WI0600060_Staff Report_20100806

AQUIFER FROTEC 1 ION SECTION REGIONAL STAFF REPGII T
Date: 08/06/10 County: Bladen
To: Aquifer Protection Section Central Office Permittee: CSX Transportation
Central Office Reviewer: M. Rogers Project Name: CSX Derailment Remedation Project
Regional Login No: ?? Application No.: WI00600060
L GENERAL INFORMATION
1. This application is (check all that apply): /1 New ❑ Renewal
❑ Minor Modification ❑ Major Modification
❑ Surface Irrigation ❑ Reuse ❑ Recycle ❑ High Rate Infiltration ❑ Evaporation/Infiltration Lagoon
❑ Land Application of Residuals
❑ Distribution of Residuals
❑ Attachment B included
❑ Surface Disposal
❑ 503 regulated ❑ 503 exempt
❑ Closed -loop Groundwater Remediation ® Other Injection Wells (including in situ remediation)
Was a site visit conducted in order to prepare this report? ® Yes or ❑ No.
a. Date of site visit: 07/12/10
b. Person contacted and contact information: Dave Brown - Project Manager IHSB-DWM Superfund
c. Site visit conducted by: Jim Barber, Dave Brown and Sean Boyles
d. Inspection Report Attached: ® Yes or ❑ No.
2. Is the following information entered into the BIMS record for this application correct?
Yes or ❑ No. If no, please complete the following or indicate that it is correct on the current application.
For Treatment Facilities:
a. Location:
b. Driving Directions:
c. USGS Quadrangle Map name and number:
d. Latitude: Longitude:
e. Regulated Activities / Type of Wastes (e.g., subdivision, food processing, municipal wastewater):
Groundwater remediation system consisting of injection wells for the remediation of Chromium VI (due to
train car derailment in Bladen County) to Chromium III to Chromium Oxide.
For Disposal and Infection Sites:
(If multiple sites either indicate which sites the information applies to, copy and paste a new section into the
document for each site, or attach additional pages for each site)
a. Location(s): Eight miles east of Clarkton (in the Rosindale Community) off of Hwy 211 (north side)
b. Driving Directions: From the Fayetteville Regional Office travel to the Town of Clarkton on Hwy 211.
Take Hwy 211 east from Clarkton to the Rosindale Community. From the intersection of Hwy 211 and
Rosindale Road, go 1.40 miles. Turn left onto a farm path and proceed to the CSX right of way (see
attached map). The site is currently used for row crop farming. The area of injection has been roped off.
The farm field outside of the roped area is planted in field corn.
c. USGS Quadrangle Map name and number: EMERSON, NC (J-24-NE)
d. Latitude: 34.434861485 N Longitude: -78.504529728 W (center of roped off area)
RECEIVED 1 DENR / DWQ
AQUIFFR roR(1TF"Ting 0,FCTION
AUG 12 2010
FORM: APSARRCSXsiteBladenWI0600060JuIy2010.doc

AQUIFER PROTEC fON SECTION REGIONAL 'STAFF REPORT
H. NEW AND MAJOR MODIFICATION APPLICATIONS (this section not needed for renewals or minor
modifications, skip to next section)
Description Of Waste(S) And Facilities
1. Please attach completed rating sheet. Facility Classification:
2. Are the new treatment facilities adequate for the type of waste and disposal system?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A. If no, please explain:
3. Are the new site conditions (soils, topography, depth to water table, etc) consistent with what was reported by
the soil scientist and/or Professional Engineer? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A. If no, please explain:
4. Does the application (maps, plans, etc.) represent the actual site (property lines, wells, surface drainage)? ❑
Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A. If no, please explain:
5. Is the proposed residuals management plan adequate and/or acceptable to the Division. ❑ Yes ❑ No E
N/A. If no, please explain:
6. Are the proposed application rates for new sites (hydraulic or nutrient) acceptable?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A. If no, please explain:
7. Are the new treatment facilities or any new disposal sites located in a 100-year floodplain?
n Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A. If yes, please attach a map showing areas of 100-year floodplain and please explain
and recommend any mitigative measures/special conditions in Part IV:
8. Are there any buffer conflicts (new treatment facilities or new disposal sites)? ❑ Yes or ❑ No. If yes, please
attach a map showing conflict areas or attach any new maps you have received from the applicant to be
incorporated into the permit:
9. Is proposed and/or existing groundwater monitoring program (number of wells, frequency of monitoring,
monitoring parameters, etc.) adequate? rl Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A. Attach map of existing monitoring well
network if applicable. Indicate the review and compliance boundaries. If No, explain and recommend any
changes to the groundwater monitoring program:
10. For residuals, will seasonal or other restrictions be required? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A If yes, attach list of sites
with restrictions (Certification B?)
III. RENEWAL AND MODIFICATION APPLICATIONS (use previous section for new or major modification
systems)
Description Of Waste(S)And Facilities
1. Are there appropriately certified ORCs for the facilities? ❑ Yes or ❑ No.
Operator in Charge: Certificate #:
Backup- Operator in Charge: Certificate #:
FORM: APSARRCSXsiteBladenWI060006OJuly2010.doc 2

