WI0700123_Staff Report_20081105

SJAFB FT-07 -1
Subject: SJAFB FT-07
From: William Hart <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2008 15:10:28 -0500
To: Thomas Slusser <I'[e-mail]>
Hi, Thomas. I just sent you an email (yesterday , I believe) in
reference to the FT-07 project (Fire Training Area). Review of the
limited amount of information seemed okay. I am not familiar at all with
the CERCLA program, or its requirements. An application was submitted
and assigned an application number (WI0700123, I believe); but I am not
sure if the permit is waived, due to the CERCLA program, or not. I think
Ms. Hartzell requested a letter of consent for the proposed injection
activities. Please let me know if I can help in any way. I know you must
be busy.
Will
Will Hart<william.hartAncmail.net>
Hydrogeologist II
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality/Aquifer Protection Section
1 of 1 12/30/2008 4:00 PM

WI0700123 - SJAFB FT-07, Fire Training era?
Subject: WI0700123 - SJAFB FT-07, Fire Training Area
From: William Hart <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2008 10:28:39 -0500
To: Thomas Slusser <[e-mail]>
CC: DAVID MAY <[e-mail]>
I have reviewed the application/request for letter of consent for the project
referenced above. I did not have any issues with the project as proposed. With
that being said, I would like to point out the limited amount of information
available for review by the Aquifer Protection Section (Section). I assume that
the proposal is in accordance with the remediation plan approved by the Division of
Waste Management. I would also assume that the letter of consent would be issued
by the Section's Central Office; and suggest that we request post -injection
monitoring data be submitted for review by the Section.
Please let me -know if this email will suffice for Regional Office comment, or if
you would like for me to complete a Staff Report. Please do not hesitate to
contact me for further discussion of the project, or for further assistance.
Will Hart <[e-mail]>
Hydrogeologist II
Department of Environment and Natural Resources I
Division of Water Quality/Aquifer Protection Section
1 of 1 12/30/2008 4:00 PM

J33
AQUIFER PROTECTION SECTION
APPLICATION REVIEW REQUEST FORM
Date: October 20. 2008
To: ❑ Landon Davidson, ARO-APS E David May, WaRO-APS
❑ Art Barnhardt, FRO-APS ❑ Charlie Stehman, WiRO-APS
❑ Andrew Pinter, MRO-APS ❑ Sherri Knight, WSRO-APS
❑ Jay Zimmerman, RRO-APS
From: Thomas Slusser, Groundwater Protection Unit
Telephone: [phone]
E-Mail: [e-mail]
Fax: [phone]
A. Permit Number: W10700123
B. Owner: SEYMOUR JOHNSON AFB
C. Facility/Operation: FT-07, FIRE TRAINING AREA
❑ Proposed ® Existing
❑ Facility 0 Operation
D. Application:
1. Permit Type: 0 Animal ❑ Surface Irrigation ❑ Reuse ❑ H-R Infiltration
❑ Recycle ❑ I/E Lagoon ❑ GW Remediation (ND)
For Residuals:
UIC - (5I) in -situ groundwater remediation
❑ Land App. ❑ D&M
❑ 503 ❑ 503 Exempt
❑ Surface Disposal
❑ Animal
2. Project Type: El New El Major Mod. Minor Mod. I I Renewal 0 Renewal w/ Mod.
E. Comments/Other Information: ❑ I would like to accompany you on a site visit.
Cc-/-4 sire �ivcize-79
TR.t`?q
Attached, you will find all information submitted in support of the above-r
review, comment, and/or action. Within 30 calendar days, please take the f
® Return a Completed Form APSSRR
❑ Attach Well Construction Data Sheet.
0 Attach Attachment B for Certification by the LAPCU.
0 Issue an Attachment B Certification from the RO*.
* Remember that you will be responsible for coordinating site visits,
information requests with other RO-APS representatives in order to prepare a complete Attachment B
certification. Refer to the RPP SOP for additional detail.
When you receive this request form, please write your name and dates in the spaces below, make a copy
of this sheet, and return it to the appropriate Central Office -Aquifer Protection Section contact person
listed above.
RO-APS Reviewer: cif) Ir
FORM: APSARR 02/06 Page 1 of 1
Date: laD.-_C7(2
RECEIVED 1 DENR / DWQ
AQUIFPR.PwirprrinN SFCTION
OCT 2 3 2008

