2002­
0001­
0070
HRS
DOCUMENTATION
RECORD
—
REVIEW
COVER
SHEET
Name
of
Site:
Ward
Transformer
NCD
003
202
603
Contact
Persons:
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Region
4:

(Name)
(Telephone)
Cynthia
Gurley,
NPL
Coordinator
(706)
355­
8556
North
Carolina
Department
of
Environment
and
Natural
Resources:

Site
Investigation:
(Name)
(Telephone)
Jeanette
Stanley
(919)
733­
2801
ext.
318
Documentation
Record:
Jeanette
Stanley
(919)
733­
2801
ext.
318
Pathways,
Components,
or
Threats
Not
Evaluated:

Groundwater
Migration
Pathway
The
groundwater
pathway
was
not
scored
because
no
observed
release
of
site
contaminants
to
the
nearest
residential
drinking
water
well
was
documented.
The
site
is
currently
served
by
city
water.

Surface
Water
Pathway
Drinking
Water
threat/
targets:
The
drinking
water
threat
was
not
scored
because
there
is
no
drinking
water
intake
within
the
15­
mile
surface
water
pathway
downstream
of
the
site.

Soil
Exposure
Pathway
The
soil
exposure
pathway
was
not
scored
because
there
are
only
4
residents
within
1/
4
mile
of
the
site.
Due
to
this,
the
soil
exposure
pathway
has
a
minimal
impact
on
the
overall
site
score.

Air
Pathway
The
Air
Pathway
was
not
scored.
The
onsite
burn
off
oven
is
currently
operated
under
a
permit
issued
by
the
NC
Division
of
Air
Quality.
1
HRS
DOCUMENTATION
RECORD
Name
of
Site:
Ward
Transformer
EPA
Region:
4
Date
Prepared:
October
12,
2001
Street
Address
of
Site:
Mt
Herman
Road
County
and
State:
Raleigh,
Wake
County,
NC
General
Location
in
the
State:
Central
Piedmont
Topographic
Map:
Southeast
Durham,
NC
Latitude:
35
o
54'07"
N
Longitude:
78
o
46'25"
W
(Ref.
4,
p.
1)

Scores
Air
Pathway
—
Not
Scored
Ground
Water
Pathway
—
Not
Scored
Soil
Exposure
Pathway
—
Not
Scored
Surface
Water
Pathway
—
100
HRS
SITE
SCORE
50
2
WORKSHEET
FOR
SITE
SCORE
S
S
2
1.
Ground
Water
Migration
Pathway
Score
Not
Scored
2a.
Surface
Water
Overland/
Flood
Migration


Drinking
Water
Threat
Not
Scored
Food
Chain
Threat
42.67
Environmental
Threat
59.7
Surface
Water
Overland/
Flood
Migration
Component
(subject
to
maximum
value
of
100,
Ref.
1,
section
4.1.5)
100
10,000
3.
Soil
Exposure
Pathway
Score
Not
Scored
4.
Air
Migration
Pathway
Score
Not
Scored
5.
Total
of
Sgw
2
+
Ssw
2
+
Ss
2
+
Sa
2
=
10,000
6.
HRS
Site
Score:
Value
on
line
5.
divided
by
four,
then
take
the
square
root
50
3
WARD
TRANSFORMER
CO.
RALEIGH,
WAKE
COUNTY,
NC
LIST
OF
REFERENCES
1.
US
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Hazard
Ranking
System,
Final
Rule,
55
FR
51532,
1990
and
Comprehensive
Environmental
Response,
Compensation,
and
Liability
Act
(42
U.
S.
C.
9601).

2.
US
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Superfund
Chemical
Data
Matrix
(SCDM).
Office
of
Solid
Waste
and
Emergency
Response.
Directive
9345.1­
13.
1996.

3.
US
Geological
Survey,
7.5­
minute
topographic
quadrangle
maps
of
North
Carolina;
Southeast
Durham,
NC,
1993;
Bayleaf,
NC,
1993;
Cary,
NC,
1993;
Raleigh
West,
NC,
1968,
photorevised
1987.

4.
Expanded
Site
Inspection,
Ward
Transformer
Site,
NCD
003
202
603,
Raleigh,
Wake
Co.,
NC,
Jeanette
Stanley,
NC
Superfund
Section,
July
31,
1998.
219
pages.

5.
Stanley,
Jeanette,
Environmental
Chemist,
NC
Superfund
Section,
Memo,
August
16,
2000;
Wetland
Inventory
Map,
Southeast
Durham,
1987;
and
"Notes
to
Users",
May
1988.
11
pages.

6.
Stanley,
Jeanette,
Environmental
Chemist,
NC
Superfund
Section,
Memos
to
file,
February
22,
1999
and
October
27,
2000
with
attached
NC
Division
of
Highways
Photogrammetry
Unit
aerial
photographs.
SUBJECT:
History
of
Operations.
8
pages.

Mission
1060,
exposure
497
dated
February
22,
1973
Mission
1519,
exposure
6,
dated
October
2,
1979
Mission
1694,
exposure
28
dated
December
10,
1983
Mission
2174,
exposure
105/
106
dated
September
28,
1987
Mission
4117,
exposure
RC­
20
dated
December
19,
1997
Mission
4375,
exposure
4­
47
dated
May
14,
1998
7.
Stanley,
Jeanette
S.,
Memo
to
file,
June
29,
2001
and
Wright,
G.
Wayne,
Chief,
Regulatory
Branch,
US
Army
Corps
of
Engineers,
letter
to
RDU
Airport,
August
8,
1995
and
DeRosa,
Brandon,
U.
S.
Army
Corps
of
Engineers,
Notification
of
Jurisdictional
Determination,
Routine
Wetland
Determination,
May
20,
1996.
7
pages.

8.
Stanley,
Jeanette
S.,
Memo
to
file,
August
2,
2000;
US
EPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
and
Emergency
Response
Publication
Numbers
9240.0­
08­
FSD,
9240.0­
33FS,
both
dated
January
2000
and
9240.0­
09­
FSD,
February
2000.
SUBJECT:
CRQL/
CRDL.
13
pages
4
WARD
TRANSFORMER
CO.
RALEIGH,
WAKE
COUNTY,
NC
LIST
OF
REFERENCES
9.
Stanley,
Jeanette
S.,
Memos
to
file,
October
13,
1993,
March
10,
1994,
September
30,
1993,
and
September
21,
2001.
SUBJECT:
Surface
Water
Pathway
Targets.
4
pages.

10.
Syracuse
Research
Corporation,
Agency
for
Toxic
Substances
and
Disease
Registry,
"Toxicological
Profile
for
Selected
PCBs
(Aroclor­
1260,
­1254,
­1248,
­1242,
­1232,
­1221
and
­1016)"
ATSDR/
TP­
88/
21,
June
1989
and
"Toxicological
Profile
for
2,3,7,8­
Tetrachlorodibenzo­
p­
Dioxin",
ATSDR/
TP­
88/
23,
June
1989.
10
pages
11.
NC
DENR
Division
of
Waste
Management,
Superfund
Section,
Inactive
Hazardous
Sites
Branch
,
"Guidelines
for
Assessment
and
Cleanup".
August
2000.
60
pages.

12.
Stanley,
Jeanette
S.,
Memos
to
file,
October
11,
2001,
August
23,
1995,
October
10,
1995,
and
October
4,
2000;
Field
Log
notes
from
Ward
Transformer
site
visits
November
3,
1993
March
3,
1998.
SUBJECT:
Field
Observations
1993
­
1998.
31
pages.

13.
Stanley,
Jeanette,
Environmental
Chemist,
NC
Superfund
Section,
Memos
to
file,
November
21,
1995
and
January
31,
1996.
Data
sheets
from
December
12,
1995
Site
Addendum
sampling.
SUBJECT:
Wetlands
and
SI
Addendum
sampling.
7
pages.

14.
Stanley,
Jeanette,
Environmental
Chemist,
NC
Superfund
Section,
Memos
to
file,
November
18,
1997,
September
25,
2001,
and
September
26,
2001.
SUBJECT:
Sample
Locations.
4
pages.

15.
Stanley,
Jeanette,
Environmental
Chemist,
NC
Superfund
Section,
Memo
to
file,
September
30,
1993.
Surface
Water
Flow
Rates.
7
pages.

16.
Stanley,
Jeanette,
Environmental
Chemist,
NC
Superfund
Section,
Memos
to
file,
October
26,
2000
and
November
19,
1993;
North
Carolina
Department
of
Environmental
management
file
material,
Air
and
NPDES
permits
with
related
correspondence
and
monitoring
data,
1972
1993
74
pages.

17.
Flood
Insurance
Rate
Maps,
Wake
County,
North
Carolina,
Map
Numbers
37183C0115E
and
37183C0120,
March
3,
1992.
4
pages.

18.
Stanley,
Jeanette,
Environmental
Chemist,
NC
Superfund
Section,
Memo
to
file,
September
27,
2001;
Franchina,
David
A.,
Attorney,
Kennedy,
Covington,
Lobdell
&
Hickman,
L.
L.
P.,
Request
letter
for
a
Prospective
Purchaser
Agreement,
April
14,
2000;
and
Bennett
Jay,
ENSR,
Memo
to
Vince
Struble,
Investment
Real
Estate,
September
24,
1998.
SUBJECT:
Analytical
data
provided
by
commercial
firms.
110
pages.
5
WARD
TRANSFORMER
CO.
RALEIGH,
WAKE
COUNTY,
NC
LIST
OF
REFERENCES
19.
Stanley,
Jeanette,
Environmental
Chemist,
NC
Superfund
Section,
Memo
to
file,
September
27,
2001;
Wake
County
Mapping
Division,
Property
Owner
List
and
maps,
September
26,
2001.
SUBJECT:
Ownership
and
Surface
Water
Pathway.
11
pages.

20.
Stanley,
Jeanette,
Environmental
Chemist,
NC
Superfund
Section,
Memo
to
file,
October
11,
2001.
SUBJECT:
Overland
flow
leaving
RDU
Airport.
1
page.