AQUIFER PROTECTION SECTION REGIONAL STAFF REPORT
2. Is the design, maintenance and operation (e.g. adequate aeration, sludge wasting, sludge storage, effluent
storage, etc) of the treatment facilities adequate for the type of waste and disposal system? ❑ Yes or ❑ No.
If no, please explain:
3. Are the site conditions (soils, topography, depth to water table, etc) maintained appropriately and adequately
assimilating the waste? ❑ Yes or ❑ No. If no, please explain:
4. Has the site changed in any way that may affect permit (drainage added, new wells inside the compliance
boundary, new development, etc.)? If yes, please explain:
5. Is the residuals management plan for the facility adequate and/or acceptable to the Division?
❑ Yes or ❑ No. If no, please explain:
6. Are the existing application rates (hydraulic or nutrient) still acceptable? ❑ Yes or ❑ No. If no, please
explain:
7. Is the existing groundwater monitoring program (number of wells, frequency of monitoring, monitoring
parameters, etc.) adequate? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A. Attach map of existing monitoring well network if
applicable. Indicate the review and compliance boundaries. If No, explain and recommend any changes to the
groundwater monitoring program:
8. Will seasonal or other restrictions be required for added sites? n Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A If yes, attach list of sites
with restrictions (Certification B?)
9. ,Are there any buffer conflicts (treatment facilities or disposal sites)? ❑ Yes or n No. If yes, please attach a
map showing conflict areas or attach any new maps you have received from the applicant to be incorporated
into the permit:
10. Is the description of the facilities, type and/or volume of waste(s) as written in the existing permit correct? ❑
Yes or ❑ No. If no, please explain:
11. Were monitoring wells properly constructed and located? ❑ Yes or D No ❑ N/A. If no, please explain:
12. Has a review of all self -monitoring data been conducted (GW, NDMR, and NDAR as applicable)? ® Yes or
❑ No ❑ N/A. Please summarize any findings resulting from this review:
13. Check all that apply: ❑ No compliance issues; ❑ Notice(s) of violation within the last permit cycle; ❑
Current enforcement action(s) ❑ Currently under SOC; ❑ Currently under JOC; ❑ Currently under
moratorium. If any items checked, please explain and attach any documents that may help clarify
answer/comments (such as NOV, NOD etc):
14. Have all compliance dates/conditions in the existing permit, (SOC, JOC, etc.) been complied with? ❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ Not Determined ❑ N/A:. If no, please explain:
15. Are there any issues related to compliance/enforcement that should be resolved before issuing this permit? ❑
Yes or ❑ No ❑ N/A. If yes, please explain:
FORM: APSARRCSXsiteBladenWI0600060Ju1y2010.doc 3

