N_o. ___ --r----1-------~ "
_1_.:i_h._S_a_m..:...p_1e_N_' o_. ---+-3_9_6_7_3_2-t-_3_9_6_7_3_3-t-_3_9_6_7_34_· -t-3_9_G_73_5 __ t 396 7JG_ · 39 G 73 7 39 6 7 33-1 _39 G 7 3c
Rrl o.ined !;•1 Sieve 1 1 ----
100 98 98 100
99 9G ~5 '99-----Tn; 48 74 63
C ~ ~ " ;
r ::, r ...
1_ --1 -;_ --~--2 -_--;-----3---·-;-i· ·4
0
--Hole No:...;.. _______ ._l ____ ,__ _
~~j'lth (ft.) 0 . 1.1 30 0 u 1 0 3 I
______ -___ t_o ____ l_l ____ .-_}Q ____ · __ j_Q!..? ____ f}_ ___ 1~}~~Li~-----23, i }_.o ____ _
------~r_h_-+--6_._2_G _ ___.__6_._3_6 ___ 6_._7-:-5 G. 53 ~-:~3 G. 2 9 s_._CJ s_ ·--
cc: ✓Hr. H. C. AJams
:rr. \,'. n. Di.ngharr,
!ioi ls Li.le
----------------·-····-----------· . --------. -------. --. --··-------·
\
I
~
,C;(.
""roj. ------------------------------··---
MATERIA~ Cl< TESTS UNIT
SOIL!:, LABORr\TORY
rcoject ________ .A • .540110.l _____ ----------County -------~---------------------------· Owner -------------------
D:it~: Sampled ------· -----------------------.------Received -·----------··---------------ltcported __ · -----·--------..·
. . ~ . . .
. Sc,mpled from ___ .P.CI3-J:>ll_u1._.,. __________ -:-·--------------B.:, ---_-·--:-------------------------------------~------·
Su?-.mitted by -------------------------------··------··------..:--------·-------·----------10. _____ Stnntlard Spec:ificali:
J'Mj. Sample No.
L~!,. Sample No.
Re:ninP.cl !:·1 Si-?ve
l'ns;;ir.r. !:10 Sieve
l 10:13inr:· :-iC, Si2ve
396732-396751 TEST HESULTS _:I._:;) · ?;
4B SA SB SC
396740 396741 396742 395743 -,.
1& -12 -l
9'o 99 8,1 ! 99 96
I ' '10 97 . 80 95 !93 . -
64 I 62 ! 64 -' 48
6A
39G74-t
7
90
8G
GS
6n
396743
2
9'/
92
6C
3967-tG
-
100
97
" .......
, r· ..
7/l .
\
39671, 7
-
100
99
--· . ·---------------------·---· ~. i:-t ::-.....;.~:~
1 ···-·-·-··. ··-

•
·· ·-•-··•·· ... ·•·-• ··-·---·---···
(
Ha.
fr,i ----------------------------------
.... , v 1:>iu,-1 ur HIGt-1\'✓AYS
MATERIALS llc TESTS UNli
SOILS LA0ORATORY
Prcj.?ct _________ 4 • .510ll0l _____ .;. _________ County -------·---~-------------------------OIvnar ______________ _
Date: Sampled -------------:----------------------Rccei\·cd -=---------··---------------ne:portcd _. _________ :_ ___ _
. Sump led from __ PC.8 Pit _#4 ____________ ' __________ B" _______________ • ------·----,, ·-------------~-·--..
Submictt:d by ____________ .:, ________________________ ; _________________________________ HI ______ Stand:nd Spccificia.Hc
396732-396751 TEST RESULTS ~') ;J · ,: ----0-'I . -~---
l':-oj. Sample No. 7B 7C 8A 8B .
'
J,ah. Sample No. 396748 396749 396750 396751 ~
J~'!tainecl !:•l Sieve e• ----7-~-,~
+ -
l'es:1ing !;10 Sieve '1o 99 99 100· 10;)
_J'e!:!sin;r !-10 S:ev~ % 97 97 99 197 --1 rr, 55 I so -53 r-·-~ir.,; ~00 S:~·1e '1o o, .
.,f C,-sr,, S,.nd-:?.O to • ==t--· I -· ~1 o.:!5 r:im. 1'.~!. :r.o </, 4 7 3 8
T 1-·,,,. Sr,nt.l--u.U 1,, --· ,: 3~ 45 20 43 i .2 ; J v., ..... r.un. H~t. :,:!10 '7o ., I "' :_;,,. I :,ilt--0.05 39 30 23 31 -'i'o ~ ?: .=;_;:? l•J C, O(t5, r:,-m.
~l~'t! CJ:.y--L:-•~
-1---· ,~ I 1, .... o 00; "'"'· ~" 20 18 s.i 18
•·
J·,-,,iusr y!" • -.. --I ;,-. ::,H) ::ii~\,,. ----1-I .
. i'llll:lSin~
~o ----I :·l lJ•) ~i":""V~ --.
·r .. L . 33 39 6G 45 j---··-I
I
P. I. 8 8 ?~ 4 r . _.,
-A>~sfIO A-4(6) A-4(4) A-7-5(17) A-5(~1 I Cbssiiicntio:1
, I I 'fcxturc ·-
Stntion I l
Hole No. 7 7 ·S 8 I --· ·-... ,----~----JJerth (it.) 10 20 0 ~ I .. .