21.
EPA,
The
CLP­
Superfund's
Data
Quality
Solution:
Target
Compounds
and
Analytes
(Washington,
D.
C.,
Last
Revised
May
13,
1997)
Internet
web
page:
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
oerrpage/
superfund/
programs/
clp/
target.
htm.
9
pages.
Attached:
USEPA
Contract
Laboratory
Program
Inorganic
Statement
of
Work
Target
Compound
List
and
Contract
Required
Quantitation
Limits/
Contract­
Required
Detection
Limits
(Version
OLC02.0)
1
page.
6
Figure
1.
Site
Location
Map
A
copy
of
this
figure
is
available
at
the
EPA
Docket
Center
U.
S.
EPA
Docket
Center
EPA
West
Room
B102
1301
Constitution
Avenue,
NW
Washington
DC,
20460
Telephone:
703­
603­
9232
Email:
superfund.
docket@
epa.
gov
7
Figure
2.
Site
Layout
(Ref.
4,
p.
3)

A
copy
of
this
figure
is
available
at
the
EPA
Docket
Center
U.
S.
EPA
Docket
Center
EPA
West
Room
B102
1301
Constitution
Avenue,
NW
Washington
DC,
20460
Telephone:
703­
603­
9232
Email:
superfund.
docket@
epa.
gov
8
Figure
3.
1997
ESI
Sampling
Points
(Ref.
4,
p.
17)

A
copy
of
this
figure
is
available
at
the
EPA
Docket
Center
U.
S.
EPA
Docket
Center
EPA
West
Room
B102
1301
Constitution
Avenue,
NW
Washington
DC,
20460
Telephone:
703­
603­
9232
Email:
superfund.
docket@
epa.
gov
9
Figure
4.
Surface
Water
Pathway
(Ref.
4,
p.
30)

A
copy
of
this
figure
is
available
at
the
EPA
Docket
Center
U.
S.
EPA
Docket
Center
EPA
West
Room
B102
1301
Constitution
Avenue,
NW
Washington
DC,
20460
Telephone:
703­
603­
9232
Email:
superfund.
docket@
epa.
gov
10
Figure
5.
1997
ESI
Sampling
Points
(Ref.
4,
p.
40)

A
copy
of
this
figure
is
available
at
the
EPA
Docket
Center
U.
S.
EPA
Docket
Center
EPA
West
Room
B102
1301
Constitution
Avenue,
NW
Washington
DC,
20460
Telephone:
703­
603­
9232
Email:
superfund.
docket@
epa.
gov
11
Figure
6.
1995
Wetland
Inventory
Map,
showing
wetlands
confirmed
by
US
Army
COE
A
copy
of
this
figure
is
available
at
the
EPA
Docket
Center
U.
S.
EPA
Docket
Center
EPA
West
Room
B102
1301
Constitution
Avenue,
NW
Washington
DC,
20460
Telephone:
703­
603­
9232
Email:
superfund.
docket@
epa.
gov
12
SD
—
General
Site
Description
General
Site
Description
and
Site
History
The
Ward
Transformer
site
is
located
near
the
Raleigh
Durham
International
Airport
in
a
predominantly
industrial
area
of
Raleigh,
Wake
County,
North
Carolina
(see
Figure
1,
Site
Location
Map).
The
active
Ward
Transformer
building/
reconditioning
facility
was
constructed
in
1964
on
11
acres
of
previously
undeveloped
land
(Ref.
12,
pp.
i.,
1)
and
has
been
an
active
facility
since
that
time.
The
facility
and
three
sides
of
the
stormwater
impoundment
are
surrounded
by
an
eight­
foot­
high
chain
link
fence
(Ref.
12;
Figs.
2,
3).
The
dam
side
of
the
impoundment
is
fenced
by
a
low
wire
fence.
Concrete
paving,
cracked
in
some
areas,
covers
most
of
the
facility.
Aerial
photography
indicates
that
the
property
adjacent
to
and
north
of
the
Ward
facility
was
once
part
of
the
transformer
operation
(Ref.
6,
pp.
5,
6).
The
closest
residence,
the
only
one
within
1/
4
mile
of
the
site,
is
approximately
300
feet
northeast
of
the
Ward
Transformer
property
(Figs.
1,
3;
Refs.
3
(scale);
Ref.
6.
p.
7
(nearest
residence)).

Prior
to
1979,
Ward
Transformer
paid
a
contractor
to
remove
transformer
oil
from
the
site.
The
contractor
sprayed
oil
along
roadsides
in
several
North
Carolina
counties,
which
became
known
as
the
PCB
Roadside
Spill
site
(Ref.
4,
p.
5;
12,
p.
5).
Polychlorinated
biphenyls
(PCBs)
are
toxic
chemicals
often
found
in
transformer
oils
(Ref.
10,
p.
2).
In
1978
and
1979,
the
US
EPA
collected
samples
on
and
downstream
from
the
facility
(Ref.
4,
p.
10).
PCB
contamination
was
found
in
soil,
in
the
stormwater
impoundment,
and
in
water
and
sediments
along
the
surface
water
pathway
(Ref.
4,
p.
11).
No
additional
action
was
taken
by
the
US
EPA
on
the
site
until
1993
when,
prompted
by
reports
of
bankruptcy,
a
removal
investigation
was
conducted.
The
site
was
listed
on
CERCLIS
in
May
1993.

The
Ward
facility
connected
to
city
water
and
sewer
in
1995.
Prior
to
that,
employees
used
an
onsite
drinking
water
well
and
a
septic
system.
PCBs
were
not
detected
in
either
the
onsite
or
nearest
drinking
water
wells
(Ref.
4,
p.
26).
Prior
to
1972,
overland
flow
from
the
site
was
uncontrolled.
Two
impoundments
were
constructed
around
1972
to
collect
runoff,
and
around
1979,
a
retaining
wall
(curb
height)
was
constructed
around
the
facility
to
direct
runoff
into
the
impoundment
(Ref.
4,
p.
4;
Ref.
6,
Ref.
16,
pp.
28,
29).
In
1986,
dam
overtopping
was
discovered
and
the
dam
was
raised
(Ref.
16,
p.
32;
Ref.
6).
An
onsite
treatment
plant,
installed
in
1979,
removes
PCBs
from
the
impoundment
water
prior
to
its
discharge
to
the
surface
water
pathway
(Ref.
4,
p.
4;
Ref.
16,
p.
29).
Recent
inspections
by
the
NC
Division
of
Water
Quality
show
that
the
treatment
facility
is
in
compliance
(Ref.
16,
p.
I.).
The
surface
water
pathway
leading
from
the
site
is
a
perennial
stream
(Ref.
4,
App.
B.
p.
5;
Ref.
12,
pp.
iv.,
12;
Ref.
19,
pp.
i.
7­
10)
that
is
bordered
by
wetlands
(Refs.
5,
p.
2;
7,
pp.
i,
1
­
6;
12,
p.
iii.
­
v.).
A
recreational
lake
and
fishery
lie
within
the
surface
water
pathway
(Fig.
4;
Ref.
9,
pp.
3,
4;
Ref.
12,
p.
17).

Early
copper
reclamation
activities
consisted
of
open
air
burning
of
transformer
parts
(Ref.
16,
p.
1).
The
facility
now
uses
an
onsite
burnoff
oven/
incinerator
for
reclaiming
copper
(Ref.
16,
pp.
I.,
1­
27)
Incomplete
combustion
of
PCBs
and
plastic
materials
produces
dioxins
(Ref.
10,
p.
9).
The
concrete
area
near
the
oven
is
covered
with
a
dark,
oily
soil
(Ref.
4,
p.
16,
Photographs
#15,
16;
App.
B,
p.
6).
Recent
inspections
by
the
NC
Division
of
Air
Quality
have
shown
that
the
oven/
incinerator
is
in
compliance
(Ref.
16,
p.
I.).
13
SD
­Characterization
and
Containment
Source:
1
SOURCE
DESCRIPTION
2.2
Source
Characterization
Number
of
the
Source
:
1
Name
and
description
of
the
source:
Contaminated
soil
at
rear
of
property.
This
area
of
soil
received
overland
flow
from
the
facility
prior
to
construction
of
the
runoff
control
features.
This
area
remains
unfenced
and
is
outside
any
runoff
control
features.
It
is
accessible
but
there
are
no
signs
of
recreation
(Refs.
12,
pp.
vi,
vii;
19,
pp.
7,
10).
This
wooded
area
looks
similar
to
the
surrounding
wooded
area.
Four
points
were
selected
in
the
wooded
area
in
order
to
document
an
area
of
contamination
(Ref.
4,
App.
B,
pp.
10
­
13).

Location
of
the
source,
with
reference
to
a
map
of
the
site:
West
corner
of
property
(Figure
3).
The
four
points
were
marked
with
a
GPS
unit
(Ref.
4,
App.
B,
pp.
10
­
13)
and
the
area
encompassed
by
the
four
points
is
estimated
to
be
10,000
square
feet
(Ref.
14,
p.
1).

Containment
Release
to
ground
water
—
Not
Scored
Release
via
overland
migration
and/
or
flood
—
Contaminated
soil
is
outside
any
controlled
runoff
feature
and
is
available
for
continuous
and
ongoing
overland
flow
(Ref.
1,
Table
4­
2;
Ref.
4,
App.
B,
pp.
10
­
13;
Ref.
12,
pp.
vi,
vii;
Ref.
19,
pp.
7,
10).

The
Site
is
outside
the
500­
year
flood
plain
(Ref.
17,
pp.
3,
4),
so
it
has
a
flood
frequency
factor
value
of
0
(Ref.
1,
Table
4­
9)

Containment
factor:
This
information,
applied
to
Table
3­
2
in
Reference
1
yields
a
containment
value
of
10.
14
SD
­Characterization
and
Containment
Source:
1
2.3
Likelihood
of
Release
The
likelihood
of
release
for
the
surface
water
migration
pathway
is
discussed
in
Section
4.1.2
of
this
documentation
record.
15
SD­
Hazardous
Substances
Source
No.:
1
(Contaminated
soil)
2.4
Waste
Characteristics
2.4.1
Hazardous
Substances
Background
soil
sample
WA­
015­
SL
was
collected
from
0
­
6"
depth
and
was
a
tan,
silty
loan
(Ref.
4,
App.
B,
p.
7).
Source
soils
were
collected
at
0
­
6"
depth
and
two
were
described
as
a
tan,
silty
loam.
A
soil
description
of
the
other
two
source
soil
samples
was
not
entered
in
the
field
log
book
(Ref.
4,
Ap.
B,
pp.
10
­
13).

Hazardous
substances
attributable
to
the
area
of
contaminated
soil
include
PCB
1260,
manganese,
zinc,
1,2,3,7,8
pentachlorodibenzofuran,
and
octachlorodibenzofuran.
This
is
based
on
four
soil
samples
collected
on
February
11,
1997
which
were
analyzed
for
semivolatile
organic
constituents
(including
pesticides
and
PCBs),
dioxins,
and
total
metals.
Only
those
substances
detected
at
levels
significantly
above
background
levels
in
at
least
three
of
the
four
samples
are
listed
below.
A
summary
of
hazardous
substance
and
ranges
of
contamination
is
provided
below.
The
data
table
showing
individual
sample
results
and
background
data
as
well
as
reference
information
are
provided
on
the
following
page.