AQUIFER PROTECTION SECTION REGIONAL`STAFF REPORT
IV.. INJECTION WELL PERMIT APPLICATIONS (Complete these two sections for all systems that use injection
wells, including closed -loop groundwater remediation effluent injection wells, in situ remediation injection wells, and heat
pump injection wells.)
Description Of Well(S) And Facilities -New, Renewal, And Modification
1. Type of injection system:
❑ Heating/cooling water return flow (5A7)
❑ Closed -loop heat pump system (5QM/5QW)
® In situ remediation (5I)
❑ Closed -loop groundwater remediation effluent injection (5LP'Non-Discharge")
❑ Other (Specify: )
2. Does system use same well for water source and injection? ❑ Yes Z No
3. Are there any potential pollution sources that may affect injection? ❑ Yes ® No
What is/are the pollution source(s)? Remediation site is currently fallow. Others areas of the field that the
remediation site is a part of are currently in field corn production (used most commonly for animal feed i.e.
poulty, swine, deer, etc). What is the distance of the injection well(s) from the pollution source(s)? ft.
4. What is the minimum distance of proposed injection wells from the property boundary? Injection site is on
poverty owned by the late James Lewis, adjacent to the CSX railroad right-of-way. The necessary landowner
certification is provided in the application in Attachment I, signed by James Lewis Jr.. ft.
5. Quality of drainage at site: ® Good ❑ Adequate ❑ Poor
6. Flooding potential of site: ® Low ❑ Moderate ❑ High
7. For groundwater remediation systems, is the proposed and/or existing groundwater monitoring program
(number of wells, frequency of monitoring, monitoring parameters, etc.) adequate? ® Yes Z No. Attach
map of existing monitoring well network if applicable. If No, explain and recommend any changes to the
groundwater monitoring program: The existing groundwater monitoring system ishighlighted in Appendix H
of the application. It appears that wells CSX-16 17 23 and 22 are located down -gradient of CSX-15 (high
chromium source area and location of two proposed injection wells as depicted on cross-section A -A'). Well
CSX-16 is approx. 190' down -gradient of CSX-15 and well CSX-23 is approx. 345' down -gradient of CSX-15.
It would appear that a monitoring well may need to be at a radius of 250' from CSX-15 to form a complaince
boundary relative to the infection area to quantify any adverse impacts to shallow groundwater relative to the
injection activity at the site or use well CSX-I6 as a alternate compliance boundary since the concentration of
chromium is below the 2L standard of 50 Dab.
8. Does the map presented represent the actual site (property lines, wells, surface drainage)? ® Yes or ❑ No. If
no or no map, please attach a sketch of the site. Show property boundaries, buildings, wells, potential pollution
sources, roads, approximate scale, and north arrow.
Injection Well Permit Renewal And Modification Only:
FORM: APSARRCSXsiteBladenWI0600060JuIy2010.doc 4

AQUIFER PROTECCLON SECTION REGIONAL STAFF REPORT
1. For heat pump systems, are there any abnormalities in heat pump or injection well operation (e.g. turbid water,
failure to assimilate injected fluid, poor heating/cooling)?
❑ Yes ❑ No. If yes, explain:
2. For closed -loop heat pump systems, has system lost pressure or required make-up fluid since permit issuance
or last inspection? ❑ Yes ❑ No. If yes, explain:
3. For renewal or modification of groundwater remediation permits (of any type), will
continued/additional/modified injections have an adverse impact on migration of the plume or management of
the contamination incident? ❑ Yes ❑ No. If yes explain:
4. Drilling contractor: Name:
Address:
Certification number:
5. Complete and attach Well Construction Data Sheet.
FORM: APSARRCSXsiteBladenWI0600060Ju1y2010.doc 5

AQUIFER PROTECT ION SECTION REGIONAL'STAFF REPORT
V. EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Provide any additional narrative regarding your review of the application.: .
2. Attach Well Construction Data Sheet - if needed information is available
3. Do you foresee any problems with issuance/renewal of this permit? ❑ Yes ® No. If yes, please explain
briefly.
4. List any items that you would like APS Central Office to obtain through an additional information request.
Make sure that you provide a reason for each item:
Item
Reason
5. List specific Permit conditions that you recommend to be removed from the permit when issued. Make sure
that you provide a reason for each condition:
Condition
Reason
6. List specific special conditions or compliance schedules that you recommend to be included in the permit when
issued. Make sure that you provide a reason for each special condition:
Condition
Reason
A as -built survery of the injection well locations
shall be submitted, within 60 days, after
installation and introduction of the oxidizing
materials.
The as -built survey is adequate to address the
acutal location of each injection location, within
the defined area (shaded) on the submitted site
plan. Field conditions, i.e
trees/utlities/formation consistency/equipment
access will dictate acutal locations.within the
area of interest.
7. Recommendation: ❑ Hold, pending receipt and review of additional information by regional office; ❑ Hold,
pending review of draft permit by regional office; ❑ Issue upon receipt of needed additional information;
Issue; ❑ Deny. If deny, please state reasons:
8. Signature of report preparer(s):
FORM: APSARRCSXsiteBladenWI0600060Ju1y2010.doc
6