-t"n __20t 3..3 t 91 3gr ·-·------~-L --· ·-·---
r.h s 77 f,. 0 .1 5...fG__ 5.90 I _J
I c,:
-. -. . . Division of Highways . . '. > •
r
PCB PIT BORING LOJ
lRr, · .,.T 4. 5401101 COUNTY Warren DATE 9-18-78 1]·. / J
,o ' RES. ENGINEER PIT NO. PCB# !:r,
6n Auger .
~UIP. USED 237-0001 INVESTIGATED BY J.S. Britt
w/rock teeth
~H5 DEPTHS ~f5 REMARKS: i.e. grou."'ldwater data Hal -:;;,~et P-, i:o DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL moisture content; etc. 65 ~~ p::iz FRCT-1 TO
1 0.0 11.0 1-A Red-Br-own Mica. -F-Sandy clay Dry
l1 11.0 ~o.o 1-B Br-own Hica. Clayey silt Moist@ 20.0'
,1 10.0 l.i.O. 5 1-C Brmm Hi.ca. Silty sand
1 l.O. 5 41.2 Soft weathered rock_ Practical auger
I refusal@ 41.2'
I
' Groundwater:·
I
I 0 Hr.-Dry caved in@ 28.5'
24 hours-caved in @ 28 .5 ,: ....
2 0.0 8.0 2-P Red-brO\-m mica. fine · sandy clay
r--(
Bro~m highly mica. sandy clay silt 2 8.0 38.0 2-B i'Jet@ 30'
Groundwater:
0-Hr.-Drv caved in@ 35.0
24 Hr.-34-2-~
3 0.0 3.0 3-A P.ed-brmm mica. -F-sandy clay Dry
3 J.O 28.0 3-B Brmm mica. sandy clayey silt Moist @ 19.0
Groundwater:
I o Hr. -Dr-v caved in@ 23.5'
I 24 Hrs.-22.9'
I
I -F-sandy cla:r h b.O 10.0 4-A F.ed-brown mica. Drv
I 4 ~0.0 33.0 4-B Brmm mica. clayey sandy silt Wet@ 27.0'
Gr01md:-;ater:
·1 . .___ 0 Hr.-Drv
,_ 24 Hr.-Dry
-F--fine
-
1Jivis1.on of Highways
PCBPIT BORHTI LCD
~0 ~-:cT 4.5401101 • ,., · ____________ COUNTY
i 9-1~78
., • RES. ENGINEER
Warren ___________ DATE
PIT rro PCB# 4
~ UIP. USED 2;34'....000J 611 Auger INVESTIGATED BY J.S. Britt
II W /_rock teeth
I
I
~f5 DEPTIIS ~f5 REMARKS: i.e. groundwater data Ht:::l Feet p... a:l DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL I§~ !~ moisture content; etc. FRCM TO '
' 15 0.0 6.5 5-A Red-brmm mica. -F-sandy -clay Dry
W /ouartz lenses •·
'i 6-'i 2'i.0 5-B Brown mica. sandy silt ., Moist @ 25.0'
!s 25.0 ·:n.o 5-C Tan mica. silty -F-sand Wet@ 29.0'
.. Groundwater:
I 0-Hr. -Dry caved in@ 30.01
ii 24 Hrs.-Dry caved in@ 30.0
I
I
I Red-brmm mica -F-sandy clay W / , 0.0 7.0 6-A Dry 0
-W quartz lenses.
I, I I 7.0 12.0 6-B &mm mica_. sandy silt ,o Drv
16 12.0 33.0 6-C I Tan r.ica. silty -F-sa.'1d i·Tet @ 26.0'
I Groundwater:
I I 0 Hr. -Drv caved in@ 29.W ,.
I
2h Hr. -dry caved in @ 29.0 ,.
Ji
:7 0.0 10.0 7-A P..ed-brown mica. -F-sandy clay Drv
I
17 10.0 20.0 7-B &mm-ta..11. -F-sandy clay Moist@ 20.0'
I
7 20.0 33.0 7-C &o·.m -F-sandy silt Wet @ 25.0'
Groundwater:
0 Hr.-d.ry caved in@ 26.7'
I
I
24 Hrs. n,,...r r.;1ve d in @ 26.71T
I
I
n 0.0 9.0 8-A Rcd-brmm mica. f:ine 3andy clay Dry 10
,... 9.0 38.0 8-B Brm·:n mica. S3.c"1dy silt 0 r-io;st @ 26.0 1
• He+ 0? 10.0 ' .,----.
Grou..n.dwa te r: --
0 Hr. -dry caved in@ 33-2'
21.:. Hrs. dry ca,red :Ll'l @ 33'
-F-= f:inc
-
.•·
3
v 4
0 ~ c.o
~
-"'~ SR 1604 0::
t./)
SCALE
,, ,
1 = 100
----------·-
SOIL
6
7
EB
8
PATH
5
2
. 1
0.5 MILE
PCB PIT -SITE N
PROJFCT NO. 4.5401101
COUNTY WARREN
PROJ. GEO LOG I ST J. S. BR I TT
DATE 9-18-78