Hazardous
substances
and
concentration
summary
PCB
1260
ranging
from
5.7
to
16
mg/
kg
Manganese
ranging
from
92
to
510
mg/
kg
Zinc
ranging
from
47
to
130
mg/
kg
1,2,3,7,8
Pentachlorodibenzofuran
ranging
from
18
to
50
ng/
kg
Octachlorodibenzofuran
ranging
from
13
to
49
ng/
kg
Sample
number
Date
and
Time
PCB­
1260
Manganese
Zinc
Penta
Octa
CRQL/
CRDL
(Refs.
8,;
21,
p.
8,
10)
33
mg/
kg
3
mg/
kg
4
mg/
kg
NS
NS
units
mg/
kg
mg/
kg
mg/
kg
ng/
kg
*
ng/
kg
*

WA­
008­
SL
2/
11/
97;
1040
16,000
95
130
50
49
WA­
009­
SL
2/
11/
97;
1140
7,100
510
25
26
14
WA­
010­
SL
2/
11/
97;
1210
5,700
92
47
ND
(6.6)
13
WA­
011­
SL
2/
11/
97;
1105
6,800
93
87
18
20
WA­
015­
SL
(bkg)
2/
11/
97;
1715
ND
(40)
20
15
ND
(6.0)
ND
(12)

bkg
=
background;
*
1,000
nanogram/
kilogram
(ng/
kg)
=
1
mg/
kg
=
0.001
mg/
kg
Penta
=
1,2,3,7,8
­
Pentachlorodibenzofuran;
Octa
=
Octachlorodibenzofuran
ND
=
Analyzed
for
but
not
detected,
(
)
=
detection
limit
if
other
than
CRQL;
NS
=
Not
Specified
in
Reference
8
BOLD
=
Greater
than
or
equal
to
3
x
background
or
greater
than
detection
limit
if
background
is
nondetect
16
SD­
Hazardous
Substances
Source
No.:
1
(Contaminated
soil)

2.4.1
Hazardous
Substances
(continued)

References:
Ref.
4,
pp.
15
­
22;
Appendix
A,
pp.
1,
3,
5,
17­
20,
36­
39,
53­
56,
73­
76,
93­
96;
Appendix
B,
pp.
1,
10
­
13.

Individual
sample
references:

WA­
008­
SL
Ref.
4,
App.
A,
pp.
17,
36,
53,
73,
93
WA­
009­
SL
Ref.
4,
App.
A,
pp.
18,
37,
54,
74,
94
WA­
010­
SL
Ref.
4,
App.
A,
pp.
19,
38,
55,
75,
95
WA­
011­
SL
Ref.
4,
App.
A,
pp.
20,
39,
56,
76,
96
WA­
015­
SL
Ref.
4,
pp.
15­
20;
App.
A,
pp.
1,
3,
5,
22,
41,
58,
78,
98;
App.
B,
p.
7
Discussion:

Previous
sampling
events
also
found
PCBs
in
this
area
of
contaminated
soil.
During
the
1995
Site
Inspection
sampling
event,
the
NC
Superfund
Section
collected
two
samples
in
the
general
area
of
Source
1,
and
these
two
samples
(Ref.
4,
pp.
8,
14;
Ref.
12,
p.
vii.)
showed
Aroclor
1260
at
18.9
mg/
kg
and
58.98
mg/
kg.
These
two
samples
also
showed
elevated
copper
and
zinc.

A
prospective
developer
for
adjacent
property
collected
soil
samples
along
this
ditch
and
dirt
road
in
1998.
He
provided
these
results
and
a
sample
location
map
to
NC
Superfund
Section
(Ref.
18,
pp.
108,
109).
All
ten
of
the
reported
samples
showed
Aroclor
1260.
The
highest
level
was
1,500
mg/
kg
Aroclor
1260,
collected
at
a
depth
from
0
­
1',
in
the
area
of
Source
1.
17
SD­
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
Source
No.:
1
(Contaminated
Soil)

2.4.2
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
2.4.2.1
Source
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
2.4.2.1.1
Hazardous
Constituent
Quantity
—
Sufficient
evidence
does
not
exist
to
evaluate
Hazardous
Constituent
Quantity
2.4.2.1.2
Hazardous
Wastestream
Quantity
—
Sufficient
evidence
does
not
exist
to
evaluate
Hazardous
Wastestream
Quantity
2.4.2.1.3
Volume
—
Sufficient
evidence
does
not
exist
to
evaluate
Volume
2.4.2.1.4
Area
Contaminated
soil
area
determined
by
extrapolating
GPS
points
(Figure
3)

Area
of
source
(ft
2
):
square
ft.
10,000
References:
Ref.
4,
App.
B,
p.
12;
Ref.
14,
p.
1
Area
assigned
value
(Ref.
1,
Table
2­
5)

=
A/
34,000
=
10,000/
34,000
=.

2.4.2.1.5
Source
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
Value
=
0.29
18
SD
­Characterization
and
Containment
Source:
2
SOURCE
DESCRIPTION
2.2
Source
Characterization
Number
of
the
Source:
2
Name
and
description
of
the
source:

Surface
impoundment
This
surface
impoundment
was
originally
created
as
two
impoundments
in
1972
to
control
surface
runoff
(Ref.
4,
p.
6).
Overtopping
of
the
dam
was
noted
in
1986
(Ref.
4,
p.
7;
Ref.
16,
p.
32),
and
the
subsequent
raising
of
the
dam
caused
the
division
of
the
two
impoundments
to
be
obscured.
Under
an
order
issued
by
North
Carolina,
a
treatment
plant
was
installed
and
continues
to
treat
the
impoundment
water
to
remove
PCBs
prior
to
discharge
from
the
impoundment
to
the
surface
water
pathway
(Ref.
16,
pp.
50,
53,
63­
68,
72).

The
surface
impoundment
is
shown
in
the
aerial
photographs
(Ref.
6,
pp.
1,
4­
8)
and
in
Figure
2
and
3.
The
lagoon
volume
is
14.3
acre­
feet,
or
23,070
cubic
yards
(Ref.
16,
p.
ii).
PCBs
are
denser
than
water
and
are
more
likely
to
be
found
in
sediments
than
water
(Ref.
10,
p.
5).

Location
of
the
source,
with
reference
to
a
map
of
the
site:

Southern
side
of
property
(Figures
2,
3,
Ref.
6,
pp.
1,
3,
5)

Containment
Release
to
ground
water
—
Not
Scored
Release
via
overland
migration
and/
or
flood
—
Surface
Impoundment,
constructed
sometime
after
1972
(Ref.
6;
pp.
ii,
3),
has
free
liquids
present
(Ref.
6,
pp.
3­
8).
A
review
of
aerial
photographs
(Ref.
6,
pp.
3­
8)
and
recent
NPDES
permit
compliance
(Ref.
16,
p.
1)
indicate
that
diking
is
regularly
inspected
and
maintained
(Ref.
16,
p.
33).
There
was
evidence
of
dam
overtopping
in
1986
(Ref.
16,
p.
32).
The
impoundment
now
has
adequate
freeboard
(Ref.
12,
p.
24),
but
there
is
no
evidence
of
a
liner.
The
Site
is
outside
the
500­
year
flood
plain
(Ref.
17,
pp.
3,
4),
so
it
has
a
flood
frequency
factor
value
of
0
(Ref.
1,
Table
4­
9)

Containment
factor:
9
19
SD­
Hazardous
Substances
Source
No.:
2
(Surface
Impoundment)

2.4
Waste
Characteristics
2.4.1
Hazardous
Substances
The
hazardous
substance
attributable
to
the
surface
impoundment
is
PCB
1260.
This
is
based
on
two
sediment
samples
collected
on
February
11,
1997
which
were
analyzed
for
semivolatile
organic
constituents
(including
pesticides
and
PCBs),
dioxins,
and
total
metals.
Only
PCB
1260
was
detected
at
levels
significantly
above
background
levels
in
both
samples.
Data
tables
showing
individual
sample
results
and
references
are
provided
below.
Because
there
is
no
surface
water
or
sediment
upstream
of
this
impoundment,
the
background
soil
sample,
WA­
015­
SL,
discussed
in
Source
No.
1
above
serves
as
the
background
for
the
impoundment
sediment.
The
background
data
is
included
below.

Haz.
Sub.
Date
time
PCB­
1260
References
CRQL
(Ref.
8,
p.
3,
Ref.
21,
p.
8,
10)
33
mg/
kg
WA­
017­
SD
02/
11/
97
1430
190
m
mg/
kg
Ref.
4,
App.
A,
pp.
2,
4,
6,
24,
43,
60,
80,
100;
App.
B,
pp.
3,
4
WA­
018­
SD
02/
11/
97
1405
430
m
mg/
kg
Ref.
4,
App.
A,
pp.
2,
4,
6,
25,
44,
61,
81,
101;
App.
B,
pp.
3,
4
WA­
015­
SL
(background)
2/
11/
97
1715
ND
(40)
Ref.
4,
pp.
15­
20;
App.
A,
pp.
1,
3,
5,
22,
41,
58,
78,
98;
App.
B,
p.
7
ND
=
Analyzed
for
but
not
detected,
(
)
=
detection
limit
if
other
than
CRQL
Discussion:
While
these
sample
results
show
relatively
low
levels
of
Aroclor
1260,
it
is
believed
that
higher
levels
of
PCB
1260
exist
in
the
deeper
impoundment
sediment.
This
is
based
on
the
following
facts:

1.
Several
previous
sampling
events
from
1978
to
1995
have
documented
significantly
higher
levels
of
PCBs
in
this
impoundment.
In
1978,
lagoon
sediment
samples
collected
by
the
US
EPA
showed
Aroclor
1260
as
high
as
990
mg/
kg.
Samples
collected
by
the
NC
Superfund
Section
in
1995
for
the
Site
Inspection
showed
Aroclor
1260
in
the
impoundment
sediment
at
21.84
mg/
kg
(Ref.
4,
pp.
10
­
15).

2.
The
1997
samples
were
collected
along
the
shoreline
of
the
impoundment,
after
heavy
rains
(Ref.
4,
App.
B,
pp.
3­
4).

3.
PCBs
are
denser
than
water
and
are
more
likely
to
be
found
in
higher
concentrations
in
the
deeper
parts
of
the
impoundment
and
sediment
(Ref.
10,
p.
5).
20
SD­
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
Source
No.:
2
(Surface
Impoundment)

2.4.2
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
2.4.2.1
Source
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
2.4.2.1.1
Hazardous
Constituent
Quantity
—
Sufficient
evidence
does
not
exist
to
evaluate
Hazardous
Constituent
Quantity
2.4.2.1.2
Hazardous
Wastestream
Quantity
—
Sufficient
evidence
does
not
exist
to
evaluate
Hazardous
Wastestream
Quantity
2.4.2.1.3
Volume
—
The
impoundment
volume
is
14.3
acre­
feet,
or
23,070
cubic
yards
(Ref.
16,
p.
ii).