AQUIFER PROTE;'1'1ON SECTION REGIONAL STAFF REPORT
Signature of APS regional supervisor: �.2a3F (ZAJ ice/
Date: 00//0
ADDITIONAL REGIONAL STAFF REVIEW ITEMS
Enclosed with this staff report is a copy of the 100 year floodplain map and topographic map for the area
depicting the area in and around the injection site, CSX-15. The proposed area of remediation by injection well
technology does not appear to be in a 100 year floodplain of Boggy Creek. Ground surface elevation at the
vicinity of CSX-15 and the injection area is approximately 100' +/- msl and the 100 year floodplain elevation,
althought not mapped for the area, would be approximately 85' to 90' +/- msl based on the information in the
floodplain mapping website that illustrates mapped floodplain areas to the south and east of the CSX site.
Those areas mapped east of the site in Bladen County and those mapped south (up to the Columbus/Bladen
County line) indicate fairly narrow width floodplain cross -sections. Based on the topographic elevation in the
mapped areas, the floodplain cross-section elevation relative to the surrounding ground surface elevation is
around 3' to 5' below corresponding ground surface elevations. This indicates that in the mapped areas, the 100
year floodplain is typically within the banks of surface featurea or just above and outside the banks; not wide
broad floodplains similar to low Tying coastal areas.
There are groundwater users in the area of the remediation site (as identified by AMEC in Attachment G of the
application), but none immediately down gradient of injection site. The six nearest private groundwater supply
wells near the injection site would be upgradient and the nearest well appears to greater than 1000' away (Mary
Brown Council well at 9486 HWY 211 E based on Bladen County GIS mapping).
No major or identified industrial/commercial sources of pollution at or near the CSX site (within 2000' of the
property boundary). Possible minor source of ground water impacts in the immediate area of the CSX site
include agricultral activities (row crop production).
A copy of the final UIC permit should be provided to the Solid Waste Section, Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch
in the Division of Waste Management. The contact person for this site is Mr. Dave Brown [phone]. The
mailing address is as follows:
Division of Waste Management
Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch
225 Green Street, Suite 714
Fayetteville, NC 28301
Attn: Mr. Dave Brown
FORM: APSARRCSXsiteBladenWI0600060Ju1y2010.doc 7

1140,A
PICK Sryl Black Trans
Bladen Tax Card
Parcel ID: 0021498
PIN: 124500913291
Owner Id: 7503337
Owner Name 1: LEWIS JAMES
R ET UX PATRICI
Owner Name 2: A
Owner Address: 765 RICHARD
SWITCH RD
Owner City: CURRIE
Owner State: NC
Owner Zip: 28435
Date Sold: 0
Plat Book:
Plat Page:
Deed Year: 1998
Deed Book: 402
Deed Page: 001
Deed Acres: 106.84
Sales Amount: 0
Taxable Value: 0
more info..

GPS Field Sheet
Project/ Location
Date
Time
GPS File. No.
Field
Latitude _
Field
Longitude
Corrected
Latitude
Corrected
Longitude
Comments
CS?C ^ 2osiyAcre-E
5/
7/.Z/
/)0
/0:39
AA.
5"67/2/1/A-
31/,y398lp
/9( GA.)
-78,So9Sz
97..8°k)
CSx RE/`+eb/A-T/o/J ...en-E.
Attu an — C3C4DL,JC000Fy
i C04 //
' /o
in act
Sol/-z/S-4
3�/.9Y3oo2
57a3 F
-78.SW38
3/SO ce0
13 ADFO HlJr yAn 64sof
CL42h0.0 &'sCQ
86g S'
1

Map provided by MyTopo.com
0
o
0
o v
0 0

C$X SITE
65
17 ca cr cx '1 rtr-rtis `rr
1 J
Ackbesi Lookup i,
NC Floodmaps Help Conta
111111111®11111101-LL9 SLs3:ii cxi:eax•ay..=Ta J:rt, rC.'!_.._•[:.,.
L