Page 1 of 1
2� 2
Evan Kane
From: Luanne Williams [Luanne.Williams@ncmaiLnet]
Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 9:59 AM
To: even kane
Subject: potassium permanganate
The precautions listed in the June 11, 1999 letter to Sherri Knight for sodium permanganate can be
followed for potassium permanganate. There are many potential chemical interactions that could result
in an explosion. This chemical is quite lethal to small children. I have attached the health effects and
possible reactions for this chemical. Please share with those that will be applying or may come into
contact with this chemical at the application site.
4/4/02

North Carolina
Department of ti •akli ' ,d I :ie.::ut Services -
Divisior •i' hut:' .. d ...
1330 St. Mary's Street • Post Office Box 29597 • Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0597 • Courier 56-20-11
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor • H. David Bruton, M.D., Secretary • Ann F. Wolfe, M.D., M.P.H., Director
June 11, 1999
Ms. Sherri Knight
Winston-Salem Regional Office
8025 North Point Boulevard, Suite 100
Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27106
Dear Ms. Knight:
Pk to
te
i L Jnn`
c'
I am writin_ in re ... e to a reuest from IT Co • oration of North Carolina, Inc., islfa
health risk evaluation regarding the use of . oxidizing agent manufactured by the Carus
Chemical Company in an in -situ soil and groundwater remeation project at the W. P. Ballard &
Company site in Greensboro, North Carolina. Based upon my review of the information
submitted, I offer the following health risk evaluation:
WORKER PRECAUTIONS DURING APPLICATION
1. Some effects reported to be associated with the product proposed to be used are as
follows: eye, skin, nose, throat, and lung irritation. If the product is released into the
environment in a way that could result in c. suspension of fine solid or liquid particles
(e.g., grinding, blending, vigorous shakii., or mixing), then proper personal protective
equipment should be used. The application process should be reviewed by an industrial
hygienist to ensure that the most appropriate personal protective equipment is used.
2. Persons working with these products should wear goggles or a face shield, gloves, and
protective clothing. Face and body protection should be used for anticipated splashes or
sprays.
3. This product may cause spontaneous ignition with cloth or paper. Caution should be
taken to prevent spills on clothes. Also, this product could react violently with most
metal powders, ammonia, ammonia salts, phosphorus, finely divided organic compounds,
flammable liquids acids, and sulfur. In addition, this product may become explosive if
mixed with sulfuric acid, acetic acid, or acetic anhydride if not kept cold.
4. Eating, drinking, smoking, handling contact lenses, and applying cosmetics should not be
permitted in the application area during or immediately following application.
5. Safety controls should be in place to ensure that the check valve and the pressure delivery
systems are working properly.
6. It is imperative that the Material Safety Data Sheets be followed to prevent incompatible
or adverse reactions and injuries.
North Carolina: Huse u/ the t999 Sp ' Qtr./pier R'b rid Sununu Gino

Sherri Knight
June 11, 1999
Page Two
OTHER PRECAUTIONS
1. Access to the area of application should be limited to the workers applying the product.
In order to minimize exposure to unprotected individuals, measures should be taken to
prevent access to the area of application.
2. According to the information submitted with the letter dated May 14, 1999, "A sensitive
receptor survey was conducted by IT Corporation of North Carolina, Inc. in November
1998. Results of the survey indicate that neither private nor public potable water wells
are present within a 1,500 —foot radius of the subject site. The survey also confirmed that
water from the City of Greensboro Water Resources is available within a 1,500 —foot
radius of the subject site.... Water accounts were confirmed for all properties adjacent to
both the W.P. Ballard and fortner Sears Greensboro Distribution Center Properties. The
exception being 2820 Lawndale Avenue, which was verified as being currently
unoccupied. A current water account is not in place....The approximate travel distance
for the ...solution in groundwater from each application point is expected to be no
greater than 20 feet." According to the information submitted, the concentration in
groundwater after injectionis estimated to approach 0% after several days to a week.
Based on this information, it is unlikely that this solution would contaminate an existing
water supply, however, measures should be taken to prevent contamination of existing or
future wells that may be located near the application area.
3. According to the information submitted, the product is not expected to discharge to
nearby surface water. The distance to the nearest surface water body was not provided.
Please do not hesitate to call me if you have any questions at [phone].
Sincerely,
•
Luanne K. Williams, Pharm.D., Toxicologist
Medical Evaluation and Risk Assessment Unit
Occupational and Environmental Epidemiology Branch
LKW:Ip
cc: Mr. Mark Pritzl, Groundwater Section
Ms. Melanie Wells, Guilford County Department of Health
Ms. Linda Blalock, Groundwater Section
Mr. Bob Cheek, Groundwater Section
frMr. Keith Ogden, P.E., IT Corporation of North Carolina, Inc.