Volume
assigned
value
(Ref.
1,
Table
2­
5)
=

V/
2.5
=
23,070/
2.5
=
9,228
2.4.2.1.4
Area
­­
Not
evaluated
2.4.2.1.5
Source
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
Value
=
9,228
21
SD
­Characterization
and
Containment
Source:
3
(Contaminated
soil
near
incinerator)

2.2
Source
Characterization
Number
of
the
Source:
3
Name
and
description
of
the
source:
Contaminated
soil
near
incinerator
loading
rack
This
source
is
near
the
southwest
corner
of
the
building
near
the
incinerator
(Ref.
4,
Photographs
#15,
16;
App.
B,
pp.
6,
7;
Figure
3,
where
WA­
019­
CN
was
collected).
This
soil
is
beneath
the
area
where
the
incinerator
rack
is
loaded,
and
contains
drippings
from
transformer
parts
that
have
been
placed
in
the
incinerator.

Location
of
the
source,
with
reference
to
a
map
of
the
site:
This
area
of
stained
soil
is
near
the
southwest
corner
of
the
building,
where
sample
WA­
019­
CN
was
collected
(Figure
3).
By
viewing
the
photographs
of
sample
collection
in
the
area
of
Source
3
(Ref.
4,
Photographs
15
&
16),
and
judging
that
the
man
in
this
photo
to
be
approximately
6'
tall,
the
area
of
Source
3
can
be
conservatively
estimated
to
be
at
least
40
square
feet.

Containment
Release
to
ground
water
—
Not
scored
Release
via
overland
migration
and/
or
flood
—
Contaminated
soil
is
on
concrete;
there
is
no
engineered
cover
over
this
source
(Ref.
4,
photographs
#15
&
#16).
Stormwater
runoff
is
controlled
and
enters
the
stormwater
impoundment
(Ref.
1,
Table
4­
2;
Ref.
16,
pp.
28,
29,
44,
53,
72).

The
Site
is
outside
the
500­
year
flood
plain
(Refs.
4,
17),
so
it
has
a
flood
frequency
factor
value
of
0
(Ref.
1,
Table
4­
9)

Containment
factor:
3
22
SD­
Hazardous
Substances
Source
No.:
3
(Contaminated
soil)
2.4
Waste
Characteristics
2.4.1
Hazardous
Substances
Hazardous
substances
attributable
to
Source
3
include
PCB
1260,
dioxins/
furans,
arsenic,
chromium,
copper,
lead,
manganese,
and
zinc.
Results
are
based
on
a
soil
sample
collected
on
2/
11/
1997
which
was
analyzed
for
metals,
semivolatile
organic
compounds,
and
PCBs
by
the
NC
State
Laboratory
of
Public
Health.
Semivolatile,
PCB,
and
metals
analyses
of
this
sample
were
not
conducted
under
the
CLP
contract.
The
dioxin
analysis
of
this
sampling
point
was
conducted
by
the
same
laboratory
as
all
of
the
other
dioxin
analyses
conducted
on
the
2/
11/
97
samples
(Ref.
4,
pp.
15­
21;
photographs
#15
&
#16;
Appendix
A,
pp.
4,
103,
106­
108,
111;
Appendix
B,
pp.
6,
7).
A
summary
of
source
and
background
data
is
provided
below.

Note
that
field
log
and
some
sample
submittal
sheets
call
this
sample
WA­
019­
SL
(Ref.
4,
App.
A,
pp,
106,
111;
pp.
B,
p.
6)
whereas
the
dioxin
chain
of
custody
record
numbered
this
sample
as
WD019
CN
(Ref.
4,
App.
A,
p.
4).
The
"WA"
designation
was
changed
to
"WD"
for
the
dioxin
samples
simply
for
the
purpose
of
accommodating
the
computerized
label
generating
program.
The
SL
and
CN
designations
were
apparently
a
transcription
error.

Date
Time
Reference
WA/
WD­
019­
CN/
SL
02/
11/
97
1525
Ref.
4,
pp.
15­
21;
photographs
#15
&
#16;
Appendix
A,
pp.
4,
103,
106­
108,
111;
Appendix
B,
pp.
6,
7
WA­
015­
SL
(background)
02/
11/
97
1715
Ref.
4,
pp.
15­
20;
App.
A,
pp.
1,
3,
5,
22,
41,
58,
78,
98;
App.
B,
p.
7
Sample
number
PCB­
1260
As
Cr
Cu
Pb
Mn
Zn
Tetra
Penta
units
mg/
kg
mg/
kg
mg/
kg
mg/
kg
mg/
kg
mg/
kg
mg/
kg
ng/
kg
ng/
kg*

WA­
019**
50,230
43
180
104,000
1,200
400
1,000
46
73
WA­
015­
SL
(bkg)
U
(40)
U
(0.43)
2.9
UJ
(5)
14
20
15
2.9
0.9
J***

CRQL
(Refs.
8,
p.
11;
21,
p.
8,
10)
33
mg/
kg
2mg/
kg
2mg/
kg
5mg/
kg
0.6mg/
kg
3mg/
kg
4mg/
kg
NS
NS
*
1,000
nanogram/
kilogram
(ng/
kg)
=
1
mg/
kg
=
0.001
mg/
kg
**
Metals
not
analyzed
by
CLP,
CRQL
for
metals
does
not
apply
for
WA­
019
sample.
***
Results
lower
than
minimum
quantitation
limit
Penta
=
2,3,4,7,8
­
Pentachlorodibenzofuran;
Tetra
=
2,
3,
7,
8
Tetrachlorodibenzofuran
(
)
=
detection
limit
if
other
than
CRQL;
NS
=
Not
Specified
in
Reference
8
23
SD­
Hazardous
Substances
Source
No.:
3
(Contaminated
soil)

2.4.1
Hazardous
Substances
(continued)

ng/
kg*
WA­
015­
SL
WA­
019­
CN
1,2,3,7,8,9­
Hexachlorodibenzodioxin
U(
6.0)
92
Hexachlorodibenzodioxin
(Total)
UJ(
6.0)
460
J
1,2,3,4,6,7,8­
Heptachlorodibenzodioxin
U(
6.0)
74
Tetrachlorodibenzofuran
(Total)
12
J
320
J
1,2,3,7,8
­
Pentachlorodibenzofuran
U
(6.0)
15
Pentachlorodibenzofuran
(Total)
12
J
590
J
1,2,3,6,7,8­
Hexachlorodibenzofuran
U(
6.0)
32
Heptachlorodibenzofuran
(Total)
UJ
(6.0)
210
J
1,2,3,4,6,7,8­
Heptachlorodibenzofuran
U
(6.0)
170
1,2,3,4,7,8,9­
Heptachlorodibenzofuran
U
(6.0)
13
Octachlorodibenzofuran
U
(12)
90
(
)
=
detection
limit
if
other
than
CRQL
*
1,000
nanogram/
kilogram
(ng/
kg)
=
1
ug/
kg
=
0.001
mg/
kg;
one
nanogram
=
one
part
per
trillion
J
=
All
totals
data
are
J'd
because
calibration
standards
are
not
available
for
all
congeners;
response
factors
are
assumed
24
SD­
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
Source
No.:
3
(Contaminated
Soil)

2.4.2
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
2.4.2.1
Source
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
2.4.2.1.1
Hazardous
Constituent
Quantity
—
Sufficient
evidence
does
not
exist
to
evaluate
Hazardous
Constituent
Quantity
2.4.2.1.2
Hazardous
Wastestream
Quantity
—
Sufficient
evidence
does
not
exist
to
evaluate
Hazardous
Wastestream
Quantity
2.4.2.1.3
Volume
—
Sufficient
evidence
does
not
exist
to
evaluate
Volume
2.4.2.1.4
Area
­­
Area
of
source
(ft
2
):
approximately
40
square
ft.
Reference:
By
viewing
the
photographs
of
sample
collection
in
the
area
of
Source
3
(Ref.
4,
Photographs
15
&
16),
and
judging
that
the
man
in
this
photo
to
be
approximately
6'
tall,
the
area
of
Source
3
can
be
conservatively
estimated
to
be
at
least
40
square
feet.

Area
assigned
value
=
A/
34,000
=
40/
34,000
=
0.001
(Ref.
1,
Table
2­
5).

2.4.2.1.5
Source
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
Value
=
0.001
25
SD­
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
Source
No.:
4
(Incinerator
Ash)

2.2
Source
Characterization
Number
of
the
Source
:
4
Name
and
description
of
the
source:
Incinerator
Ash
(Ref.
1,
Table
2­
5)
The
incinerator
ash
sample
was
collected
from
the
ash
within
the
incinerator.
Ward
Transformer
reportedly
disposes
of
the
ash,
when
it
accumulates,
by
placing
it
in
a
barrel
and
sending
it
for
copper
reclamation
(Ref.
4,
p.
9),
but
ash
disposal
history
has
not
been
documented.
The
size
of
this
source
is
unknown
(Ref.
4,
photograph
13),
but
is
greater
than
zero
(Ref.
1,
section
2.4.2.2).

Location
of
the
source,
with
reference
to
a
map
of
the
site:
Outside
southwest
corner
of
main
building
(Figures
2,
3;
Ref.
4,
photographs
13
&
14).

Containment
Release
to
ground
water
—
Not
Scored
Release
via
overland
migration
and/
or
flood
—
Ash
is
in
incinerator
and
on
the
concrete.
Stormwater
runoff
is
controlled
and
enters
the
stormwater
impoundment,
but
there
is
no
engineered
cover
(Ref.
1,
Table
4­
2;
Ref.
16,
pp.
28,
29,
44,
53,
72)

The
Site
is
outside
the
500­
year
flood
plain
(Ref.
17,
pp.
3,
4),
so
it
has
a
flood
frequency
factor
value
of
0
(Ref.
1,
Table
4­
9)

Containment
factor:
3
26
SD­
Hazardous
Substances
Source
No.:
4
(Incinerator
Ash)

2.4
Waste
Characteristics
2.4.1
Hazardous
Substances
Hazardous
substances
attributable
to
Source
4
include
PCB
1260,
numerous
dioxins/
furans,
arsenic,
chromium,
copper,
lead,
manganese,
and
zinc.
Results
are
based
on
a
sample
collected
on
2/
11/
1997
which
was
analyzed
for
metals,
semivolatile
organic
compounds,
and
PCBs
by
the
NC
State
Laboratory
of
Public
Health
(Ref.
4,
App.
A,
pp.
105,
107­
108).
The
dioxin
analysis
of
this
sampling
point
was
conducted
by
the
same
laboratory
as
all
of
the
other
dioxin
analyses
conducted
on
the
samples
collected
for
the
2/
11/
97
investigation
(Ref.
4,
App.
A,
pp.
4,
102).
A
summary
of
source
and
background
data
is
included
below.
Dioxins
are
listed
in
two
tables
­­
those
showing
levels
above
the
NC
Inactive
Hazardous
Sites
Program
Remediation
Goals
(Ref.
11,
p.
4­
10)
and/
or
soil
exposure
benchmarks
(Ref.
2),
and
those
showing
levels
either
below
benchmarks
or
for
compounds
having
no
benchmark.