O
�
0.5 Mi
2000pt
Map provided by MyTopo.com

NONRESIDENTIAL WELL CONSTRUCTION RECORD
North Carolina Deportment of Envronment end Natural Resources -Division of Water Quality
WELL CONTRACTOR CERTIFICATION # 2111
1. WELL CONTRACTOR:
Thomas Bill
Well Contractor (Individual) Name
Bill s Well Drilling Co:. Inc.
Well Contractor Company Name
800 McArthur Rd
Street Address
Fayetteville NC 28311
City or Town State Zip Code
(910 ) 488-3740
Area code Phone number
2. WELL INFORMATION:
WELL CONSTRUCTION PERMIT#WSOE-M1094
OTHER ASSOCIATED PERMR#(R applicable)
SITE WELL ID *applicable)
3. WELL USE (Check One Box) Monitoring 0 Municipal/Public 0
IndusWel/Commerclal 0 Agricultural ❑
Irrigation❑ Other 0 (list use)
DATE DRILLED 12/18/2009
4. WELL LOCATION:
Hwv 211 Council Site
Recovery 0 Infection 0
(Street Name, Numbers, Community. Subdivision, Lot No.. Parcel, Zip Code)
CITY: Clarkton COUNTY Bladen
TOPOGRAPHIC / LAND SETTING: (cheek appropriate box)
❑Slope OVelley DfFlat ❑Ridge CI Other
LATITUDE 35
LONGITUDE75
'DMS OR DD
• DMS OR DD
Latltudellongltude source: [MPS Dropagraphic map
(location of well must be shown on a USGS fops map andattachad to
this form If not using GPS)
5. FACILITY (Name of the business wham the well Is located.)
Bladen County Water Distric
Facility Name Facility ID# Of applicable)
Hwv 211 Council Site
Street Address
Flizabethtown NC 28337
City or Town - State Zip Coda
Randy Gardner
Contact Nema
PO Box 2350 -
Matting Address
Fli7abethtown NC 78337
City or Town State Zip Code
( 910.0 862-6996
Area code Phone number
S. WELL DETAILS:
a. TOTAL DEPTH: 283
b. DOES WELL REPLACE EXISTING WELL? YES ❑ NOD'
c. WATER LEVEL Below Top of Casing: 45 FT.
(Use'+" If Above Top of Casing)
d. TOP OF CASING IS +3. FT. Above Land Surface'
'Top of casing terminated atlor below land surface may require
a variance In accordance with 15A NCAC 2C .0118.
e: YIELD (gpni): 320 METHOD OF TEST DUI'T101n0
E DISINFECTION: Type HTH Amount 10 ibs
g. WATER ZONES (depth):
Top 205 Bottom 215 Top Bottom.
Tap 230 Bottom 270 Top Bottom
Top Bottom Top Bottom
Thickness/
7. CASING: Depth Diameter Weight Material
Top +1 Bottom 100 FL 8� " .375 Steel
Top +3 Bottom 205 Ft. 8" .322 Steel
Top 215 Bottom 230 Ft. 8" .322 Steel
9, GROUT: Depth Material
Top 0 Bottom 100 FL Cement
Top Bottom - FL
Top -. - Bottom Ft. - - - - -
Method
Pumped
9. SCREEN: Depth Diameter Slot Size Material
Top 205 Bottom 215 Ft. 8 . In. 40 in. S. S.
Top 230 Bottom 270 Ft. 8in. 40 in. S.S.
Top Bottom FL In. In.
10. SAND/GRAVEL PACK:
Depth Size Material
Top 0 Bottom 280 Ft #4 Gravel
Top Bottom FL
Top Bottom - FL
11. DRILLING LOG
Top Bottom
/.
12. REMARKS:
Formation Description
See Attached
I CO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS WELL WAS CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WRH
15A NCAC 2C, WELL CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS, AND THAT COPY OF THIS
RECOpp I4 S BEEN PROVIDEjjTO THE WELL OWNER.
SIGNATURE OF CERTIFIE
iLL CONTRA12/18/09
OR DATE
Thomas Bill
PRINTED NAME OF PERSON CONSTRUCTING THE WELL
ufimd within 3D days oaf completion to :Division of Waterl3uaha
r Mail Service Center,?Raleigh,, NC27699 161„Phone.. (919Y607430
Form GW-lb
Rev. 2/09

Bladen County Test Well
Drilling Log Lithology
Well Site Council
From
To
Formation Description
0
10
Black Sandy Clay
10
36
Tan Sand w/shells
36
69
'33' Light Gray Clay
69
81
Light Brown Sand (fine)
81
95
Brown Sand w/shells
95
98
Gray Sandy Clay
98
107
Gray Sand
107
117
Gray Sandy Clay
117
121
Gray Clay
121
128
Gray Sand
128
156
Gray Sand w/clay streaks
156
169
Gray Sandy Clay
169
198
(Q9') Gray Clay
198
201
Gray Sandy Clay
201
218
Gray Sand (fine)
218
219
Rock Layer
219
235
Gray Sand
235
253
Gray Sand w/rock layers
253
274
Gray Sand w/clay streaks
.374
300
Gray Sandy Clay