Note
that
field
log
and
sample
submittal
sheets
call
this
sample
WA­
012­
CN
(Ref.
4,
App.
A,
pp,
105,
110;
App.
B,
p.
6)
whereas
the
dioxin
chain
of
custody
record
numbered
this
sample
as
WD012
CN
(Ref.
4,
App.
A,
p.
4).
The
"WA"
designation
was
changed
to
"WD"
for
the
dioxin
samples
simply
for
the
purpose
of
accommodating
the
computerized
label
generating
program.

Date
Time
Reference
WA/
WD­
012­
CN
02/
11/
97
1520
Ref.
4,
pp.
15­
21;
photographs
13
&
14;
Appendix
A,
pp.
4,
102,
105,
107­
108,
110;
Appendix
B,
p.
6
WA­
015­
SL
(background)
02/
11/
97
1715
Ref.
4,
pp.
15­
20;
App.
A,
pp.
1,
3,
5,
22,
41,
58,
78,
98;
App.
B,
p.
7
Sample
number
PCB­
1260
As
Cr
Cu
Pb
Mn
Zn
units
mg/
kg
mg/
kg
mg/
kg
mg/
kg
mg/
kg
mg/
kg
mg/
kg
WA/
WD­
012­
CN*
7,180
800
1,000
38,000
9,700
1,500
4,100
CRQL
(Ref.
8.
pp.
9,
11;
21,
p.
8,
10)
33
mg/
kg
2
mg/
kg
2
mg/
kg
5
mg/
kg
0.6mg/
kg
3
mg/
kg
4
mg/
kg
WA­
015­
SL
(bkg)
ND
(40)
(0.43)
2.9
ND
(5)
14
20
15
mg/
kg
=
milligrams
per
kilogram,
or
parts
per
million
(ppm)
mg/
kg
=
micrograms/
kilogram,
or
parts
per
billion
(ppb)
*Metals
not
analyzed
by
CLP
laboratory,
so
CRQL
does
not
apply
for
this
sample
27
SD­
Hazardous
Substances
Source
No.:
4
(Incinerator
Ash)
2.4.1
Hazardous
Substances
(continued)

ng/
kg*
WA­
015­
SL
WA­
012­
CN
2,3,7,8
­
Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
U
(2.4)
2,700
J**

1,2,3,4,7,8­
Hexachlorodibenzodioxin
U
(6.0)
2,600
1,2,3,6,7,8
­
Hexachlorodibenzodioxin
U
(6.0)
3,900
1,2,3,7,8,9­
Hexachlorodibenzodioxin
U
(6.0)
7,000
1,2,3,4,6,7,8­
Heptachlorodibenzodioxin
U
(6.0)
25,000
2,3,7,8­
Tetrachlorodibenzofuran
2.9
1,200
J***

1,2,3,7,8­
Pentachlorodibenzofuran
U
(6.0)
3,400
2,3,4,7,8­
Pentachlorodibenzofuran
0.9
J****
8,000
1,2,3,6,7,8­
Hexachlorodibenzofuran
U
(6.0)
9,900
1,2,3,7,8,9­
Hexachlorodibenzofuran
U
(6.0)
1,300
2,3,4,6,7,8­
Hexachlorodibenzofuran
U
(6.0)
12,000
1,2,3,4,6,7,8­
Heptachlorodibenzofuran
U
(6.0)
43,000
1,2,3,4,7,8,9­
Heptachlorodibenzofuran
U
(6.0)
1,800
*
1,000
nanogram/
kilogram
(ng/
kg)
=
1
mg/
kg
=
0.001
mg/
kg
**
J'd
as
PE
sample
result
was
in
warning­
low
range
(Ref.
4,
App.
A,
p.
83)
***
confirmation
result
outside
calibration
range.
****
Results
lower
than
minimum
quantitation
limit
Below
are
additional
dioxins/
furans
reported
in
the
ash
sample:

ng/
kg
*
A
AA
BB
B
C
D
G
I
K
N
O
WA­
015­
SL
UJ
(20)
UJ
(6.0)
UJ
(2.4)
470
UJ
(6.0)
12
J
12
J
5.8
J
UJ
(6.0)
U
(12)
1.2
J
WA­
012­
CN
59,000
J
83,000
J
47,000
J
29,000
55,000
J
160,000
J
130,000
J
83,000
J
49,000
J
6,800
13,000
J
J
=
All
totals
data
are
J'd
because
calibration
standards
are
not
available
for
all
congeners;
response
factors
are
assumed
NV
=
no
value
established
for
this
compound
*
1,000
nanogram/
kilogram
(ng/
kg)
=
1
ug/
kg
=
0.001
mg/
kg;
one
nanogram
=
one
part
per
trillion
A
=
Heptachlorodibenzodioxin
(Total)
AA
=
Hexachlorodibenzodioxin
(Total)
B
=
Octachlorodibenzodioxin
BB
=
Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
(Total)
C
=
Pentachlorodibenzodioxin
(Total)
D
=
Tetrachlorodibenzofuran
(Total)
G
=
Pentachlorodibenzofuran
(Total)
I
=
Hexachlorodibenzofuran
(Total)
K
=
Heptachlorodibenzofuran
(Total)
N
=
Octachlorodibenzofuran
O
=
Toxicity
Equivalent
Value
(TEQ)
28
SD­
Hazardous
Substances
Source
No.:
4
(Incinerator
Ash)

2.4.2
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
2.4.2.1
Source
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
2.4.2.1.1
Hazardous
Constituent
Quantity
—
Sufficient
evidence
does
not
exist
to
evaluate
Hazardous
Constituent
Quantity
2.4.2.1.2
Hazardous
Wastestream
Quantity
—
Sufficient
evidence
does
not
exist
to
evaluate
Hazardous
Wastestream
Quantity
2.4.2.1.3
Volume
—
The
type
of
source
is
"other".
Volume
is
unknown
but
>0
Volume
assigned
value
(Ref.
1,
Table
2­
5)
=
>
0
2.4.2.1.4
Area
—
not
evaluated
2.4.2.1.5
Source
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
Value
=
>
0
29
SD­
Summary
SITE
SUMMARY
OF
SOURCE
DESCRIPTIONS
Containment
Source
Hazardous
Source
Waste
Quantity
Ground
Surface
Air
No.
Value
Water
Water
Gas
Particulate
1
0.29
NS
10
NS
NS
2
9,228
NS
7
NS
NS
3
0.001
NS
3
NS
NS
4
>0
NS
3
NS
NS
Sum
of
Source
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
Values
=
9,228
(Rounded
to
nearest
integer,
per
Ref.
1,
section
2.4.2.2)

Based
on
HRS
(Ref.
1,
Table
2­
6),
the
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
Factor
Value
=
100.

"If
any
target
for
that
migration
pathway
is
subject
to
Level
I
or
Level
II
concentrations,
assign
either
the
value
from
Table
2­
6
or
a
value
or
100,
whichever
is
greater"
(Ref.
1,
section
2.4.2.2)

NOTE:
NS
=
not
scored
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
Factor
Value
=
100
30
3.0
GROUNDWATER
MIGRATION
PATHWAY
—
NOT
SCORED
Because
contamination
was
not
found
in
drinking
water
wells
(Ref.
4,
p.
26),
the
groundwater
pathway
was
not
scored.
31
SWOF
—
Surface
Water
Overland
Flow/
Flood
Migration
Pathway
4.1
OVERLAND/
FLOOD
MIGRATION
COMPONENT
4.1.1.1
DEFINITION
OF
HAZARDOUS
SUBSTANCE
MIGRATION
PATH
FOR
OVERLAND/
FLOOD
COMPONENT
The
Ward
Transformer
facility
sits
on
a
knoll
and
runoff
drains
toward
the
southwest
into
an
unnamed
tributary
(UT)
to
Little
Brier
Creek
(Figs.
1,
4;
Ref.
3).
Prior
to
1972,
runoff
oil
from
the
plant
was
discharged
into
the
waters
of
the
State
of
North
Carolina.
In
1972,
Ward
built
surface
impoundments
to
contain
the
oil
runoff
(Ref.
16,
p.
28).
Around
1979,
Ward
Transformer
constructed
a
waste
water
treatment
plant
(WWTP)
and
a
retaining
wall
to
further
control
runoff
and
received
an
NPDES
permit
for
discharge
from
the
onsite
waste
water
treatment
plant
(Refs.
6,
pp.
1,
4;
16,
pp.
50,
53,
63­
68,
72;
Fig.
2).
In
1986,
Ward
Transformer
was
instructed
by
the
State
of
North
Carolina
to
raise
the
lower
dam
to
stop
overflow
from
the
onsite
impoundment
to
the
surface
water
pathway
(Ref.
16,
pp.
32,
33).
Once
the
wall
was
raised,
the
division
between
the
two
impoundments
was
no
longer
visible
(Ref.
6,
pp.
1,
5).
Since
1979,
impoundment
water
has
been
processed
through
the
WWTP
to
remove
PCBs
prior
to
discharge
to
surface
water
(Ref.
16,
pp.
50,
53,
67).
Surface
water
runoff
from
the
part
of
the
Ward
Transformer
property
outside
the
retaining
wall
area
remains
uncontrolled.

The
probable
point
of
entry
(PPE)
of
overland
flow
to
surface
water
is
near
the
base
of
the
dam,
about
40'
downgradient
from
the
former
impoundment
outfall
which
is
also
the
current
NPDESpermitted
outfall
(Refs.
3;
16,
pp.
50,
65­
66;
Figs.
2,
3,
4,
5).
Runoff
from
the
uncurbed
portions
of
the
Ward
Transformer
property
enters
the
same
stream
(Ref.
4,
App.
B,
p.
4).
The
PPE
is
defined
as
the
point,
about
40'
below
the
outfall,
where
the
outfall
water
and
the
ditch
receiving
overland
flow
merge.