Section C-eshown in plat!
Section D-Dashown in plate 5
Section E-eshown in plate 6
Section F-F'shown in plate 7
Section G-G'shown in plate 6
Section H-H.shown in plate 9
Section J-Zshown in plate 10
Section J. J4shown in plate 11
Section K-Kashown in plate 12
Section L-Lashown in plate 13
Section Li-Oshown in plate 14
Section M-M'shown in plate 15
Section N-N, N411:P-P. and R-R#
in Robeson, Bladen, and Columbus counties
',teed, 1. 0
yEca/ -6-0
Lakl
rlu.na,rk 13i
MQ
F-
Kr E;
- " a 3e,40•40
,
wara,.
0 Henn
fic
134/
/ fl
a tr Aw
";' ti
o
re«
Goldsbc
\`I
9rnm.n
-
Ala
f E EMN E TT!' "",
•f146' Qaa.�.�
r q.
i N+Kt+
y
O/ V
and le
44 E
Sawn, ice'=c aa.
`Nor Bei P A
9m
104_:106 i02
.10
to:
•
00301en'�%
u 11 \,
i t3"
Pt
R
lr/
i+aarem" M M AR 1-
•,gt�
• 24� � L
R
0Rwsoru.`�1 _
--
E S-436
1 A 0 .eata"c 11 o..+i w14
UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
ST -\rll: )14 �NORRTII
10
x�
10 o 3Fi-..Er—�'_
RC)I_- ,..N_\.
National YSWatk wrticul datum cf 1923
.e•. o� aC euit.<M w, b1.s50 i a010 the 100csl Sune,. 19Z7 Nora Aar'.. meccatum
T. lamxn conform.: conk VO a -110, basal oo standard parali.ts 33. an0 45.
50 ec .0o

U.S. GEOLOGICt SURVEY
FEET
200
/SO'
/21
100 —1
SEA LEVEL
100 —
200 —
300 —
Soo —
600 —
600 —
700 —
.•
s
■
f
u
7 //_ i ■ ■ G ppei
L1 &eta
WL+47
CL 1240
WL+46: -
'Tq LOWER
jt�A C A FIE ;:F>EAR.,.,.�.-_..
// CL 1,540 CONFINING UNIT-
it/LI
4 W WEP pOU1FEF
CL 3,325
CpP� FE►.a
LO
WL+86
CL 3,360
APPROX. `°..c47)o4J of gCA.1) .t)
aA o &C;4CLF^Tan)
N '
Z I n
O'1.a
F,
UI mi..
0
FearRiver
I
White
1"
Chadbourn
30 r
yea
i
RKTO W N -AQUIFER
AND
-:CONFNNO•UNR _ -
AQUIFER
CORRELATION
UNCERTAIN .: `
case/ 2 / I
. 1
ZZJjl i11 Z/72Z/ 71I11 T/71 / 72 2
WL+58''
CL 466 r /

r;
I r
I.
[_
Il—
P:torolcalHaskCSX Ro Indala1612000DI5 CSX-Ro7ndalo Remedial
A
West
100
90
Railroad Line
CSX-04
BAC KFI LL'
Land Surface
CSX-02
(Projected)
Proposed Injection
Well Schematic
CSX-26
(Pro ected)
B=B'
CSX-15
CSX-16
(Projected)
227
260 (6/96)
5.00
vr+POAMcp Booici A
�l!Y ELL
!
Water Table
(May 19, 2009)
CSX-23
A'
East
Surficiai Solis
923
9.3 (6/08)
L ' — E — --
5 (6/08)
60 —
50
a
•
10 ft.
A .
a
4
SCALE
0
Vertical Exaggeration 5X
I I50ft.
• 4
Pee Dee
Confining Unit
4
O•
Pee Dee Aquifer
4
v
a
a •
4
a
a
: 4
a
a
a
: d
44• a
a
100
90
80
70
60
50
Depth Below Land Surface (ft)
LEGEND
CSX-04 Well Name
Total Chromium in pg/L - May 2009
Results Unless Marked Otherwise
923
BQL Below Laboratory Quantitation Limit
---= 50 Isoconcentration Line (Ng/L)
Well Screen Interval
' Water Level
Abandoned Well
Surficial Soils -
Tan Silty Medium to Fine Sand
Pee Dee Confining Unit -
Clay
Pee Dee Aquifer -
Grey Sand with Shell Fragments
AMEC Earth & Environmental
2200 Gateway Centre Blvd., Suite 205
Morrisville, NC 27560
[phone]
ma°
CLIENT:
CSX TRANSPORTATION; INC.
TITLE
LITHOLOGIC CROSS SECTION A -A'
CSX ROSINDALE DERAILMENT SITE
ROSINDALE, NORTH CAROLINA
DR:
JWB
REV:
HT
PROJ. NO.:
643008035
CHIC:
HT
DATE:
November 4, 2009
DWG NO.
NA
SCALE
1"=50'
FIGURE. NO.:

Compliance Inspection Report
Permit: WI0600060 Effective: Expiration: Owner: Csx Transportation Inc
SOC: Effective: Expiration: Facility: Microwave Tower Rd
County: Bladen Pin1245000913291
Region: Fayetteville
Clarkton NC 28433
Contact Person: Kathleen Roush Title: Phone: [phone]
Ext.138
Directions to Facility:
System Classifications:
Primary ORC: Certification: Phone:
Secondary ORC(s)r.
On -Site Representative(s):
Related Permits:
Inspection Date: 07/12/2010
Primary Inspector: Jim Barber
Secondary Inspector(s):
Entry Time: 09:15 AM Exit Time: 10:15 AM
Phone: [phone]
Reason for Inspection: Routine Inspection Type: Reconnaissance
Permit Inspection Type: Injection In situ Groundwater Remediation Well (51)
Facility Status: 0 Compliant 0 Not Compliant
Question Areas:
II Other
(See attachment summary)
Page: 1

Permit: WI0600060 Owner -Facility: Csx Transportation Inc
Inspection Date: 07/12/2010
Inspection Type: Reconnaissance Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
The CSX-Rosindale site is currently a small farm field planted in feed corn. During the site visit on 12 July it was noted
that the area of concern (location of proposed injection• sites) was roped off with monitoring wells CSX-26, CSX-15,
CSX-09 and CSX-04 delineating the proposed injection site. No corn was planted within the roped off area. The roped off
area is easily accessible by a dirt road parrallel to the CSX railroad and the southern border of the Lewis property. The
information provided by AMEC concerning the surrounding area is accurate and complete. No new activities where noted
during the site visit within the 1 mile buffer map provided'by'AMEC as it relates to new homes or private water supply
wells. It should be noted that Bladen County has constructed a new water suppply well and elevated tank approx. 1.60
miles west of the CSX site adjacent to Hwy 211. This well is 283' deep with screen depths from 205' to 215' and 230' to
270' below land surface. It woudl appear that this water supply well is adequately protected by distance from the proposed
injection site and is screened below a confining unit relative to the shallow groundwater that is being treated at the CSX
remediation site.
Dave Brown and Sean Boyles of the Inactive. Hazardouse Sites Branch/Supeifund Section/Division of Waste
Management also visited the site with me on this date: Dave Brown is the project hydrogeologist for the IHSB'overseeing
this project.
Other
Comment:
Yes No NA NE
Page: 2

AQUIFER PROTECTION SECTION
APPLICATION REVIEW REQUEST FORM
Date: July 2, 2010
To: ❑ Landon Davidson, ARO-APS ❑ David May, WaRO-APS
® Art Barnhardt, FRO-APS ❑ Charlie Stehman, WiRO-APS
❑ Andrew Pitner, MRO-APS D Sherri Knight, W-SRO-APS
El Jay Zimmerman, RRO-APS
From: Michael Rogers Groundwater Protection Unit
Telephone: [phone]
E-Mail: Michael.Rogers@a,ncmail.net
Fax: [phone]
A. Permit Number: WI 0600060
B. Owner: CSX Derailment
C. Facility/Operation:
n Proposed ® Existing
❑ Facility ❑ Operation
D. Application:
1. Permit Type: Animal ❑ SFR-Surface Irrigation❑ Reuse ❑ H-R Infiltration
❑ Recycle ❑ I/E Lagoon ❑ GW Remediation (ND)
® UIC — 5I Groundwater Remediation Well
For Residuals: ❑ Land App. ❑ D&M ❑ Surface Disposal
❑ 503 0 503 Exempt 0 Animal
2. Project Type: ® New ❑ Major Mod. ❑ Minor Mod. ❑ Renewal ❑ Renewal w/ Mod.
E. Comments/Other Information: ❑ I would like to accompany you on a site visit.
NOTE:
Attached, you will find all information submitted in support of the above -referenced application for your
review, comment, and/or action. Within, please take the following actions:
® Return a Completed APSARR Form and attach laboratory analytical results, if applicable.
❑ Attach Well Construction Data Sheet.
❑ Attach Attachment B for Certification by the LAPCU.
LI Issue an Attachment B Certification from the RO.*
* Remember that you will be responsible for coordinating site visits and reviews, as well as additional
information requests with other RO-APS representatives in order to prepare a complete Attachment B for
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:
Date:
FORM: APSARR 07/06 Page 1 of 1