Although
not
shown
as
a
perennial
stream
on
the
USGS
topographic
map
(Ref.
3),
the
plant
manager
stated
that
the
stream
runs
constantly
(Ref.
4,
App.
B.
p.
5),
the
US
Corps
of
Engineers
wetlands
expert
reported
that
the
stream
had
the
appearance
of
a
perennial
stream
(Ref.
12,
pp.
v.,
12),
and
the
Wake
County
GIS
maps
indicate
that
this
is
a
perennial
stream
(Ref.
19,
pp.
i.
7­
10.
This
unnamed
tributary
(UT)
to
Little
Brier
Creek
(Ref.
3;
Figure
3)
flows
westerly
for
about
1610
feet
through
several
pockets
of
wetlands
(having
a
total
wetland
frontage
of
470')
and
downstream
of
exiting
this
last
measured
wetland
area,
it
enters
an
area
of
disturbed
wetlands
(Ref.
12,
p.
14).
The
stream
then
enters
an
approximately
345'­
long
culvert
under
I­
540.
About
800'
below
where
the
stream
exits
this
culvert,
the
stream
merges
with
another
UT
to
Little
Brier
Creek.
In
another
800
feet,
the
merged
stream
crosses
under
Lumley
Rd.
It
then
flows
in
a
southwesterly
direction
for
about
500
feet,
toward
the
entrance
ramp
from
Lumley
Rd.
to
I­
540
and
then
flows
along
a
streambed
that
is
rip­
rapped
on
the
side
nearest
the
roadway
(Fig.
4,
Ref.
12,
p.
19).
32
SWOF
—
Surface
Water
Overland
Flow/
Flood
Migration
Pathway
4.1.1.1
DEFINITION
OF
HAZARDOUS
SUBSTANCE
MIGRATION
PATH
FOR
OVERLAND/
FLOOD
COMPONENT
(continued)

The
stream
bed
on
the
side
away
from
the
ramp
is
adjacent
to
wetlands
(Refs.
7,
pp.
2,
3;
12,
pp.
19
­
23
).
The
stream
then
turns
away
from
the
road
and
flows
in
a
southwesterly
direction
through
wetlands
and
joins
Little
Brier
Creek.
Just
downstream
of
this
confluence,
the
stream
again
flows
through
a
culvert
under
the
Northern
Wake
Expressway.
Little
Brier
Creek
flows
another
0.6
miles
(the
last
0.3
mile
of
which
is
a
wetland
(Ref.
5,
p.
11))
and
enters
the
Brier
Creek
Reservoir,
the
nearest
fishery
(Ref.
12,
p.
17).

Little
Brier
Creek
is
a
minimal
stream
when
it
enters
the
Brier
Creek
Reservoir
(Ref.
15,
p.
1).
Brier
Creek
Reservoir
is
1.6
miles
long
and
the
outfall
is
Brier
Creek,
now
a
small­
to­
moderate
stream.
Brier
Creek
flows
for
1.7
miles
until
it
enters
Lake
Crabtree
which
then
empties
into
Crabtree
Creek
1
mile
downstream.
The
15­
mile
surface
water
pathway
ends
on
Crabtree
Creek
near
the
I­
440
bridge.
The
last
1
½
miles
of
the
surface
water
pathway
is
a
moderate­
to­
large
stream
(Ref.
15,
p.
1).
33
SWOF
—
Surface
Water
Overland
Flow/
Flood
Migration
Pathway
4.1.2.1
LIKELIHOOD
OF
RELEASE
4.1.2.1.1
OBSERVED
RELEASE
(Drinking
water
threat
not
scored,
no
intake
within
15­
mile
pathway)

4.1.3.1
LIKELIHOOD
OF
RELEASE
­
Likelihood
of
release
for
the
drinking
water
threat
is
the
same
as
that
for
the
human
food
chain
threat
(Ref.
1,
section
4.1.3.1).

Chemical
Analysis
—
Sediment
Background
concentration
—
Sediment
Only
those
compounds
found
in
a
source
and
a
release
sample
at
levels
greater
than
three
times
background
are
listed
below
in
the
background
data.
For
the
listed
compounds
not
detected
in
the
background,
only
the
SQL
and
the
CRQL/
CRDL
values
are
given.
When
samples
are
analyzed
by
the
EPA
Contract
Laboratory
Program,
the
Hazard
Ranking
System
Final
Rule
instructs
that
when
the
background
concentration
is
not
detected
or
is
less
than
the
detection
limit,
an
observed
release
is
established
when
the
sample
measurement
equals
or
exceeds
either
the
Sample
Quantitation
Limit
(SQL),
or
if
this
can
not
be
determined,
the
Contract­
Required
Quantitation
Limit
(CRQL)
(Ref.
1,
Table
2­
3).
For
inorganic
compounds
Reference
21,
page
10
provides
the
Contract
Required
Detection
Limit
(CRDL),
which
is
an
equivalent
term
to
CRQL
(Ref.
1,
Section
1.1,
see
definitions
for
CRDL
and
CRQL).

Sample
(WA­
016­
SD)
was
collected
downstream
of
the
confluence
of
the
NPDES
permitted
outfall
and
the
ditch
draining
the
rear
of
the
Ward
property
(Figures
3
&
5),
which
was
at
the
headwaters
of
this
unnamed
tributary
(UT)
to
Little
Brier
Creek.
Therefore,
there
was
no
location
within
this
stream
segment
that
qualified
as
a
background
location.
Another
UT
to
Little
Brier
Creek
flowing
from
the
north
merges
with
this
UT
to
Little
Brier
Creek
after
it
flows
through
the
culvert
under
I­
540.
WA­
001­
SD
was
collected
in
this
other
stream,
upgradient
from
its
merger
with
the
UT
to
Little
Brier
Creek
which
drains
the
site
(Figure
5).
WA­
001­
SD
serves
as
a
background
for
samples
WA­
003­
SD/
SDD.

Background
sample
WA­
006­
SD
was
collected
in
Little
Brier
Creek
upgradient
from
the
point
where
the
UT
to
Little
Brier
Creek
merges
with
Little
Brier
Creek.
Sample
WA­
006­
SD
was
not
upgradient
from
samples
WA­
016­
SD,
WA­
002­
SD,
or
WA­
003­
SD/
SDD,
but
was
collected
to
serve
as
a
background
sample
had
an
observed
release
of
site
contaminants
been
documented
in
samples
collected
further
downstream
in
the
fishery
(Ref.
3).
The
fishery
samples
are
not
discussed
herein
but
are
discussed
in
the
ESI
report
(Ref.
4,
pp.
38
­
44;
Ref.
4,
App.
B,
p.
13,
14).
WA­
006­
SD
serves
as
a
background
because
it
documents
background
conditions
in
a
stream
outside
the
area
of
hazardous
substance
influence
from
the
site,
yet
in
a
similar
hydrologic
setting
as
WA­
003­
SD.
34
SWOF
—
Surface
Water
Overland
Flow/
Flood
Migration
Pathway
Creek
sediment
backgrounds
Sample
Date
Time
Refs.

WA­
001­
SD
02/
11/
97
1735
Ref.
4,
App.
A,
pp.
1,
3,
5,
9,
28,
45,
65,
85;
App.
B,
pp.
16,
17
WA­
006­
SD
02/
11/
97
1140
Ref.
4,
App.
A,
pp.
1,
3,
5,
15,
34,
51,
71,
91;
App.
B,
p.
2
Hazardous
Substances
in
background
sediment
samples:
Hazardous
Substance
Analytes
Sample
Depth
&
Description
PCB­
1260
Copper
CRQL/
CRDL
(Ref.
8,
p.
9;
21,
p.
8,
10)
33
mg/
kg
5
mg/
kg
Concentration:
mg/
kg
mg/
kg
WA­
001­
SD
S,
P,
I,
D
0
­
6";
none
recorded
(Ref.
14,
p.
3)
U
(40)
U
(6)

WA­
006­
SD
S,
P,
I,
D
0
­
6";
sandy
clay
(Ref.
4,
App.
B,
p.
2
&
photo
#3)
U
(43)
U
(5)

ND
=
Not
Detected
S
=
Semivolatiles;
P
=
Pesticides/
PCBs;
I
=
Inorganics;
D
=
Dioxins
(
)
=
Detection
Limit
or
reportable
quantitation
limit,
where
different
from
the
CRQL/
CRDL
35
SWOF
—
Surface
Water
Overland
Flow/
Flood
Migration
Pathway
Contaminated
Samples
—
Sediment
Samples
WA­
016­
SD
and
WA­
002­
SD
serve
to
document
an
observed
release
to
the
surface
water
pathway.
Sample
WA­
016­
SD
was
collected
in
the
unnamed
tributary
(UT)
to
Little
Brier
Creek
near
the
PPE,
just
downstream
of
the
confluence
of
the
perennial
stream
below
the
surface
impoundment
(Source
2)
and
the
ditch
receiving
overland
flow
from
the
unfenced/
uncurbed
soil
area
(Source
1)
(Ref.
4,
App.
B,
pp.
4,
5;
Fig.
3).
This
stream
is
perennial
(Ref.
4,
App.
B,
p.
5;
Ref.
12,
pp.
v.,
12;
Ref.
19,
pp.
i.,
7
­
10).
Sample
WA­
002­
SD
was
collected
further
downstream,
in
the
same
UT
to
Little
Brier
Creek
draining
the
site,
upgradient
from
where
the
stream
enters
the
culvert
under
I­
540
(Ref.
4,
App.
B,
p.
15;
Fig.
5).
These
two
samples
(WA­
016­
SD
and
WA­
002­
SD)
serve
to
demonstrate
that
PCB­
1260
is
in
the
stream
sediment
downgradient
from
the
site.

No
background
sample
could
be
collected
in
this
stream
segment
because
the
point
of
origin
of
this
stream
segment
is
the
surface
impoundment.
Background
data
for
sediment
samples
collected
further
downstream
are
discussed
in
the
on
pages
30
and
31.
A
sample
collected
in
1995
during
the
Site
Inspection
(WT­
001­
SD)
at
approximately
the
same
location
as
WA­
002­
SD
showed
13,800
mg/
kg
PCB­
1260
(Ref.
4,
pp.
36).

Samples
WA­
003­
SD
and
WA­
003­
SDD
serve
to
document
that
there
has
been
an
observed
release
of
PCB
1260
to
sediment
downstream
of
greater
than
0.1
mile
of
wetland
frontage
(Fig.
6;
Ref.
12,
pp.
iii.
­
v.,
12
­
15,
19
­
23).
Neither
background
sediment
sample
WA­
001­
SD
nor
the
contaminated
samples
WA­
003­
SD/
SDD
were
collected
within
wetlands
(Ref.
14,
p.
4;
Ref.
12,
p.
iii.),
but
were
collected
upstream
and
downstream
of
wetlands,
respectively
(Refs.
7;
12,
pp.
iii.
­
v.,
12
­
14,
19
­
23).
Sample
WA­
003­
SD
and
its
duplicate
WA­
003­
SDD
show
very
similar
results.
[Note
that
field
log
notes
(Ref.
4,
App.
B,
pp.
1,
2)
discuss
the
collection
of
WA­
003­
SD
but
do
not
specifically
discuss
the
collection
of
WA­
003­
SDD;
however,
the
photolog
on
App.
B,
p.
1
does
list
this
sample,
and
chain
of
custody
shows
this
sample
collected
at
same
time
as
WA­
003­
SD.]

Surface
water
sediment
release
samples
Sample
ID
Date
Time
Refs.

WA­
016­
SD
02/
11/
97
1450
Ref.
4,
App.
A,
pp.
2,
4,
6,
23,
42,
59,
63,
79,
99;
App.
B,
pp.
4,
5
WA­
002­
SD
02/
11/
97
1645
Ref.
4,
App.
A,
pp.
1,
3,
5,
10,
29,
46,
66,
86;
App.
B,
p.
15
WA­
003­
SD
02/
11/
97
1110
Ref.
4,
App.
A
pp.
1,3,
5,
11,
30,
47,
67,
87;
App.
B,
pp.
1,
2
WA­
003­
SDD
02/
11/
97
1110
Ref.
4,
App.
A
pp.
1,3,
5,
12,
31,
48,
68,
88;
App.
B,
pp.
1,
36
SWOF
—
Surface
Water
Overland
Flow/
Flood
Migration
Pathway
Contaminated
Samples
—
Sediment
(continued)

Hazardous
substances
found
in
sediment
release
samples
Hazardous
Substance
Analytes
Sample
Depth
&
Description
PCB­
1260
Copper
CRQL/
CRDL
(Ref.
8,
p.
9;
21,
p.
8
10)
33
mg/
kg
5
mg/
kg
Concentration
mg/
kg
mg/
kg
WA­
016­
SD
S,
P,
I,
D
0
­
6";
tan
(Ref.
4,
App.
B,
pp.
4­
5;
Ref.
14,
p.
3)
1,600
m
mg/
kg
8.6
J
WA­
002­
SD
S,
P,
I,
D
0
­
6";
sandy
clay
(Ref.
4,
App.
B,
p.
15;
Ref.
14,
p.
3)
1,300
m
mg/
kg
22
WA­
003­
SD
S,
P,
I,
D
0
­
6";
clayey
silt
(Ref.
4,
App.
B,
pp.
1,
2;
Photo.
#3)
390
m
mg/
kg
7.3
WA­
003­
SDD
S,
P,
I,
D
same
as
WA­
003­
SD
400
m
mg/
kg
ND
(6)

BOLD
indicates
contaminants
determined
to
be
an
observed
release
to
sediment
water
S
=
Semivolatiles;
P
=
Pesticides/
PCBs;
I
=
Inorganics;
D
=
Dioxins
ND
=
Not
Detected
(
)
=
Detection
Limit
or
reportable
quantitation
limit,
where
different
from
the
CRQL/
CRDL
Discussion:

Several
other
sampling
events
support
that
there
has
been
an
observed
release
to
the
surface
water
pathway,
notably:

1.
During
the
Site
Inspection
in
1995,
a
sample
collected
at
the
same
location
as
WA­
003­
SD,
but
with
an
auger
into
slightly
deeper
sediment,
showed
28.83
mg/
kg
(28,830
mg/
kg)
PCB
1260
(Ref.
4,
pp.
36
­
38;
12,
pp.
19,
20;
Ref.
13,
pp.
1
­
7).
2.
Samples
collected
by
EPA
in
1978
and
1979
also
showed
PCBs
in
the
surface
water
pathway
(Ref.
4,
pp.
32
­
34).
3.
Property
near
the
Ward
Transformer
facility
is
being
developed.
In
a
request
for
a
Prospective
Purchaser
Agreement
for
property
downstream
from
the
Ward
Transformer
facility
(Ref.
18,
pp.
1
­
13),
land
along
the
stream
between
I­
540
and
Lumley
Road,
outside
the
immediate
stream
area,
has
been
identified
for
planned
commercial
development.
As
part
of
the
settlement
of
a
lawsuit,
a
separate
corporation
(owned
by
Ward)
now
owns
the
streambed
and
its
adjacent
flood
plain
(Ref.
18,
footnote
on
p.
11).
37
SWOF
—
Surface
Water
Overland
Flow/
Flood
Migration
Pathway
Contaminated
Samples
—
Sediment
(continued)

3.
(continued)

In
this
request
letter
(Ref.
18,
pp.
1
­
13),
the
prospective
developer
reported
that
analysis
of
soils
and
sediments
for
PCBs
had
been
conducted.
This
stream
sediment
sampling
event
included
sample
collection
with
an
auger
down
to
12"
in
the
stream
bed.
Oily
soils
and
PCB
levels
as
high
as
400
ppm
Aroclor
1260
were
encountered
in
the
stream
bed
closest
to
Ward.
PCBs
were
detected
in
all
of
the
roughly
30
sediment
samples,
except
for
the
background
sediment
sample.
The
developer
concluded
that
PCB
levels
in
deeper
sediments
were
an
order
of
magnitude
higher
than
levels
found
during
the
NC
Superfund
Section's
Site
Inspection
sampling
event.
A
summary
of
the
sampling
event
(Ref.
18,
pp.
14
­
22),
the
summary
data
tables
and
sample
location
maps
(Ref.
18,
pp.
23
­
34),
and
data
sheets
(Ref.
18,
pp.
35
­
107)
were
provided
to
the
NC
Superfund
Section.

Attribution
—
Sediment
1.
A
potential
developer
trying
to
decide
whether
or
not
to
purchase
and
develop
property
in
the
area,
collected
soil
samples
on
adjacent
property
and
provided
results
to
the
NC
Superfund
Section
(Ref.
18,
pp.
i.,
108
­
109).
One
soil
sample,
collected
at
0
­
1'
depth,
in
an
area
indicated
as
being
outside
the
fenced
area
and
in
the
vicinity
of
Source
1,
was
reported
as
containing
1,500
ppm
Aroclor
1260.

2.
Most
of
the
runoff
from
the
Raleigh
Durham
International
Airport
flows
directly
to
retention
basins
and
then
directly
into
the
Brier
Creek
Reservoir.
There
are
two
stormwater
control
basins
which
flow
into
the
unnamed
tributaries
upstream
of
the
Brier
Creek
Reservoir,
but
there
are
no
known
sources
of
PCBs,
transformer
oil,
or
petroleum
contamination
in
that
area
of
the
airport.
The
northeastern
end
of
the
airport,
nearest
to
the
Ward
Transformer
property
is
the
newer
part
of
the
airport,
and
the
older
part
of
the
airport
(also
containing
most
of
the
fuel
handling
and
electrical
facilities)
is
on
the
southwestern
portion
of
the
airport
property
(Ref.
19;
20).

==================================================================
Hazardous
Substance
Released:
PCB­
1260
Surface
Water
Sediment
Observed
Release
Factor
Value—
550
38
SWOF
—
Surface
Water
Overland
Flow/
Flood
Migration
Pathway
4.1.2.1.2
Potential
to
Release
4.1.2.1.2.1
Potential
to
Release
by
Overland
Flow
Potential
to
release
was
not
evaluated
because
an
observed
release
to
surface
water
was
established
by
chemical
analysis
(see
Section
4.1.2.1.1
of
this
HRS
documentation
record).
39
SWOF
­­
Food
Chain
4.1.3.2
HUMAN
FOOD
CHAIN
THREAT
—
WASTE
CHARACTERISTICS
4.1.3.2.1
Toxicity/
Persistence/
Bioaccumulation
Since
no
observed
release
to
fishery
has
been
documented,
only
the
potential
to
release
to
the
fishery
is
being
evaluated.
Downstream
fisheries
(Ref.
9,
pp.
3,
4;
Ref.
12,
pp.
v.,
17)
are
located
in
fresh
water
only,
so
only
the
fresh
water
Bioaccumulation
Potential
Factor
Value
(BPFV)
values
are
used
(Ref.
1,
section
4.1.3.2.1.3).
PCB
1260
serves
to
document
the
highest
possible
toxicity/
persistence/
bioaccumulation
potential
factor
and
PCB
1260
was
the
only
documented
hazardous
substance
in
the
surface
impoundment
(which
was
the
only
documented
source
having
a
hazardous
waste
quantity
value
of
greater
than
0.5).

Hazardous
Substance
Source
No.
Tox.
Factor
value
PF
#
BPFV*
T/
P
value
(Ref.
1,
Table
4­
12)
T/
P/
BPFV
(Ref.
1,
Table
4­
16)

Copper
3,
4
­­­
1
50000
0
0
PCB
1260
1,2,3,4
10000
1
50000
10000
5
x
10
8
T/
P/
BPFV
=
Toxicity/
Persistence/
Bioaccumulation
Potential
Factor
(Ref.
1,
Table
4­
16).
BPFV
=
Bioaccumulation
Potential
Factor
Value,
Ref.
2,
pp.
6,
16.
#
PF
=
Persistence
Factor
Value,
Ref.
1,
section
4.1.3.2.1.2;
Ref.
2,
pp.
6,
16.
*Ref.
1,
Table
4
­
15,
section
4.1.3.2.1.3;
Ref.
2,
pp.
6,
16.

=====================================================================

Toxicity/
Persistence/
Bioaccumulation
Factor
Value:
=
5
x
10
8
40
SWOF
­­
Food
Chain
4.1.3.2.2
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
HRS
(Ref.
1),
section
4.1.3.2.2
instructs
to
assign
the
same
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
as
is
assigned
for
the
drinking
water
threat,
as
instructed
in
4.1.2.2.2.
Section
4.1.2.2.2
instructs
that
the
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
is
the
same
as
determined
in
HRS
section
2.4.2.
This
value
has
previously
been
determined
in
section
2.4.2
of
this
HRS
documentation
package.

Sum
of
Values:
9,228
(Calculations
shown
in
section
2.4.2
and
(Ref.
1,
Table
2­
6))

Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
Factor
Value
=
100
4.1.3.2.3
Human
Food
Chain
Threat
Waste
Characteristics
Factor
Category
Value:

Toxicity/
Persistence
Value
=
10,000
Bioaccumulation
Potential
Factor
Value
=
50,000
Toxicity/
Persistence
Value
x
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
Factor
Value:
10,000
x
100
=
1,000,000
(1
x
10
6
)

(Toxicity/
Persistence
x
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity)
x
Bioaccumulation
Potential
Value:

(1
x
10
6
)
x
50,000
=
5
x
10
10
=====================================================================
Human
Food
Chain
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
Assigned
Value/
Human
Food
Chain
Waste
Characteristics
Factor
Category
Value
320
(Ref.
1,
Table
2
­
7)
41
SWOF/
Food
Chain
4.1.3.3
HUMAN
FOOD
CHAIN
THREAT
­
TARGETS
Actual
Human
Food
Chain
Contamination
Observed
Release
to
Surface
water
documented
in
Section
4.1.3.1.
No
actual
human
food
chain
contamination
is
documented.