Michael F. Easley, Governor
•
raOr
North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services
Division of Public Health • Epidemiology Section
1912 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1912
Tel [phone] • Fax [phone]
October 28, 2003
MEMORANDUM
TO: Evan Kane
Groundwater Section
FROM: Luanne K. Williams, Pharm.D., Toxicologist
Medical Evaluation and Risk Assessment Unit
Occupational and Environmental Epidemiology Branch
North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services
SUBJECT: Use of EOS ® to Enhance Biodegradation of Contaminated Groundwater
I am writing in response to a request for a health risk evaluation regarding the use
of EOS ® to Enhance Biodegradation of Contaminated Groundwater. Based upon my
review of the information submitted, I offer the following health risk evaluation:
WORKER PRECAUTIONS DURING APPLICATION
I . The specific chemicals present in the products are not provided for proprietary
reasons. However, some effects reported to be associated with the chemicals
present in the product following short-term exposure are as follows:
• Exposure can cause irritation of skin, eyes, nose and throat (New Jersey
Department of Health and Senior Services Hazardous Substance Fact Sheet,
Micromedex TOMEs Plus System CD-ROM Database, Volume 58, 2003).
• Significant inhalation exposure can cause coughing, wheezing, and shortness
of breath (New Jersey Department of Health and Senior Services Hazardous
Substance Fact Sheet, Micromedex TOMEs Plus System CD-ROM Database,
Volume 58, 2003).
• May cause a skin allergy where very low future exposures can cause itching
and a skin rash (New Jersey Department of Health and Senior Services
Hazardous Substance Fact Sheet, Micromedex TOMEs Plus System CD-
ROM Database, Volume 58, 2003).
1Z
Carmen Hooker Odom, Secretary
© Q
G
c
rn
N2
2. If the products are released into the environment in a way that could result in a
suspension of fine solid or liquid particles (e.g., grinding, blending, vigorous
shaking or mixing), then it is imperative that proper personal protective
equipment be used. The application process should be reviewed by an industrial
1 of 2
l rinn- 2728 Capital Boulevard • Parker Lincoln Building • Raleigh, N.C. 27604 An Equal Opportur i y Employer

hygienist to ensure that the most appropriate personal protective equipment is
used.
3. Persons working with this product should at least wear goggles or a face shield,
gloves, and protective clothing. Face and body protection should be used for
anticipated splashes or sprays. Again, consult with an industrial hygienist to
ensure proper protection.
4. Eating, drinking, smoking, handling contact lenses, and applying cosmetics
should never 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. The Material Safety Data Sheets should be followed to prevent adverse reactions
and injuries.
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. Measures should be taken to prevent contamination of this product to nearby
wells and surface water bodies.
Please do not hesitate to call me if you have any questions at [phone].
LW:pw
cc: Mr. Tony Lieberman, RSM
Bioremediation Program Manager
Solutions-1ES
3722 Benson Drive
Raleigh, NC 27609
Mr. Gary Birk, P.E.
EOS Remediation Inc.
3722 Benson Dr., Suite 101
Raleigh, NC 27609
2 of 2

Re: Sodium Lactate
Subject: Re: Sodium Lactate
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2000 10:48:34 -0400
From: Luanne Williams <[e-mail]>
Organization: N.C. Dept. of Health and Human Services
To: Amy Axon <[e-mail]>
Sodium lactate (lactic acid, monosodium salt) has a LD50 (one dose kills 50% animals tested) of >1 to 2
gm/kg depending on the route given. According to Casarett and Doull's Toxicology 3rd edition by
Klaassen, CD, Amdur MO, and Doull J, Macmillan Publishing Company, New York, NY, 1986, this
chemical likely to be moderately toxic and may be slightly irritating. Lactic acid has been used as a mild
antiseptic to suppress pathogenic bacteria.
Amy Axon wrote:
Luanne:
I just received an inquiry about using sodium lactate at a site to
augment degradation of chlorinated solvents. The consultant stated that
it was basically milk sugar and was similar to the Hydrogen Release
Compound that Regenesis makes. He also stated that the only thing added
to the sodium lactate would be water. Do you know of any risks
associated with this compound? Do you feel comfortable in approving the
use of this compound, or do you need more information? -
Thanks for your help.
Amy
} -fo 2 S../IL = I000 do ;» mg k5
J oso., s ar`k VS" \ ceLe Pi ki ,ti.
co00
1 of 1 5/8/2000 9:37 AM