4.1.3.3.1
Food
Chain
individual
(Ref.
1,
section
4.1.3.3.1)

"If
there
is
an
observed
release
of
a
hazardous
substance
having
a
bioaccumulation
potential
factor
value
of
500
or
greater
to
surface
water
in
the
watershed
and
there
is
a
fishery
present
anywhere
within
the
target
distance
limit,
assign
a
value
of
20"

=====================================================================
Food
Chain
Individual
Factor
Value
=
20
4.1.3.3.2
Food
Chain
Population
­­
not
evaluated
4.1.3.3.2.1
Potential
Human
Food
Chain
Contamination
­­
not
evaluated
4.1.3.3.3
Calculation
of
Human
Food
chain
threat
­
targets
factor
category
value
(Ref.
1,
section
4.1.3.3.3)

Human
food
chain
threat­
targets
factor
category
value
=

20
+
(population
factor
not
evaluated)
=
20
4.1.3.4
Calculation
of
human
food
chain
threat
score
Likelihood
of
release
x
waste
characteristics
x
targets
/
82,500
=

550
x
320
x
20
/
82,500
=
42.67
====================================================================
Human
Food
Chain
Threat
Score
=
42.67
42
SWOF/
Environment
4.1.4
ENVIRONMENTAL
THREAT
4.1.4.1
LIKELIHOOD
OF
RELEASE
=
550
(Ref.
1,
section
4.1.4)

4.1.4.2
ENVIRONMENTAL
THREAT
WASTE
CHARACTERISTICS
4.1.4.2.1
Ecosystem
Toxicity/
Persistence/
Bioaccumulation
An
observed
release
of
PCB
1260
and
copper
to
wetlands
will
be
documented
below.
PCB
1260
serves
to
document
the
highest
possible
toxicity/
persistence/
bioaccumulation
potential
factor,
and
PCB
1260
was
the
only
documented
hazardous
substance
in
the
surface
impoundment
(which
was
the
only
documented
source
having
a
hazardous
waste
quantity
value
of
greater
than
0.5).

Hazardous
Substance
Source
No.
Eco.
Tox.
Fac.
value*
PF
Eco.
TPF
fac.
value**
BPFV
(Ref.
2)
T/
P/
BPFV***

Copper
3,
4
100
1
100
50000
5
x
10
6
PCB
1260
1,2,3,4
10000
1
10000
50000
5
x
10
8
PF
=
Persistence
Factor
Value
(Ref.
2,
pp.
6,
16)
*Ecosystem
Toxicity
Factor
Value
(Ref.
2,
pp.
6,
16)
BPFV
=
Ecosystem
Bioaccumulation
Potential
Factor
Value
(Ref.
2,
pp.
6,
16)
**
Eco.
toxicity/
persistence
factor
value
(Ref.
1,
Table
4­
20)
***
Tox/
Persist/
Bioaccumulation
Potential
Factor
Value
(Ref.
1,
Tables
4­
19
and
4­
21)

=====================================================================
Ecosystem
Toxicity/
Persistence/
Bioaccumulation
Factor
Value
=
5
x
10
8
43
SWOF/
Environment
4.1.4.2.2
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
(Ref.
1,
section
4.1.2.2.2,
4.1.4.2.2)

Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
Factor
Value
=
100
4.1.4.2.3
Environmental
threat
­
waste
characteristics
factor
category
value.

For
PCB
1260:
Ecosystem
Toxicity/
Persistence
Factor
Value
=
10,000
Ecosystem
Toxicity/
Persistence
Factor
Value
x
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
Factor
Value:
10,000
x
100
=
1
x
10
6
Ecosystem
Bioaccumulation
Potential
Factor
Value
=
50,000
Ecosystem
Toxicity/
Persistence
x
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
Value
x
Bioaccumulation
Potential
Factor
Value:

1
x
10
6
x
50,000
=
5
x
10
10
Environmental
Threat­
Waste
Characteristics
Factor
Category
Value
(Ref.
1,
Table
2
­
7)
=
320
44
SWOF/
Environment
4.1.4.3
ENVIRONMENTAL
THREAT
­
TARGETS
Level
I
Concentrations
­­
No
Level
I
concentrations
were
noted.
Only
sediment
samples
were
collected
and
sediments
do
not
have
environmental
or
food
chain
benchmarks.

Most
Distant
Level
II
Sample:
Sample
ID:
WA­
003­
SD
and
WA­
003­
SDD
Distance
from
the
Probable
Point
of
Entry
(Ref.
12,
pp.
iii.
­
v.,
12
­
14,
19
­
23):

1810'
(from
PPE
to
culvert
(Ref.
12,
p.
v.))
+
345'
(through
culvert
under
I­
540)
+
(1600')
(length
of
stream
between
I­
540
and
Lumley)
+~
100'
(length
of
culvert
under
Lumley
Rd.)
+
500'
(stream
rip­
rapped
on
one
side)
+
75'
(below
wetland)
=
4,430',
or
0.8
miles
Wetlands
Distance
to
wetland
Length
of
Wetland
Wetland
frontage
Cumulative
wetland
frontage
from
PPE
10'
100'
200'
200'
650'
80'
160'
360'
1575'
55'
110'
470'
4284'
71'
71'
541'

Note
that
additional
wetland
frontage
between
the
PPE
and
the
release
sample
was
not
measured
due
to
Wetland
Total
Wetland
Frontage
Reference
Value
Wetland
areas
>0.1
mile
(Refs.
7;
12,
pp.
iii.
­
v.,
12­
14,
19­
23;
Fig.
6)
(Ref.
1,
Table
4­
24)
25
Total
Wetland
Frontage
exposed
to
Level
II
contamination:
0.1
miles
Wetland
Value:
25
(Ref.
1,
Table
4­
24)

Sum
of
Sensitive
Environments
Value
+
Wetland
Value:
25
Level
II
Concentrations
Factor
Value
=
25
=====================================================================
Level
II
Concentrations
Factor
Value:
25
45
SWOF/
Environment
4.1.4.3.1.3
Potential
Contamination
The
closest
environmental
concern
along
the
surface
water
pathway
is
wetlands
(Refs.
5,
p.
11;
Ref.
7,
pp.
1
­
6;
Ref.
12,
pp.
iii
­
v.,
12
­
14,
19
­
23).
Other
than
wetlands,
the
next
closest
sensitive
environment
along
the
surface
water
pathway
below
the
site
is
the
Black
Creek
Slopes
Priority
Area,
which
lies
along
the
south
side
of
Lake
Crabtree
about
5.5
miles
from
the
PPE
(Fig.
1,
Refs.
3;
9,
p.
1).
The
Black
Creek
Slopes
sensitive
environment
is
an
area
important
to
maintenance
of
unique
biotic
communities
(Ref.
9,
p.
2).

The
review
of
Natural
Heritage
files
on
the
surface
water
pathway
downgradient
from
the
site
was
conducted
in
1993
and
indicated
no
plant
or
animal
species
of
concern
closer
than
9
miles
below
the
PPE
(Ref.
9,
p.
1).
An
observed
release
of
site
contaminants
to
sediment
below
0.1
mile
of
wetland
frontage
[assigned
wetlands
rating
value
of
25
(Ref.
1,
Table
4­
24)]
and
a
potential
to
release
to
the
next
closest
sensitive
area,
Black
Creek
Slopes
[assigned
sensitive
environments
rating
value
of
25
(Ref.
1,
Table
4­
23)]
were
adequate
to
produce
a
site
score
greater
than
28.5.
An
update
of
species
sitings
was
not
conducted.
Umstead
State
Park,
another
sensitive
environment
with
an
assigned
rating
value
of
25
(Ref.
1,
Table
4­
23)
lies
along
3
miles
of
the
surface
water
pathway,
beginning
about
6.5
miles
from
the
PPE
(Fig.
1;
Ref.
3).
The
eastern
boundary
of
this
park
is
marked
on
the
USGS
topographic
map
(Figure
1,
Ref.
3),
but
the
western
boundary
is
not
clear
on
this
map.
The
only
sensitive
environments
used
to
produce
this
site
score
are
wetlands
and
Black
Creek
Slopes
Priority
Area.

Sensitive
Environments
Type
of
Surface
Water
Body
Crabtree
Lake
Because
Crabtree
Creek,
(which
is
the
receiving
stream
from
Lake
Crabtree)
has
a
flow
rate
of
61.24
cfs
(Ref.
15,
p.
1),
the
dilution
weight
is
0.1
(Ref.
1,
Table
4­
13)
Sensitive
Environment:
Black
Creek
Slopes;
area
important
to
maintenance
of
unique
biotic
communities
Reference
(Refs.
1,
Table
4­
13;
9,
p.
2)
Sensitive
Environment
Value
25
46
SWOF/
Environment
Wetlands
Distance
to
wetland
Length
of
Wetland
Wetland
frontage
Total
wetland
frontage
from
outfall
4,480',
(just
below
sampling
point
for
WA­
003­
SD,
Ref.
12,
pp.
22,
23)
337'
337'
1.2
miles
0.3
miles
0.6
mile
0.7
[Only
those
wetlands
along
Little
Brier
Creek
prior
to
its
confluence
with
Brier
Creek
Reservoir
are
documented
herein.]

Wetland
Frontage:
0.7
miles
Reference:
(Refs.
5,
p.
11;
12,
pp.
19,
20,
22,
23)
Wetlands
Value
for
Type
of
Surface
Water
Body:
25
(Ref.
1,
Table
4­
24)
Type
of
Surface
Water
Body:
Minimal
Stream,
dilution
weight
1
(Ref.
1,
Table
4­
13)
Flow
rate
of
Little
Brier
Creek
is
8.85
cfs
(Ref.
15,
p.
1)

Type
of
Surface
Water
Body:
Minimal
Stream
Small­
to
Moderate
Stream
Sum
of
Sensitive
Environment
Values
(Sj)
25
Wetland
Frontage
Value
(Wj
)
25
Dilution
Weight
(Dj
)
1
0.1
Dj
(Wj
+
Sj)
25
2.5
Sum
of
Dj
(Wj
+
Sj):
27.5
(Sum
of
Dj
(Wj
+
Sj))/
10:
2.75
(Ref.
1,
section
4.1.4.3.1.1)
=====================================================================
Potential
Contamination
Factor
Value:
3
47
Table
4­
1
Surface
Water
Overland/
Flood
Migration
Component
Scoresheet
Human
Food
Chain
Threat
Likelihood
of
Release:
550
Waste
Characteristics:
Toxicity/
Persistence/
Bioaccumulation
5
x
10
8
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
100
Waste
Characteristics
Factor
Category
Value
320
Targets:
Food
Chain
Individual
Factor
Value
20
Potential
(calculated
value
not
used)

Human
Food
Chain
Threat
Score:
[550
x
320
x
20
]
/
82,560
=
42.67
Environmental
Threat
Likelihood
of
Release:
550
Waste
Characteristics:
Ecosystem
Toxicity/
Persistence/
Bioaccumulation
5
x
10
8
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
100
Waste
Characteristics
Factor
Category
Value
320
Sensitive
Environments:
Level
I
Concentration
Factor
Value
­­
none
documented
Level
II
Concentration
Factor
Value
25
Potential
Contamination
Factor
Value
3
Targets:
28
Environmental
Threat
Score:
[550
x
320
x
30]
/
82,500
=
64
59.7
(subject
to
a
maximum
of
60
(Ref.
1,
section
4.1.4.4))
